Modern Law Magazine - Issue 6 - IT Supplement by Charlton Grant

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Law firms specialise in being a font of knowledge and interpretation, the Internet is where people are most likely to go to get knowledge and help. This presents a fabulous opportunity for law firms to draw in new customersâ&#x20AC;? Jon Brewer, Evident

IT: Out with the old, in with the new? The quest for technological solutions to drive efficiency and new business in the new legal frontier is a challenging, often confusing and expensive journey. Modern Law speaks to the in-house innovators, experts in their field, vendors and investors about the present and future capacity for IT and infrastructure to have an effect on growth and sustainability in the legal market.

LEGAL IT Supplement 2013

Proclaim®

You need Proclaim The UK’s only Case Management Software system designed exclusively for Alternative Business Structures. Proclaim ABS is the complete, all-in-one solution catering for all areas of law. It’s currently used by 20,000 legal professionals in ﬁrms both large and small.

y Used b f the 25% o BS UK’s A sations i n a g r o

For a free demonstration

Call 01274 704 100 visit www.eclipselegal.co.uk or email info@eclipselegal.co.uk

Contents

CONTENTS 05 Introduction Charles Christian, Editor in Chief, Legal Technology Insider introduces the second of our special Supplements and takes a look at what law firms think they really, really want â&#x20AC;&#x201C; when it comes to legal technology, and what they really, really need.

06 Interview with... Jon Brewer Founder and Chief Executive, Evident Legal

12 Touchpoint - Welcome to the self-service future Eclipseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new self-service portal, TouchPoint, puts customers first.

14 Outsourcing...is it really a necessity? Craig Jones, Simpson Millar discusses how and why outsourcing is being used in light of the turbulence within the legal sector and if it is really the answer...

17 Legal IT, the new age Modern Law introduces our panel of experts in the Legal IT arena, to discuss and debate the changing legal landscape and how innovation and understanding of IT can assist firms in the changing market.

Nigel Stott, IT Director, Clarion Solicitors

Tony Brown, Consultant Chief Executive, Pellys RJP Solicitors

Tim Kiel, Group IT Director, Irwin Mitchell LLP

Thereza Snyman, Head of IT, Kingsley Napley LLP

Luigi Salzano, Associate Director, IT, Pannone LLP

26 Software support for Project based Legal service delivery Antony Smith, Legal Project Management discusses why an increasing number of law firms are implementing Project Management systems in light of the changes.

27 Interview with... Vin Murria Chief Executive, Advanced Computer Software Group plc

30 The final word Emma Waddingham, Modern Law, rounds up our unique supplement by taking a look at what we have learnt from talking to our Legal IT experts.

Modern Law Magazine Project Director Kate McKittrick Contact t: 01765 600909 e: kate@charltongrant.co.uk

Chief Editor Emma Waddingham Editor Charlotte Parkinson

ML // IT Supplement 2013

Have you seen our sister publication Modern Claims Magazine? Linking the Industry Together

May 2013 | Issue 01 | ISSN 2051-6495 Steve White new CEO of BIBA outlines his manifesto priorities for members and underlines his commitment to fighting for fairer, more relevant regulation for insurance brokers. Motor sense: Instead of moaning about the state of the insurance market, a team of claims professionals decided to try and do something about it, as Ant Gould, CII, explains.

Modern Claims Magazine | May 2013 | Issue 01

“Claimant representatives and insurers are always going to be on opposite sides of the fence. But we can agree to disagree on some issues and put that aside and work together on issues of mutual interest, fraud, for example.” James Dalton, ABI

Dominic Clayden “I don’t believe having lawyers in those low value claims adds any real material value – the value can be delivered by going directly to the insurer so from an Aviva point of view, let the insurer have the first go at settling it.”

Charlton Grant

Supported by Association of Regulated Claims Management Companies

SBT1420 Charlton Grant - Modern Claims Magazine - Issue 1 v4.indd 1

Sponsored by A CENTURY OF PROFESSIONALISM

15/05/2013 15:05

To arrange your free subscription please e-mail charlotte.parkinson@charltongrant.co.uk

www.modernclaimsmagazine.co.uk

Introduction

Introduction WHAT DO LAW FIRMS REALLY, REALLY WANT? F

aced with the challenges of the Legal Services Act era, too many law firms find themselves in the same position as the Spice Girls… their heyday was 20 years ago, attempts at reviving their fortunes and reinventing themselves have met with limited success and their more talented people are quitting to go-it-alone or join another firm. And then one day a partner says “I met these consultants at a conference and they said we needed to update our IT systems.” To paraphrase the Spice Girls chart-topping singles Wannabe and Stop, stop right there. What law firms think they really, really want when it comes to legal technology – and what they really, really need, are frequently poles apart. All too often a decision to invest in technology is made where there is an absence of any clear strategic thinking on the wider future of the firm. It is the computing equivalent of rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic (relax, I’m not going to start singing Celine Dion) – a belief that in a crisis, if you don’t know what to do, doing anything is better than doing nothing. Don’t do it. Instead, save your money and think. Technology is –always has been and always will be – a tool for implementing broader business objectives and strategies. By itself it has no intrinsic value. To use the Black & Decker analogy, the reason you buy an electric drill is not because you want to own a drill but because you want to put up a shelf and need to drill holes in the. And when you do sit down to think. Make sure you share your thoughts with not just other lawyers but also your head of IT, your head of finance and your head of business development/marketing to take stock of the IT systems you currently have, what weaknesses they may or may not have, and what IT systems people think the firm needs. All law firms like to believe they are special – they are not but their IT needs will vary depending upon their business circumstances and practice specialisms. For example, if you are into volume work and claims handling, then some

form of case/matter management system is a must. If you have lawyers who are out on the road, working from home, appearing in court, then a sound communications infrastructure (including security) and mobile solutions (including smartphones and iPads) and possibly even hosted or cloud solutions will be on the agenda. So what else to look out for? Much as it may break the IT salesman’s heart to hear these words but just because a computer system is old, doesn’t automatically mean it needs replacing. Some of the largest firms in the country are still happily running accounts and practice management systems they purchased in the mid-1990s (same vintage as the Spice Girls). What however many of them have done is to add more sophisticated management reporting and information tools. As the old adage goes “you can’t manage what you can’t measure”. If you don’t know how well (or how badly) an office, a department or a fee earner is performing (and the same goes for all financial metrics including cash-flow, WIP, credit control) how can you hope to be able to do anything about it? It is this business intelligence, knowledge-gap that has created the current situation with the SRA warning that 150 UK law firms are “experiencing very significant financial difficulty.” My other hot tip is business development technology – everything from interactive websites to marketing and CRM systems. Currently firms are spending money on these systems at twice the rate they are on traditional back office software. Firms need to win more business to survive and they then need to retain those clients for as long as possible. So what are your practice strengths? Where do your clients come from? Why do you lose them? How good is their customer experience when they deal with you? Merely being a good lawyer is no longer good enough today. Now the whole consumer experience must be excellent and IT systems can help to deliver this quality of service consistently. To sum up… there are many great IT systems available in the UK but no firm or ABA has the resources (not just money but also in terms of time and capacity to deal with the disruption inevitably associated with implementations and rollouts) to buy them all. You therefore need to schedule your IT procurement plans and to cherry-pick the systems you really need now, as distinct from all the ones it would be nice to have maybe sometime later. And remember, your IT needs may not be the ones you first thought you had issues with! Charles Christian, Editor in Chief, Legal Technology Insider

ML // IT Supplement 2013

Evident Legal Interview

Interview with... Jon Brewer Founder and Chief Executive, Evident Legal

The Chief Executive of Evident, which owns Simplify the Law, speaks to Emma Waddingham about the implicit role of technology in the new legal age when used to drive efficiency and new business, rather than for its own sake.

Q A

Has the LSA & ABSs given rise to the need for greater technological support for law firms, in the bid to compete against big brands – or had the legal IT revolution already begun? There are two types of IT; those legal IT products that create efficiency and those used to win business and impact on client experience. The former had already begun but it’s not been what I call a ‘revolution’. In fact, the reason why the Government wanted to allow for innovation in the legal sector was because it is set in its way. It has been a closed market for over 200 years. Another driver for the spread of IT for the latter, prior to the LSA, was the property crash in the mid-late 2000’s when there wasn’t enough margin on work in this field (or to support others). This led firms to look at how they could use IT to improve their work. Even now, it is a common theme that those who innovate in legal services (and they are there) are very few. ABS competition has come through more slowly than expected so the impact on law firms is still yet to be felt. Because the sector hasn’t had to change for so long, it is inherently slow to move unless it has to and the benefits are evidenced. In reality, most law firms will do what they’ve always done, especially in such an ageing profession. Why would a senior partner, who has five or so years left before retirement, look to invest and change what they are doing if they can roll on before selling up? Having said that, the threat of competition prays more on the minds of lawyers; leading to firms thinking our ideas are useful. We’ve had a great deal more success since launching [in November 2012] than what we’d expected, which is fantastic.

Q A

What about those that have innovated?

They will be looking to land grab; to occupy territory by using IT and driving new business online and maintaining relationships. They will be able to capture the prospective clients more efficiently and effectively than others can do manually, which means that when the time comes for a business to invest in legal services, this existing relationship will take over those on the high street who rely on word of mouth referrals. Riverview Law is an excellent example of this, driving business through content marketing and investment in IT to deliver large pipelines of future work, nationwide. Brand new ABSs have no choice but to invest in IT in order to build a client base. For existing law firms, it’s all too easy to sit back and farm existing clients. There is inertia in the market that will be taken advantage of by those who have innovated or are increasingly open to doing so as soon as possible.

