Tag Archives: Legal

Alternative Billing – What Does It Mean For IT Staff?

There has been quite a bit of activity on blogs and twitter recently about the billable hour, questioning its validity in the current economic climate (see this story on law.com), however it’s this article on 3 geeks and a law blog that caught my eye (in fact I hope they don’t mind as I’ve kind of plagiarised their blog post title!). You might also want to take a look at The Client Revolutions posting on the subject which in turn references this post by Adam Smith.

The reason I pointed out the 3 geek’s post though was that it addressed the question on what it means for support staff. It got me thinking on how the legal IT department would change if there was a sudden shift to flat-rate billing.

I think Greg is when he talks about the one word that gets mentioned when alternative billing is put about “efficiency”.  Now when IT is done right one thing it can be very good at is creating “efficiency” (conversely it can also be great at making things inefficient if it’s not done right).

Take a look back a few years to the Woolf reforms in the UK and in particular the effect on the personal injury market. Insurance departments started to use technology to make things more efficient. In particular Case Management software enabled some of the work lawyers did to be pushed to paralegals or even secretaries simply by following the workflow of the system.

Similarly Knowledge Management systems can enable firms to draw on a wealth of previously created precedent documents, meaning a reduction in time taken to draft new documents.

These systems have been used in the past and are used now, but I imagine that more and more there will be a demand to use technology to drive down costs. However I think before this happens there will be the usual approach to cutting costs, downsizing and budget cuts! So for 2009 I think (as with most industries) we will see IT departments shrink, but as the push for more efficiency takes hold I think the firms that step up and embrace technology to achieve efficiencies will be the winners. 

The challenge for IT is to help lead this “revolution”!

Share

“All this new technology has meant more work for private practice media lawyers”

Read a post on Iain Dale’s blog this morning regarding defamation.

I was interested more from a law firm perspective rather than from that of a blogger. Although thinking about it I suppose my comment on Clifford Chance’s London office yesterday could be considered as such and maybe I need to think more from a bloggers point of view?!? (Let me say any implication on CC’s London office is not to be taken seriously!)

It just reminded me of the Davenport Lyons saga (if the name itself doesn’t explain, Google their name for stories like this), the law firm blunderbus approach to new media. To be fair once I’d read the article from the Law Gazette I realised it came across as fair and a sensible approach to the law (dealing in the most part by negotiation rather than taking the case to court).

But Iain’s right, bloggers need to be aware of the legal aspect. The days where bloggers could say what they wanted about anyone have probably past. There was a great example of why in yesterday’s Metro!

Share

Law firms aren’t immune

Post on The Lawyer today : Legal Job Watch: UK 200 TOTAL REDUNDANCIES: 2199

The interesting thing about The Lawyer’s reporting (and LegalWeek for that matter) is that the figures are just for the lawyers! There is no figure for support staff in consultancy or redundant in any of the firms?

Can you read anything into this? I mean todays news on the job losses at Nissan didn’t just total the managers or engineers, but all staff. Why are the numbers from KM, facilities, the secretarial teams or IT not of any interest to readers of The Lawyer?

After all it’s not as if it’s because there has been zero job losses in these areas is it.

Share