Q A

What are the key stumbling blocks to engaging law firms in the investment of new technology?

There are clearly cultural issues to overcome. The decision-making process is hideously slow in partnerships – true

“Because the sector hasn’t had to change for so long, it is inherently slow to move unless it has to and the benefits are evidenced. In reality, most law firms will do what they’ve always done” ML // IT Supplement 2013

Evident Legal Interview

“As a former lawyer, I know lawyers like evidence before they invest or change. As I said, it’s been a closed market for 200 years and those at the top more commonly ask, ‘do I really need to change?’ I get that but it’s a culture that will hold firms back or even lead to their eradication. By the time that evidence is in the marketplace, it will be too late” Jon Brewer, Founder and Chief Executive of Evident Jon is Founder and Chief Executive of Evident. He practised as a commercial litigator at Pinsent Curtis and CMS Cameron McKenna. Having completed his MBA at Imperial College Business School, he led the development and strategic marketing of new online products from the UK board of LexisNexis. In addition to leading marketing activity for Evident, Jon’s experience of the productisation of legal knowledge plays a big role in the creation of competitive advantage for law firms Evident works with. About Evident Evident was launched in 2012 to supply online services to those in the legal sector that specialise in commercial law. These services have been built around the needs of UK businesses by Evident to help its clients build a ‘distinct advantage over competitors’. Its services for law firms include: Simplify the Law, which aims to effectively establish new client relationships for law firms with small and medium enterprises on the Internet, and; the ability to develop an own-brand online service, capitalising on the expertise of lawyers. For in-house legal teams, Evident also delivers online services for colleagues within the corporate client organisation and the knowledge to empower colleagues, freeing up resources for more complex work by the in-house legal team. www.evident-legal.com

of any partnership models, not just in the legal sector. An equity partner told me he was really keen to invest in our services and saw the value and benefits that would come of installing the processes but he had to run it through the rest of the partnership – even though it didn’t affect their practice areas. We could have ended the conversation there but lawyers need evidence. We offered a three month trial so they could all see the benefits in situ, to help make a case for the rest of the partners to prove it is a worthwhile investment. As a former lawyer, I know lawyers like evidence before they invest or change. As I said, it’s been a closed market for 200 years and those at the top more commonly ask, ‘do I really need to change?’ I get that but it’s a culture that will hold firms back or even lead to their eradication. By the time that evidence is in the marketplace, it will be too late.

Q A

Barristers are reportedly even slower to change their working culture – is the Bar missing a trick? Solicitors are project managers – experts in some cases but when things get really tricky, they bring in counsel. There are and will be a variety of technological

solutions to enable barristers – once allowed – to supplant the role of the project manager more effectively and take even more work directly, while cost-effective. There are so many missed opportunities for those at the Bar and it is mainly due to culture.

What about the idea that smaller / high street firms should become specialists or niche firms to offer a different USP than the high volume, high process ABSs?

Take a look at the parallels between the optometry market and the legal market since deregulation - a number of articles have already been written on the subject. It’s often forgotten that while 3,000 independent opticians held 75% of the market prior to deregulation, there were over 3,300 once the dust settled. By this time however, 75% of the market now sat with the top four brands (Specsavers, Vision Express, etc). What the data shows is that the big brand innovators – which created 80% growth in the optical market – are now enjoying the fruits of their labour. The same will happen to law firms. It’s not simply a case of saying ‘we know the local landscape and can offer a boutique service’ to capture the rest of the market. Simply

ML // IT Supplement 2013

Evident Legal Interview

“A huge challenge for in-house legal teams is to get their voice heard – especially when it comes to budget time. By using IT to help the business install more efficient and cost-effective systems, that enable colleagues to do more for themselves, raises the profile of the legal team. The lawyers can show they are using IT to help the business achieve its aims” becoming a niche firm isn’t the same as building a brand around offering truly niche areas of law and evidencing success and delivery. True niche experts tend to reside in larger law firms where they can afford to have pockets of expertise and departments to service these needs. High street practitioners tend to be generalists because they have had to service all legal needs.

Does security raise issues for law firms looking to offer and use more online tools and cloud based applications? Are there misconceptions in terms of Cloud-based systems and using mobile devices?

Fundamentally, the concerns about using Cloud-based technology lie more in the price than perceived security issues. If you compare the security of pre-existing systems in law firms to that of Rackspace Managed Hosting [which Evident uses] – one of the largest Cloud suppliers worldwide – then it quickly becomes evident that security issues are satisfied by our potential customers. Of course, it depends on the nature of the business you are working with. An in-house legal team in a financial services organisation will want to use its own firewalls etc so we work around that and we don’t have to get involved with the systems. For others, it’s a great bonus. In terms of mobile devices, many firms don’t want colleagues to use their own devices internally but they are looking for ways in which customers can access their services and interact with the law firm through mobile devices. Some of our law firm clients look to do this with us as customers are increasingly looking for content and knowledge online. When sharing information through mobile devices, again, it depends largely on what information they are sharing. I doubt very much that hackers will be interested in the terms and conditions of a manufacturing contract or divorce. You have to take reasonable measures of security, depending on what information you are looking to share online with the client. All of our processes are Data Protection compliant – which is a given.

Is the shift towards using online, selfhelp tools in the UK going to be as popular as it is in the US and what will be the impact on smaller, even specialist law firms?

ML // IT Supplement 2013

I don’t think it’s yet had the impact in the UK that people thought it might by now. Legal Zoom is yet to fully launch and Rocket Lawyer has a few users but it has had (reportedly) lowish uptake. Of course you can’t tell yet but things are a bit quiet on the online documentation front here. It will come but it will take a big public relations push and a number of social media referrals to achieve a greater status. The recent Legal Services Board Small Business Legal Needs survey (May 2013 – see Modern Law issue 6, page 18, for details), highlighted the fact that most businesses want to stay away from law firms and avoid seeking and paying for legal advice as long as possible. Further expansion into online legal documentation and a PR push will help drive people towards helping themselves where they can.

Q A

So why aren’t small businesses being targeted?

It would be short-sighted for firms to say ‘we don’t really deal with small businesses because they never purchase, so we’re going after larger ones’. Businesses try to avoid legal spend whatever their size – even if they have invested in an in-house legal team – it’s the dynamic. We just need to diffuse the new legal innovations – such as self-drafting – into the public consciousness and highlight ease of use and cost efficiency.

Q A

Are consumers as up to speed on technology and DIY law as we like to think?

They are – so long as it’s user-friendly and accessible. The systems Evident offers are user friendly and we wouldn’t have created them unless we were certain they would help reduce cost and process burden for customers and in-house colleagues. It is worth bearing in mind though that technological innovation shouldn’t be applied for its own sake – it has to solve a problem to guarantee return on investment. Self-drafting and DIY law isn’t a new thing; it’s just about understanding the nature of the customer’s problem and creating something to solve it. It’s also important to ensure the guidance is there alongside the ability to self-draft. However, the biggest challenge to getting people to use DIY legal services is the fact that they don’t often know what the problem is in the first place. They often

Evident Legal Interview

for in-house legal teams is to get their voice heard – especially when it comes to budget time. By using IT to help the business install more efficient and cost-effective systems, that enable colleagues to do more for themselves and raises the profile of the legal team. The lawyers can show they are using IT to help the business achieve its aims.

Q A

Is there another benefit here that companies can offer their legal processes to their customers and / or partners? It’s very interesting; we’re seeing and hearing of this potential more extensively in the marketplace and the precedent for this has been set in the US by Cisco Systems. Around a decade ago, Cisco decided to share legal knowledge with other bluechip companies on non-competitive issues. This is likely to spread to the UK with the onset of ABSs.

“Law firms specialise in being a font of knowledge and interpretation, the Internet is where people are most likely to go to get knowledge and help. This presents a fabulous opportunity for law firms to draw in new customers” need someone to qualify that they do have a problem and what that problem is / how remedied – either through selfdrafting and / or the use of an expert lawyer. It’s about offering choice.

Q A

So why hasn’t the big push happened, especially in terms of using public relations to drive the use of self-drafting? Because the existing profession is worried about cannibalising their own market. In terms of the new entrants – it’s too early to tell. The Co-op is not yet showing the signs of offering DIY tools extensively to the marketplace (although I have no doubt we will see these services offered in the case of divorce law) but it has certainly evidenced the expansive use of IT innovations inhouse to service the marketplace.

Will the use of DIY drafting in corporate organisations with in-house legal teams see the number of lawyers employed inhouse decline?

Yes, possibly. But in-house legal teams have been even more open-minded to the introduction of self-drafting tools than law firms. In-house teams are struggling to gain wider resources from their organisation as well as tackle the more complex tasks such as risk control – largely because their time is being taken up by reinventing the wheel. The self-drafting function means they can empower their colleagues to do more, freeing time and resources up in the in-house legal department to make terms tighter and tackle other issues. A huge challenge

Q A

What does the future of legal services look like in the UK?

There are two answers here; what the future could look like and what it will look like in reality. The first, more exciting prospect is the potential for online marketing for legal services. Law firms specialise in being a font of knowledge and interpretation, the Internet is where people are most likely to go to get knowledge and help. This presents a fabulous opportunity for law firms to draw in new customers. There are, of course, challenges. Firstly, that lawyers don’t want to give their knowledge away and secondly, that to master online marketing, you have to have scale. The legal services sector is too fragmented in the UK to get the required volume of content, output and resources required to beat the competition. So for law firms facing these challenges, things look pretty bleak; hence the initial enthusiasm for the Quality Solicitors network. However, simply sticking a brand name in your shop window isn’t enough - it has to mean something to the consumer. If you get your branding right, install the right systems and processes and match it by meeting your promises in terms of customer experience, then you can truly sell on a point of brand differentiation.

ML // IT Supplement 2013

THE NEW HOME OF SAFER INFORMATION Proofpoint leverages the power of cloud to enable the world’s most successful companies to better understand, defend and govern their critical information – inside and outside their network. NETprotocol is the premier technology solutions provider to legal and financial institutions, already trusted to design, deliver and support key infrastructure to top 100 law firms nationwide through diverse deployment models, covering Data Centre to Desktop. Together we represent the UK’s leading partnership in delivering complete information security and governance.

WHAT DOES 1 MEAN TO YOU? Whether the breach of confidential information by 1 successful targeted attack, the 1 untraceable message or 1 smoking gun email – ‘the 1’ can have a colossal impact on your organisation.

Protection. Can you identify today’s advanced targeted attacks before it’s too late? With Targeted Attack Protection’s clicktime defence technology, you get a new protection that follows email through the organisation – on-site, off-site, on every click. Which means when something originally safe turns hostile, you have unique visibility and ultimate actionability to find and neutralise it before it’s too late.

Archive. Can you find that 1 critical piece of evidence when it matters most? Proofpoint’s Enterprise Archive technology gives you Big Data-powered parallel searching to deliver results in seconds – instead of days or weeks. And our fully automated data ingestion, retention management and legal holds, give you the assurance of a new level of discovery readiness. Gartner, Inc. positions Proofpoint in the Leaders Quadrant in its 2012 Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Information Archiving. Find out why – download the report at proofpoint.com/gartnermq

The Features

11-15

The Features

ML // IT Supplement 2013

The Features

TouchPoint - welcome to the self-service future Law is changing. Legal services firms, their clients and business partners are demanding more for less. They require more information, more quickly, wherever they are. Journey 1… buying a house the TouchPoint way For most people, buying a house is one of the most daunting and stressful experiences in life – especially for those not used to dealing with the legal profession. But for customers using Touchpoint, the whole experience changes for the better. TouchPoint means they are involved, in touch and in control.

clipse’s new self-service portal, TouchPoint, puts customers at the centre of the process and is a truly personal interactive experience. TouchPoint provides a deviceindependent experience using data (taken in real-time) from Eclipse’s core Proclaim Case and Practice Management solution. Providing a self-service solution via iPad, smart phone or PC is now a reality. Let’s take a tour.

“The interactive hub behind TouchPoint gives him visibility of all current and historical claims, visual statistics, and reporting tools.” ML // IT Supplement 2013

Meet Sarah – she’s buying her first house and she’s looking for a conveyancing quote. One conveyancer she visits is a TouchPoint user, so rather than phoning or visiting them, an active tile on the firm’s site takes her to a quote calculator. Sarah gets her quote using her iPhone - and once happy with it, her information is pushed automatically into the firm’s Proclaim Case Management system. From here, all sorts of workflows can be triggered that get things moving for Sarah. A welcome SMS and an email give her secure access to her new TouchPoint self-service area. Because this is Sarah’s TouchPoint, and it’s personal to her, she can create a personalised map and snapshot of the house she has fallen in love with. Further information tiles include plain-English explanations of the process, and guides on useful terminology. All this gives Sarah a connection to - and a proper understanding of - the service. At any point, Sarah can contact and chat with her lawyer, and behind the scenes all queries and questions can be sucked into Proclaim, to trigger workflow or be rerouted to relevant personnel. For Sarah this means no more leaving messages, wondering if and when someone will call back. Using TouchPoint’s ‘FileView’ tool, Sarah stays informed and in control. She can check on her file and its documentation any time and from anywhere. It’s a transparent view which gives Sarah the full conveyancing picture and a greater understanding of the process. The data she sees is secure, and in real-time - her law firm decides how much (or how little) is shown - whatever is right and appropriate for them. Through marketing features in TouchPoint, Sarah receives tailored communications, news feeds, blogs and even special offers that are relevant to her. She is free to just pull information, so she won’t get irritated by blanket ‘junk mailers’ – but she appreciates taking a look at a relevant news feed while at work on her PC or catching up with a blog on her smartphone. TouchPoint helps to build a closer, more positive relationship between Sarah and her law firm. Once her house is bought and all the paperwork is complete, Sarah can then take part in a Client Satisfaction survey embedded in TouchPoint. The results are automatically captured in Proclaim, triggering relevant workflow tasks inside the firm. And of course, subsequent data analysis helps the law firm continually improve customer service – which Sarah, or the friends she recommends to the firm, will appreciate when they want to buy or sell their homes.

The Features

Journey 2… profitable business relationships

Journey 3… Manage your firm from the couch

Let’s look at how TouchPoint could be used by a business partner. Let’s call our individual user “James”.

Helen is a senior partner at a top 100 law firm, and she’s just been given TouchPoint access. She’s instantly attracted by the accessible interface, and loves the idea of the ‘Office hub’ – turns out it’s not just a gimmick. This is her TouchPoint journey.

James is a senior director at an insurance company and his job involves liaising with an external service provider who manages large quantities of litigated injury cases. TouchPoint changes his interaction with this law firm partner - and how he tracks progress - immeasurably. The interactive hub behind TouchPoint gives him visibility of all current and historical claims, visual statistics, and reporting tools. This means he can track work at a time and in a place convenient to him - be that in the office, or on an evening at home via iPad. He can keep an eye on costs and progress at the touch of a tile, ultimately helping James do his job more easily and deliver a better service to his clients and stakeholders. By accessing TouchPoint’s ‘FileView’ system, James can track each and every claim. This opens up a transparent view of progress – he can see top-level information, like who is working on each claim, right through to detailed individual histories. Instead of making chase-up phone calls, which are time-consuming and tricky to handle quickly for James and his busy lawyers, he can now get the information himself. Whenever he wants. Instantly. TouchPoint also gives him online access to documents that need authorising. Before TouchPoint, he received these via standard email – and he wasn’t very comfortable with the security of that. Or worse, they arrived interminably slowly through the post. TouchPoint has put an end to all that – he now receives alerts reminding him to attend to a document or issue, and he can review and action anything that needs attention in a secure environment, in real-time. That means really quick turnaround. The self-service ‘Analytics’ section in TouchPoint really helps James with his work. Insurance is a competitive market, and he needs to stay on top of his game – for that, he needs data. In TouchPoint Analytics he can draw from a plethora of parameters, KPIs and management information, and he gets all this live, on-screen, at the touch of a tile. He can even choose the graph style and make his own as and when he needs. And with TouchPoint, instead of numerous emails, faxes and calls to his lawyers he has instant access to data, just the way he wants it. He runs all the reports himself and monitors costs, speed of service, and financial trends from his desk – or his sofa.

First, Helen makes a beeline for FileView. She likes to keep track of her own files, and those in progress throughout her department. TouchPoint opens up a transparent view into what has happened (with live data taken from the firm’s Proclaim Case or Practice Management system) and Helen can drill down into individual cases. This is new to her - she can view a great deal of the firm’s matter and client data, easily and simply, while out of the office. Being able to securely take a look at work in progress, via an iPad from her lounge, makes Helen feel especially good as it means she’s making much better use of her limited time – maximising billable time. TouchPoint’s ‘Document Upload’ tool gives Helen a fast and easy route to upload any kind of documents to the relevant Proclaim files, all from the one-stop portal. And it doesn’t matter where she is, because the TouchPoint experience is the same no matter what device she’s using. Documents uploaded can trigger workflow tasks in the office’s Proclaim system, keeping cases moving and progressing in the background. As a senior partner in the firm, Helen values TouchPoint’s Analytics tool. She likes the way KPIs and management information are presented in TouchPoint – there’s a great deal of live data about the firm in there, all available at press of a tile. In essence, Helen has a visual landscape of the whole firm at her fingertips, so she can do more than just see the information – she can understand what’s going on. She can look at predefined data, but she prefers to choose her own parameters from the many available to create her own graphs and reports. Lately many of Helen’s firm’s biggest clients have been demanding all kinds of reports, both before they choose her firm to partner with and while they’re working together – now she can provide them with all the bells and whistles they want. And because Helen’s a business-minded partner, she wants to analyse profitability and client satisfaction – all of which are available through the TouchPoint interface. Helen’s life is easier, and her information is with her wherever she is.

And now, instead of waiting to receive a letter or phone call, James can tell his firm what he thinks of the service he receives using TouchPoint’s Satisfaction Survey tool. He always has plenty of feedback, which is all imported into the law firm’s Proclaim Case Management system. This helps law firm partners follow up with him on areas that need attention, and analyse the data with him to learn lessons and improve their service – something else he likes. Working together collaboratively at last? For James, that time has arrived.

For more information on TouchPoint - or for a demonstration - call Darren Gower at Eclipse on 01274 704100 or email darren.gower@eclipselegal.co.uk www.eclipselegal.co.uk

ML // IT Supplement 2013

The Features

Outsourcing... is it really a necessity? With the current change and turbulence within the legal sector, Craig Jones, Simpson Millar asks how and why outsourcing is being used, and if it is really the answer... A pinch of collaboration Any discussion around outsourcing has to recognise that the conclusion reached depends largely on the needs of a firm’s customer base. Certainly for businesses that service a customer base of consumers and SMEs, there are significant savings to be made by saying ‘no’ to third party offers of taking it all off your hands. All it takes is a little investment and perhaps a pinch of collaboration. I don’t particularly like describing people as sophisticated and unsophisticated but feel forced to do so since our regulator subscribes to such terms: defining a sophisticated customer base as one that is capable of measuring the quality of the “legal” element of legal services, and is therefore less likely to be sensitive to the provider’s decision to outsource or not. Conversely, an unsophisticated customer base is less capable of measuring the legal element and will therefore tend to focus on the “service” element when measuring the quality of the service and deciding where to buy it. My views are influenced by the fact that our business - Simpson Millar LLP - is predominantly a consumer and SME oriented business. Consequently the service element is of paramount importance to our success. Personally, I have struggled with outsourcing; perhaps a reflection of having been unable to identify the right partners or simply that my approach has been flawed. Either way, outsourcing arrangements have rarely lived up to my expectations but rather provided a constant tension between the objectives of our business and those of the provider. At a time of cataclysmic change, I am hesitant about the ability of outsourcing arrangements to adapt as quickly and smoothly as we require, so that we can meet market challenges head on.

ML // IT Supplement 2013

My biggest aversion to outsourcing is in relation to software solutions. Although links between offices and telephony systems are, for example, entirely outside the realms of possibility for us to deliver ourselves, other areas offer greater choice. They may be business critical but they are not differentiators: Firewall and mail filtering systems, email systems and even legal accounts management seems of little importance to our customer base. Governed by our regulations and therefore reasonably static in their requirements, I find third party solutions to be perfectly acceptable. I cannot say the same for systems that are potential differentiators and therefore core to the services we deliverand the manner in which we deliver them. These are areas where my approach to outsourcing becomes particularly conservative and where we as a firm have invested significantly in developing our skill set to fully understand how to use the software at our disposal. Spending a small fortune on very common software products such as Microsoft Office and then failing to utilise their potential is an opportunity missed. Either learn to use it or switch to free alternative such as OpenOffice.

“Firms that really want to leverage the technology to a state of very high productivity sometimes find that their systems are unable to deliver.”

Time to let the systems decide? Other breeds of software suffer with a similar but more accentuated problem, such as case management systems which, in my book should have five core functions: data entry and retrieval, document assembly, time recording, diary management and then workflow which provides an effective means of bundling the other four functions together. These are generally relatively expensive systems to buy, both in terms of upfront cost and annual maintenance fee but, if you are really going to get the most out of them, the real expense is the time that will subsequently be spent building your own processes, procedures and documents – ostensibly “your service” - on top of that system. Incurring the initial outlay but then failing to invest the time and effort required to see a return on that investment is the reason a case management system yields very different results from business to business. For some that will mean there are a relatively small number of relatively unsophisticated documents. For others, it will mean

The Features

“The additional overhead arising out of the need to keep records and registers is significant, but adds no value whatsoever to the proposition to the customer.” hundreds, possibly thousands of intelligent documents able to change themselves based on the information contained within the system, and that the system will decide which of those documents to use depending again on the information available. The only two limiting factors on the extent to which this technology can be leveraged are a) our intellectual ability as lawyers to embed our expertise and knowledge in these systems and b) the commercial consideration of how much upfront investment in terms of the time and effort of going through that embedding process can be justified. Without proper investment, it may be that your existing software will do just as good a job. And perhaps your ranks are hiding one or more people with hidden talent in how to get the most out of products like Microsoft Word. Given half a chance, they could provide real efficiencies at a significantly lower cost than third party products. Firms that really want to leverage the technology to a state of very high productivity sometimes find that their systems are unable to deliver. That was the situation I faced when I first started with Simpson Millar LLP. In trying to appeal to the widest possible audience, vendors tend to aim for the majority rather than accommodating the needs of the users at the extremes of the spectrum. In my case, we had no desire to throw out the core legal accounts facility that everyone was used to but felt restrained by the limitations of the case management facilities that the software offered. So we began developing our own case management software around it. Consequently, we have built our own bespoke system encompassing all five functions described above and more – supporting almost 300 users across multiple work types and sites. This has taken no small amount of effort but has given us the agility and adaptability that we wanted, and that

we now need. So while we read with increasing regularity about the need for legal services providers to be “close to the data” we do not need to wait for our software suppliers to work out what that actually means in practice; how to achieve it and then to deliver it. Instead, we write the software ourselves to do exactly what we want, how we want it, when we want it. Cost is key This self-sufficient approach has had knock-on benefits. The growing interest in mobile telephone applications is one we identified some time ago. We also found the cost of developing that software externally to be prohibitive. But with solid, in-house knowledge of software development, we were able to turn our attention to mobile platforms and write our own mobile apps. Interestingly, in these times where many are talking about unbundling of legal services we are doing the same thing with our mobile apps –doing a lot of the development work ourselves and then seeking specialist assistance for the parts which are outside of our area of expertise. Once you know a little about software development, you begin to find a lot of what is being sold to be rather underwhelming. Increasingly, our team is able to build something similar far more cost effectively. And so they do. In some cases, our effort results in something which is a differentiator. However, some of what we develop makes little or no impact on the service we deliver. Take compliance requirements for example. Few will dispute that the arrival of the 2011 Code of Conduct and “Outcomes Focussed Regulation” has created an additional burden on practitioners. The additional overhead arising out of the need to keep records and registers is significant, but adds no value whatsoever to the proposition to the customer. Part way through building our own software

solution designed to meet these requirements I needed to produce some quite complex project plans. I have used Microsoft Project before which I found too expensive given that the open source software community offers a similar product for free which did exactly what I needed it to do. And so it occurred to me - perhaps law firms should begin to collaborate in a similar way to the open source software community; sharing the results of their efforts to build products which are not differentiators. Up and down the country, legal services providers from sole practitioners to massive ABS’ are required to meet the same requirements in terms of keeping of compliance registers. No doubt a number of them are like us and have decided to build their own. Would it be so difficult for those of us that are taking that route to collaborate, build together and even share the results with those less well resourced? We would probably all end up with a better product, obtained at cheaper cost and more quickly. I would get no small sense of satisfaction from helping out firms that are dazzled by the promises made by those looking to make a small fortune from providing outsourced software requirements. Anyone reading this and thinking that they would be interested in participating in such a project by helping to build, please feel free to email me directly at craig.jones@ simpsonmillar.co.uk

ML // IT Supplement 2013

The Questions

16-26

The Questions

ML // IT Supplement 2013

The Questions

Introduction

Legal IT, the new age

trategies for selling legal knowledge and effectively service Legal need in a perceivably constricted (if not simply cash-poor) market, cannot exist without including the word ‘technology’. While the sector attempts to demystify law, IT solutions are still a complex and ever-changing minefield for lawyers – not in the least bit helped by issues regarding the long-term maintenance, cost and management of processes and solutions. Over the past few weeks I’ve immersed myself in the minefield that is legal IT. As a legal IT user myself in the past, I’ve suffered my fair share of getting to grips with new updates, having to work out how the CRM system works and then finding out it’s of no real help and then trying to find the time / money / resources to ‘up-skill’ myself and the system to meet the evolving business needs. That’s not a slight on the system – I’m sure somewhere in the quagmire of solutions there was a tool fit for purpose. But I didn’t always have the time and entertained notions of bolton solutions. Change or bust As a journalist I use technology on a daily basis: to communicate with the sector and our readers through social media; to record endless reams of interview notes; to craft my copy and see it come to life in a publication; to communicate with readers, contributors and colleagues and to stay in touch with the wider world. Working from home (not a cop-out, I can assure you) I understand the ‘risks’ associated with relying on someone else for secure servers, 24/7 access, data protection and back up and software support. But I simply couldn’t do my job without trusting the skill of others. I also relish the opportunities mobile devices bring to my working practice – such as being able to access information from my colleagues and share knowledge at the touch of a button and respond to my customers’ (or the reader and supporter) needs immediately. I also know that I am far more efficient, effective and therefore

more profitable working on the go than sat in an office with restricted tools to hand due to huge overheads and historic investment in desktop hardware. That doesn’t mean I don’t sometimes - out of habit - reach for the pen and paper instead of my Smartphone dictating application. But what does this have to do with you? Well, in the interviews and roundtable1 debates I’ve hosted for this exclusive supplement and Modern Law, some of the main concerns around new IT and the reality of it entering into the legal sphere often revolve around: risk, cost, ease of use and will it increase profitability. One of the biggest ‘should we, shouldn’t we’ debates revolves around the fairly innocent mobile device – whether it be the Smartphone, tablet or notebook. Bring Your Own Device or BYOD might sound like something you’re supposed to do to keep the costs down in a restaurant but it’s a huge perceived-risk issue in law, as colleagues bring in devices to share, store and change in-house or customer data. From one perspective it means the skills, familiarity and knowledge of the use of mobile devices and efficiency / communication applications is selfdriven. From another it means that care needs to be taken to ensure processes and the bigger picture of regulation, data protection and client care are understood and considered in the use of IT throughout the legal entity. It’s not for me to say what the solution is or whether or not the

technology market is overpriced, oversubscribed or underutilised. What remains to be said is that we have lined up another selection of legal entrepreneurs all chomping at the bit to talk about how technology enhances (or not) their business plan, how strategic implementation can attract the attention of external investors (to ABSs), and enable lawyers’ ability to do more for less. One final note should be made to highlight the influx of IT directors and managers into legal entities from the wider commercial sector, as reported by both Vin Murria (Advanced Computer Software Group plc) and Jon Brewer (Evident) in the interviews that precede this introduction. They both see the ability for those with a helicopter view and experience of IT in non-legal (certainly more commercially-minded) environments as being of huge benefit to law firms and ABSs. They believe the right skills and knowledge around technology can help break down historic misunderstandings, misuse and a culture of fear surrounding IT use in the legal sector. So my ‘helicopter’ musings might be of interest after all! Emma Waddingham Chief Editor, Modern Law 1 To read the latest Modern Law sector roundtable on legal technology, please turn to pages 35-39 in Modern Law, issue 6.

“I simply couldn’t do my job without trusting the skill of others. I also relish the opportunities mobile devices bring to my working practice – such as being able to access information from my colleagues and share knowledge at the touch of a button.” ML // IT Supplement 2013

The Questions

Q: Should firms be using their time and money to invest in infrastructure and technology to ensure they remain competitive in an ever competitive market? Are these investments better placed in bespoke research and development or on off the shelf products?

I find it hard to imagine any law firm that is not dependent in some way on technology to deliver its services to clients. At a grass roots level firms will be dependent upon email, word processing and finance systems to communicate with clients, provide legal services and realise revenue from its operations. In the current market however, most firms should be looking at improving their operational capability and efficiency or start considering how they diversify their service offering to remain competitive. The debate rages on whether firms should be adopting a lean approach to business, providing internet based legal services, fixed fees or going through a legal process deconstruction project to achieve their goals. Whichever approach is taken however, we can be sure of one thing. Technology will at the very least be required to underpin if not drive a major part in the operation of these initiatives. What firms need to be aware of is how their approach to infrastructure and overall technology investment will play a major part in their ability to rapidly succeed in the delivery of the aforementioned strategies. Over the last few years we’ve seen the market go from a “batten down the hatches” to a “thrive to survive” mentality. Unfortunately, I hear of many firms now experiencing the repercussions from lack of investment in IT infrastructure over the last few years. They want to use technology to achieve their business ambitions but are being held back by limitations at the very foundation of their IT systems. Out of date hardware, server software and a lack of server virtualisation are some of the reasons why firms cannot implement the technologies they need to move forward. This isn’t just a networks and servers thing either. The laptops and computers that are used by staff will

ML // IT Supplement 2013

be in need of attention. Still running Windows XP? Microsoft will cease support of the product early next year, meaning that security updates will no longer be available. Technical Agility So from an infrastructure point of view my challenge to firms would be “To what extent does your current infrastructure allow you to rapidly deploy systems to remain competitive?” For example, if a firm is seeking to adopt a new financial, workflow or CRM system to what extent is the new software supported by the infrastructure and does the IT department have the technical agility they need to roll this out quickly. Technical agility comes with the architecture of IT systems. For

“Technology will at the very least be required to underpin if not drive a major part in the operation of these initiatives.”

example, server virtualisation is a valuable tool in enhancing agility. 5 years ago, if I needed a new server I had to buy the hardware and software and then spend precious days building machine and installing the operating system. With server virtualisation I can place a number of virtual servers on a single piece of hardware. Each server lives in its own isolated environment and will not be affected by other servers on the same hardware. When I need a new server is a virtual environment, I can provision one in a matter of seconds. The provision of infrastructure shouldn’t put a drain on cash either. The recession made service providers and software vendors review their pricing models. A range of products now allow you to pay for software using a “pay as you go” model. For example, Microsoft’s SPLA (service provider licence agreement) and Office 365 models allow the latest versions of client and server software to be acquired and used on a month by month basis. This also allows for the scaling up and scaling down of licences at will as business needs dictate. Alternatively, why build your own infrastructure at all? The oft used term “Cloud” is a means by which firms can access modern IT infrastructure technologies without having to build their own. Many providers can now

The Questions

“If the IT function is to thrive in modern, forward thinking law firms they must show the characteristics expected of IT teams in any other sector.” rent IT infrastructure to firms in need of rapid access to technology to support their systems. These systems, usually hosted in secure data centres can be built, supported and maintained by the third party provider if needed. Though firms can elect to get as little or as much involved in this process as they need. Cloud isn’t for all, lots of people like the tangibility of their IT systems being in-house and a huge amount of trust has to be placed in the provider. But the options are there. Each firm must weigh up the benefits. A new kind of leader Outside of infrastructure, firms have a myriad of technology options to deliver the competitive advantage mentioned earlier. However, IT departments have always faced a struggle when asking the business to fund technology. Providing a quantative argument for investing in technology is often difficult. IT heads need to realise that times have changed. If the IT function is to thrive in modern, forward thinking law firms they must show the characteristics expected of IT teams in any other sector. Therefore IT teams must deliver a visible return on investment, implement systems with agility and efficiency and get the basics like support right. The evidence is there that firms need a new kind of IT leader to deliver the above. The necessity for IT heads with commercial acumen is growing. The “buy it or build it” consideration needs a certain skill not just to determine the right path, but to deliver within the necessary timescales whichever route is decided upon. Let’s consider the “buy it” approach for a moment. The whole procurement process requires an element of skill to ensure that solutions are acquired at the right price with favourable contractual terms in place that protect and support the business. A savvy approach is needed to ensure that a

good commercial deal can be quickly established with a vendor. Lining up the right people to then ensure that contracts can be reviewed, negotiated and signed is important as only then can implementation be planned and begin. Even then, it is not uncommon to be stuck in negotiations with project managers over resource and dates. The larger the software deal, the longer this whole process can take. Firms looking that have acquired or in the process of acquiring a practice management system will be familiar with the scenario above. All the while, time marches on and the advantages that these systems should have realised may slowly start to dissipate. Firms may want to consider a more modular approach instead. Is there any value that can be extracted for existing systems or do they need complementing with best of breed products? Existing products are usually rolled out with a limited feature set, which can help with staff transition. Following on from this though, it is important to introduce new features on a regular basis. The danger here is that once a rollout is performed, busy IT departments go on to the next big thing. This can create a perception that the system is limited in features and over a period time may be perceived as not fit for purpose. The trick is to keep revisiting existing systems, obtaining user feedback to improve existing functionality and introduce new features when people are ready to move up a step. Intelligent Investment The “build it” approach can reap the most rewards however. Having a truly customised system that is built and maintained internally means IT can be responsive to business needs and changes almost immediately. Complementing the IT team with Microsoft .NET and database developers can mean almost anything

is achievable from a technology point of view. Commercially aware and experienced developers will take a problem and rapidly build solutions to business challenges. At Clarion, we saw a CRM system built from scratch in just six weeks. There are direct financial benefits too. HMRC’s R&D tax credits scheme mean that firms who succeed or attempt to succeed in developing new technology can obtain a refund of some of their tax payments. Changes in the law are demanding that firms use technology in order to comply with changes. The recent Jackson reforms saw a need to create costs budgets prior to certain types of litigation cases and once approved, monitor the ongoing costs against that budget. This can only be affectively done by using technology to extract data from time systems and compare this against the agreed budget. This has to be done as near real time as possible to prevent any unforeseen overspend. Without an intelligent investment in the right technologies, firms will fail to remain competitive. IT strategies should be closely linked to business initiatives and IT teams should become increasingly engaged with their legal peers. Despite all the hype, it is difficult to see exactly where the legal market will be in the next five years. However, technology will remain critical and we need to be able to quickly respond to the macro factors all around us. Agility, commerciality and modularity are key. Firms shouldn’t be afraid to build in-house where off the shelf cannot deliver. Treading the path untrodden should become familiar to those looking to succeed. Only by setting ourselves apart from the competition can we remain competitive. Nigel Stott, IT Director, Clarion Solicitors

ML // IT Supplement 2013

The Questions

Q: How appropriate and effective are Cloud based servers/products when applied to small/medium sized firms? Cloud based servers and products are, for the vast majority of law firms, an unknown entity so I searched the internet for a definition and unsurprisingly you find many options, none of which really do justice to it.

common definition “cloud computing” is the storage of an organisation’s data on the Internet in a server provided by an independent data center that is a separate organisation from the client organisation. Law firms can now store client data, financial records, legal documents, and other information on the Internet, rather than house data in servers located on their premises, often at a cost which is much less than the cost of storing data internally. See what I mean! To many business owners, let alone Law firms, the thought of putting the future of their business into “The Cloud” fills many with dread and fear. Legal services for decades, even centuries, have drawn comfort from paper, industry regulators and member organisations have much to answer for in the over reliance on paper too, but a large paper bundle tied up neatly with ribbon or securely held in a large folder is today’s way, and it’s not the modern way! It doesn’t end there either, because when the dust on a case settles and the comfy blanket is at the end of its useful life it’s locked away in a filing cabinet for retention periods that take you into a new millennium! You never know when someone might want to query a disbursement or something far less trivial. I think we all agree that the comfy blanket has seen its day and inevitably

we are careering headfirst into the future, some firms faster than others. Life changing innovation? Technology is daunting to many of us, probably because most will never use (or understand) more than 50% of a systems capability. This is not made any easier by IT guys who say “a child could use this” or “it’s a simple programme”. How many of us struggle to even use our Mobile Phone to the extent of what it’s capable? So against that backdrop how on Earth do you decide what’s appropriate and what isn’t? How much do you spend and on what? Which provider do you use? How secure are the systems? Which software do you install? The list is endless and it can be a minefield, no let me re-phrase that, it IS a minefield and all too easy to get wrong. To answer the question of how appropriate Cloud based solutions are depends very much on the Firm, its current systems, the direction and strategy of the business and importantly the appetite of the firms’ Owners/Directors/Partners, there is no right or wrong answer. Let’s assume for the purposes of this debate that whatever option, in house or Hosted, by the time it’s installed and working effectively it’s probably going to be out of date as some other market leading, life changing innovation has hit the streets. Don’t be fazed by this and don’t

“Technology that enhances your business, improves processes, creates efficiencies, is regularly updated and ultimately helps drive revenue…who wouldn’t want that?” ML // IT Supplement 2013

try and keep pace with change and innovation in the IT market place. Keeping up with the Gates’ and Jobs’ is simply not affordable whatever the cost/benefit ratio IT providers throw at you. I suspect many, maybe even the majority of, firms today change their IT because they have to and not because they want to; it’s perceived as expensive, disruptive and never happens smoothly or quickly. For example, if an IT guy tells you it will take 6 hours, double that and add 20% and you will be somewhere near the right number. Multiply that for a whole system change and you can see where I am heading with this…. Technology that enhances your business, improves processes, creates efficiencies, is regularly updated and ultimately helps drive revenue…who wouldn’t want that? Cloud/hosted solutions, particularly for the small and midsized firm, offers the opportunity and potential to keep pace with technology developments; most hosted/cloud solutions have this as part of the monthly package. This feature is extremely attractive to firms in the small

The Questions

“With security becoming less of a factor and providers continually looking at ways to improve every aspect of hosted solutions it starts to become an even more attractive option.” and midsized sector, many of whom have ageing servers, dated hardware/software or even no system at all. Many systems are no longer supported by maintenance contracts and firms usually employ an in house manager or local IT company who provide support. In the longer term this is probably more costly than making that bold investment at the right time. Business strategy. What’s the greater risk to a firm? Having an existing and/or ageing system fall over and being left exposed and vulnerable or a Cloud based solution that’s regularly updated and tailored to your business? We all know that fluffy Cloud is actually a better marketing and sales pitch than a basement in Clapham but let’s not get hung up on what it’s called, is it right for you? Why would or wouldn’t a firm go down the Cloud/Hosted route when they need to upgrade their IT? There are the obvious benefits such as Scalability & Costs, Business Continuity & Contingency, Growth Capability and Regular Upgrades and Developments. It all comes down to the strategy of the business, what do you want a system and a provider to do for you? Any system must facilitate the business strategy not determine it, it must support increased efficiencies, enhance client experience and satisfaction, it must help drive increased income and it has to be flexible. Security seems to be the biggest concern I hear from talking to Managing Partners, CEO’s and IT Directors. How secure is the Cloud? It’s not exactly a leap of faith but providers today seem to have taken these concerns on board and developed secure systems and locations that can only get stronger over time. Many providers have brought

servers in house as opposed to remote locations to allay the fear of the basement in Clapham; doesn’t that in itself create a risk? With security becoming less of a factor and providers continually looking at ways to improve every aspect of hosted solutions it starts to become an even more attractive option. A single monthly payment has a lot of appeal, certainty of budget and cash flow. If your firm has always dealt with IT in House think about the amount of time and money spent on Licenses, replacing Hardware, Software Upgrades, Back Ups, Call Outs, Training and System down time. Out with the old, in with the new. Another set of considerations are that Cloud services do not have the same setup issues as in house solutions, they are scalable and support merger and acquisition activity and subsequent integration, and enable firms to open and close offices in different locations quickly in response to client demand. Thinking even more radically and to be able to compete with new entrants, on-line legal services and the use of mobile devices such as Tablets, iPads’ etc are far easier to support with modern technology and infrastructure. Taking the Lawyer, and the Lawyer’s office, to the client by way of mobile devices adds tremendous value to the client. Being able to access files, documents etc on the move can easily be supported through the Cloud and creates a Wow factor to the client and the Lawyer. In 1999 the IT industry convinced all of us that our computers couldn’t cope with ticking over to 2000 from 1999, the Millennium Bug was born and it created almost an industry in itself with businesses panicked into paying vast sums to IT guys to save their business from the Bug…what happened? The cynic in me suggests Bill

Gates sat in a room somewhere and decided to give profits a boost, but very few systems fell over at a second past midnight on December 31st 1999. We moved on… the advent of Apple Mac, iPod, iPad etc brought another era of innovation. Funky and modern you went for Apple, traditional and safe went for Windows, no right or wrong answer. In fact who would have thought technology would be determined by what type of fruit you are? Apple, Blackberry & Orange, again I digress… Coming back to the whole point of this article and whether Cloud is appropriate for small & midsized firms I would go with yes for the following reasons… • Access to Technology that is regularly updated • Contained and predictable cost • Bespoke applications suited to your business • Flexibility to add or remove users and offices • Data is more secure than ever before • Capital and operational savings will be made through reduced hardware and staffing requirements I am an advocate of continuous business improvement, retaining old and dated processes, systems and practices will not take a business forward and will not allow a firm to compete in the new legal services landscape. I have a healthy cynicism for technology, but we can’t live without it. Maybe it’s the name and marketing aspect that’s at fault where we are told a fluffy white Cloud will be good for your business? Perhaps it may be more accurate if providers every now and then used a Grey one in case the weather turns! Tony Brown, Consultant Chief Executive, Pellys RJP Solicitors

ML // IT Supplement 2013

The Questions

Q: Which new range of systems, processes and platforms do you feel will be the ones to drive legal businesses and law firms into the next decade?

he UK legal sector has a unique set of requirements compared with other industry sectors in that it has been historically fairly insular and sees itself as different. Legal IT is no different and this will need to change in order for Law Firms to survive and thrive. Three main areas that will drive legal into the next decade are: • From Microsoft to Open • Business Process Automation • Big Data Analytics From Microsoft to Open Legal IT has a range of niche suppliers who provide “specialist” legal products mostly within the Microsoft ecosystem. This will change dramatically over the coming decade and a move to more open platforms and standards will be essential if law firms are to remain competitive against new entrants into the sector. The reliance on the Microsoft platform and the tight integration that existing Legal IT vendors have built into their systems could soon be the Achilles heel of IT within Legal. The Legal sector is not large enough to garner massive support and investment from Microsoft (or other large vendors) and will need to find its own way forward. Interestingly the recent changes in Microsoft Office 2013 to the “Plug Ins” architecture, that so many Law Firms are reliant upon, could spell the death knell for many Legal IT vendors, with wholesale re-engineering of their solutions needed. In fact the entire Legal IT eco-system needs to seriously consider its future relationship with Microsoft very seriously. Instead, Legal IT needs to move to embrace new technologies, unburdening itself from the shackles of Microsoft centric solutions and move towards open standards web-based solutions, including those that provide Office like functionality – after all the legal business is all about documents! This is already happening within the US with a number of firms moving towards Google Docs for Office productivity rather than the traditional, Word, Excel and Powerpoint. This trend is set to continue and expand into Europe and beyond. Business Process Automation For larger firms competing in the volume services end of the marketplace, industrial strength automation and Business Process Management solutions will be vital. Learning from other industry sectors is key in this regard and the Legal Sector needs to embrace the experience and process maturity found in Retail, Insurance and Financial Services - who have been through the journey that the Legal Sector is about to embark upon. Industry standard BPM solutions will be required compared to the historical approach of bespoke developments for Case and Document Management automation.

ML // IT Supplement 2013

“The recent changes in Microsoft Office 2013 to the “Plug Ins” architecture, that so many Law Firms are reliant upon, could spell the death knell for many Legal IT vendors.” Big Data Analytics The changing market will drive openness and collaboration between Law Firms and IT will need to underpin this. Electronic data exchanges and online brokerage and comparison businesses will emerge, many will fail and only some will succeed as evidenced by a similar trend in Retail during the early 2000s. The evolution of Big Data and in particular the analysis of such data will also have a profound effect on Legal. It is unlikely that all but the largest of Law Firms will be able to internally fund the systems and platforms to process vast quantities of data and as such dedicated Legal statistical service firms will emerge and provide Information as a Service, as Dunnhumby has done for Tesco. The next decade will see radical change for the Legal Sector and it is essential that “Old Legal IT” transform itself to embrace this change. If it doesn’t many Law firms will find themselves falling by the way side potentially through no fault of their own, other than the inability for IT to deliver open flexible solutions and drive competitive advantage. Tim Kiel, Group IT Director, Irwin Mitchell

The Questions

The New Normal To misquote the old song – “Change is in the Air”. Just about every legal event (or more specifically, Legal IT event) or publication, in whatever format, formal or informal, has adopted or is adopting “change” as its major theme. There has been extensive analysis of the “drivers for change” and seemingly, a consensus is emerging that technology is both at the heart of change – a driver – and a “solution” to change in the legal services sector.

he subject has almost – but not quite – become boring. It is probably time to move away from the theoretical into the practical arena. Just exactly how do we envisage technology underpinning change in the legal services sector? On the assumption that IT will indeed provide one of the strategic differentiators of success, what practical steps can we take – or plan for – to allow law firms to survive and succeed over the coming three to five years? The answers will undoubtedly vary from firm to firm, and sector to sector. What will be appropriate for a global “magic circle” firm is unlikely to have much relevance for a midsized provincial firm, or a new ABS entrant to the market. Nevertheless, it is likely that there will be common strategies which law firms of all shapes and sizes should at least consider, if not adopt. Back to Basics As counterintuitive as it may seem in an article devoted to change, I suggest that a thorough and objective assessment of all existing IT infrastructure, systems and processes would be a good place to start. Even the most innovative skyscraper has to be built on sound foundations. As unexciting as it may seem, ensuring that the IT infrastructure (whether on- premise or “in the cloud”) is sound, the communication links both adequate and resilient, the version of all systems supported and compatible with each other and that as few legacy systems as possible remain will underpin the success of all other IT change initiatives. The watchword is – be ruthless. If a system, process or component is not fit for purpose and not reasonably future-proof – ditch it. The outcome of the review may require some radical re-engineering and heavy investment, but now is the time to do it.

What do clients want – really, really want? It is quite possible – and it may become increasingly likely – that clients (or some of them) will expect an on-line offering from their lawyers (after all, they have become used to on-line banking, on-line shopping, on-line gaming…) ranging from an all-singing, all dancing Facebook type collaboration platform, and/ or e-billing, and/ or 24/7 access to legal advice… the possibilities are endless. The urgency with which law firms – and their IT capability – will have to cater for these demands will depend on the firm, their type of client, the sector(s) in which they operate… but only thorough research and feedback from clients will establish the requirement and thus determine which IT solution will potentially provide a competitive advantage. However, what we can safely assume all clients want is an efficient, legally sound and value for money service from their lawyers. And here, without embarking on extensive market research or attempting to second-guess clients, IT can make a significant contribution to the “value for money” requirement. Until recently, “process” was almost a dirty word in legal circles, and the concept of “business process reengineering”virtually unknown. Such processes as existed were largely based on the principle of “oh, but we have always done it this way” – with little thought as to efficiency, productivity and cost, and probably based on technology evolved thirty or more years ago. Not surprisingly, there is considerable waste in the system… which ultimately, clients have to pay for. A fundamental and farreaching review (and potential redesign) of all business and legal processes is therefore likely to have a healthy impact not only on the bottom line, but more

importantly, on perceived value for money delivered to clients. In a similar vein, the traditional billing structure appears to have been designed specifically to obfuscate the client and incentivise the lawyer to be as inefficient as possible. Increasingly, as they themselves become subject to cost pressures, clients will not only expect various types of alternative fee arrangements, but at the very least will demand accurate costs forecasts and transparent billing. Inevitably, lawyers will be forced to adopt a project management/ cost budgeting approach to ALL matters (and not only those affected by the Jackson Reforms). Those who proactively adopt the disciplines and the technology to enable them to do so are likely to gain a considerable competitive advantage. A time of change could either be frightening, or exciting. It should be neither – merely the “new normal”, if firms step up, embrace change and with common sense and pragmatism, direct and control change. Thereza Snyman, Head of IT, Kingsley Napley

ML // IT Supplement 2013

00 24

????Questions The

These are still difficult times in the legal sector. Firms of all sizes are experiencing cost and profitability pressures from the general state of the economy, the added complexities and restrictions introduced by Jackson, and many other factors. For legal IT practitioners there are simultaneous issues: firms have existing investments in IT infrastructure, applications and other assets and are understandably keen to sweat these as much as possible, and this can be a brake on investment in new infrastructure and technology. Although it is difficult to justify large capital expenditure in this economically uncertain time, it should be remembered that the primary reason for any IT project of any sort is to either address a business need, solve a business problem, or to increase productivity and profitability. These drivers don’t necessarily go away because we are at a (seemingly unending) extreme of the business cycle. If a business need is great enough, firms should consider whatever is required to address the issue. Not all firms will have sufficient finance to invest during a downturn but the competitive edge that a well worked IT solution may provide, if planned and executed well, can stand any business in good stead come the upturn.

The risks inherent in technology investment to some extent vary depending on the nature of the investment. For example, there is inherent risk in not investing in infrastructure upgrades – for example, vital but ageing storage may become unsupported - whereas a failure to upgrade a case management system will likely have a more limited impact. It can be argued that infrastructure and storage upgrades should be prioritised during uncertain economic times. (Whether or not on premise infrastructure is a model for the future and worth investment past the medium term is, of course, a different debate). Pankaj Ghemawat1 has pointed out the balance that organisations need to take between the financial risk of investing and the competitive risk of not investing, particularly at extremes of the economic cycle. He says, “the financial risk of investing is the failure to achieve satisfactory financial returns from an investment. And the competitive risk of not investing is the failure to retain a satisfactory competitive position for lack of investment.” A balance between a blanket ban on investment and an indiscriminate or unstructured commissioning of projects should be found. This balance may be difficult to find, given the aforementioned financial pressures.

“Not all firms will have sufficient finance to invest during a downturn but the competitive edge that a well worked IT solution may provide, if planned and executed well, can stand any business in good stead come the upturn.” ML // IT Supplement 2013

A competitive edge. A further obfuscation of the drivers for investment is that IT projects are typically long-tail, and so investments made today might not deliver any benefit for a number of months or years. A Practice Management System upgrade, for instance, might take two-three years from initial commissioning to delivery and the benefits from it might be relatively marginal on a like-for-like replacement, but a long term view should be taken to ensure that at the end of the downturn the firm retains a competitive edge and its IT systems are fit for the future. Taking a more strategic view of a PMS system upgrade might yield possibilities in terms of optimising legal and back-office processes in a firm and producing enhanced business information – all elements of the life blood of a firm. In deciding where to focus investment, the question is how to target what are likely to be limited resources -and strategically plan investments. In all likelihood a plan will address the greatest risks for the firm; as infrastructure provision is inherently more risky, this is likely to attract a degree more

The Questions

“Firms should be streamlining and optimising process efficiency, potentially using lean techniques, and learning best practice from wider industry.” focus and priority than application development. The issue of whether to buy or develop solutions in-house is often more contentious. It is useful to attempt to separate out the different types of solutions which firms might need to explore. These can encompass discrete programs performing specific functions, Practice Management Systems, solutions built on platforms such as a Case Management or Business Process Management, Business Intelligence solutions or even mobile applications.These can of course require a different level of effort to implement. There is a wide spectrum of software and applications available – and those which are legal-specific or developed for the legal market are of variable quality and often limited in scope and functionality. If a legal vendor’s solution is selected it is likely that any implementation will need customisation or supplementary software. At Pannone we have a long tradition of delivering applications and packages heavily customised for the specific needs of the business. They address functionality missing from applications and at times act as strategic enablers, allowing the firm to engage profitably in new lines of business and develop relationships and buy-in with work providers and clients. What the modern law firm needs. Although individual firms’ needs will differ, in broad terms the modern law firm has a number of general needs from its technology platform: • A stable system with minimal downtime – business deals can’t wait for IT systems; • Systems which can support increased process efficiency and productivity, and enable continuous process improvement; • A secure system, protecting the firm from prying eyes whilst also

maintaining internal security; • Improved reporting across the business, from finance down to the progress of cases. • These factors should result in increased customer satisfaction, and ideally all of this needs to be delivered ideally with a reduction in cost over the lifetime of the solutions! In a new “greenfield” business, with systems designed from the ground up to meet the specific work types of the firm and no existing software constraints, this is a more easily achievable task than in an established business needing the development and deployment of new software systems in the presence of existing software systems. Solutions developed for these environments must take into account and coexist with live software and systems already in place. The challenge in these businesses will be greater and will more likely require custom development of solutions. Relatively low cost opportunities, using Business Process Management (BPM) tools, exist for the production of new solutions and are useful for these “brownfield” firms. Firms should be streamlining and optimising process efficiency, potentially using lean techniques, and learning best practice from wider industry. Automation and optimised business processes are vital for the modern law firm - it is difficult to imagine a manufacturing business operating with systems which aren’t entirely aligned to the product being produced – and BPM tools can offer the flexibility needed to align processes and systems. Some levels of solution, such as PMS systems, clearly should be bought in, particularly when they include functionality which addresses more arcane elements of legal practice and accounting. Software packages can be viewed

in the sense of the “raw” and the “cooked” – solutions which require a lot of effort to get to a useable state, and those which are sold requiring minimal configuration to be useable. BPM systems have in the past been sold as “raw”toolkits, to be developed or customised for the precise needs of a business. This has led in some cases to an appreciable internal development cost, significantly higher than that of a “cooked”, pre-configured product. We are now seeing a movement from BPM vendors such as OpenText and K2 to supply pre-configured modules for their systems, allowing law firms the best of both worlds – the convenience of a largely preconfigured solution with the flexibility to customise with a moderate amount of effort. A firm’s attitude to investment must be balanced; whether to develop in house or buy in depends on where you are, where you want to get to and the route you wish to take. Firms should be alive to the opportunities and the risk mitigation that investment in IT systems can bring. In the end consideration, if there is a case and a cost benefit to either developing or buying solutions firms should consider doing whatever is the best fit for their business. Custom solutions attract overheads such as staffing costs but internal ownership of change and the direction of a solution offer a significant inherent value and offer an agility which is difficult to quantify but which can pay real dividends in the long term. BPM may offer a useful middle path. Luigi Salzano, Associate Director – Systems Development, Pannone LLP 1. MIT Sloan Management Review, 1 April 2009, http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-risk-of-not-investing-in-a-recession-2/

ML // IT Supplement 2013

The Questions

Software support for project based legal service delivery An increasing number of law firms are implementing Project Management systems in light of the changes, Antony Smith, Legal Project Management, takes a look at the in’s and out’s of some of these new methods of management...

egal project management (LPM) can be defined as the adoption and adaptation of well-established project based techniques making the delivery of legal services more effective. An increasing number of firms are incorporating LPM principles as part of their daily practice, including some which employ dedicated legal project managers.In this article I will list some project management competences particularly relevant to legal service delivery and suggest some features to look for when seeking software to support LPM implementation. Core project management competencies most directly applicable to legal service delivery are: • Scoping and estimating the amount of work to be done and quality at which it is to be done (a premium level of service is not always required, nor can it always be afforded by clients) • Pricing the services to be delivered • Organising resources (people and materials) • Communicating progress to all relevant stakeholders • Taking steps to either ensure delivery is as agreed with the client originally or seeking agreement regards revised delivery (which may concern revised time, scope or cost arrangements).

The need for improved project management skills in lawyers has been brought into sharp focus recently. As from 1st April 2013, in the vast majority of civil disputes where the sum of damages claimed is less than two million pounds in total, legal representatives from each side must submit to the court a detailed cost estimate early in the procedural timetable. This is a requirement of the rules of court and there is a standard form which must be used, precedent form H. Judges have received training in project management to help them administer these new rules and they expect solicitors to be equally familiar

ML // IT Supplement 2013

with relevant project management principles. Clients, particularly commercial clients, are taking a similar view. Several law firms I have spoken to recently have told me that they have been unsuccessful in bidding for work. Potential clients have told them that relatively poor legal project management skills cost them the work. Often when I discuss LPM with lawyers it is usually they who first raise the issue of IT support for LPM with me, which is ironic given that I have spent most of my career in legal IT. I do sometimes wonder whether lawyers asking about IT support for LPM implementation to displacement activity. Application software will not of itself make law firms more efficient, effective and responsive to client need. Software can assist with these activities of course, but it cannot provide the answer alone. Law firms still need to improve their estimating, budgeting and delivery skills if they, and their clients, are to benefit from applied LPM. Rather than simply help lawyers do things more quickly, more software is now available to help them do things more effectively. Usually this means greater emphasis on more explicit planning functionality. So what features should lawyers look for in a LPM support system? The list below is not intended to be exhaustive, but it is hoped it will be a useful starting point: 1. If you are a litigator then help with completing precedent form H should be high on your list. Ideally there should be automatic completion of a draft form, using data from previous similar cases (hence there should be integration with, or ability to extract data from, your existing practice management system). 2. Automatic creation of standard litigation workflows (containing core processes and documents) would also be desirable. 3. LPM is not confined to litigators so software should also help create budgets and produce case

plans for typical matters found in other practice areas. Once the draft data is in place, the software should allow for the tailoring of estimates, budgets and tasks etc for each case. Although many cases may be similar, few are identical. During the tailoring exercise, the software should also allow for ‘what if’ scenario planning and hence the ability to create several alternate draft budgets for any given matter (so that each draft could be discussed with the client). Within a typical law firm a range of staff will be involved in planning, supporting and executing service delivery and so, ideally, the software should have a number of ‘views’ displaying data in ways most relevant to different team members. Some kind of dashboard facility, which can report matter progress and highlight areas of concern, would also be useful.

Legal IT vendors are positioning more of their products to assist with LPM activity as they appreciate law firm clients are demanding the benefits which flow from it. Antony Smith, Director, Legal Project Management Limited www.legalprojectmanagement.co.uk

IRIS Legal Interview

Interview with... Vin Murria

Chief Executive, Advanced Computer Software Group plc

In one of the hottest business technology sector deals of the year, Vin Murria announced her return to working with the legal sector after her group purchased Computer Software Holdings, which incorporates IRIS Legal. She talks to Modern Law about her plans.

Q A

What inspired the return to Computer Software Holdings? Was it always your intention to buy the company back once you had established the Advanced Computer Software Group? The real reason is that it’s a perfect fit. Quite simply, that was the rationale – Advanced established three divisions starting four and a half years ago in Sept 2008, Advanced Business Solutions, which includes the new Advanced Legal brand; Advanced Health & Social Care, and; Advanced 365. We went from zero to £420 million in market capital from a standing start. With 83% of that being recurring revenues, it seemed right to add CSH to the fold to access its recurring customer base and to widen opportunities for all. More importantly the customers of CSH now have the benefit of products across the Group so actually, I see it as coming home for CSH.

Q A

What does this change of ownership mean for Advanced Legal and its customers?

One of the key advantages is that Advanced Legal customers will now benefit from the broad range of product and service developments we have made for our customers across all our divisions in a range of market sectors. We have a number of Tier 1 customers in the public and private sectors that use our Business Services solutions, along with a Health & Social Care division which has been innovative in its field. The developments we have made for corporate customers - which include Barclays, Santander, the Co-op, and British Airways – are completely suited to the commercial needs of ABSs. The mission-critical nature of activities undertaken by these corporate brands and NHS Trusts means that we have capacity and expertise in demanding and high risk industries, which is why we have developed the highest quality products, cloud-based systems and support mechanisms. The legal sector can now take advantage of these services and others across the Group such as HR and payroll, e-procurement, budget forecasting and collaborative planning, etc. Additionally, the managed service offering available via Advanced 365 is there for clients to select as and when they require it. Our experts from that division work with them through their account manager to ensure that the solution is right for the customer and it is what they need and are comfortable with. In the last three to five years we have seen

Vin Murria, Chief Executive, Advanced Computer Software Group plc Vin’s career has combined Venture Capital, Private Equity and CEO/ Operational expertise, centred around 20 in the software sector. Vin is a partner at Elderstreet Investments and is Chief Executive Officer of Advanced Computer Software Group plc, which in just over four years has achieved a market cap of £400m. Her last company, where she was CEO (Computer Software Group plc), she took private in March 07. Following a merger with IRIS the business was acquired by Hellman & Friedman in July 07. Prior to this, Vin was European chief operating officer for Kewill Systems Plc. She remains an investor and advisor to a number of quoted and unquoted companies. Her charitable work includes being a Trustee of the Fredrick’s Foundation (a regional version of the Princes Trust), and founder of PS Foundation, a charity supporting the education of children in India.

ML // IT Supplement 2013

IRIS Legal Interview

a rise in the number of customers moving across to cloud-based systems, driven by the marketplace but also the knowledge that we have the reputation and the resources to provide stability and continuity. So when customers – including law firms – look to move across too, they can be sure it’s business as normal, fully backed up and running 24/7.

Q A

Has the de-regulation of the legal industry and the Legal Services Act played a role in the opportunity to create Advanced Legal? Advanced Legal incorporates IRIS Legal, providing lawyers with case management and software for lawyers and now provides access to the Business Services Division and all the things that our 20,000 customers - have had access to for years to help manage their businesses effectively. The LSA and ABSs are exactly the reason why the purchase of CSH was such a welcome opportunity; we can offer legal services providers operating under both new and existing models the ability to access the kind of processes used by organisations in the best companies across the commercial and public sector . When I left the legal software sector in 2007 the old IRIS faced some difficult challenges. The legal marketplace was feeling the impact of the financial crisis long before the LSA came about. The legal market has been in a tough environment for the last five to six years as a result of the recession and now it faces increased competition from ABSs and new entrants – but change of this kind always brings opportunities. It’s absolutely the right time for the Group to come back and work with the sector. We have a wealth of experience to offer, especially around ABSs and the new legal environment. Our customers don’t have to wait for us to develop the processes and software they require for this evolving environment - we have it already. We own the intellectual property for everything we offer and can make changes to suit the marketplace and adapt to change far more effectively and quickly than other providers.

Q A

Will you work closely with clients to create bespoke software and services that are fit for purpose? We work with the customer all the time through user groups and steering committees

ML // IT Supplement 2013

“The potential we identified in in-house corporate legal teams is probably one of the key reasons we set up Advanced Legal. Having 10 in-house lawyers ourselves, we understand the needs and systems required to deal with colleagues in-house and also in terms of the relationships with external legal specialists” across the piece to ensure products are delivered in response to the needs of the market. We don’t spend time developing products that will fall into the ether, but look at the needs of hundreds of customers to allow products to be flexible – a critical component of our success.

Q A

How do you see the legal services sector growing and developing and how will this impact IT and Business Services? Change always brings opportunity. There will be much more competition from new entrants, such as the Co-op and new network brands, along the lines of Quality Solicitors. We aim to support the traditional and new legal market as it grows but also cater for the needs of in-house or partnered legal teams in corporate organisations. British Airways, Specsavers, the Co-op, all of our clients - and us – have in-house legal teams, as do NHS Trusts and local authorities. The potential we identified in in-house corporate legal teams is probably one of the key reasons we set up Advanced Legal. Having 10 in-house lawyers ourselves, we understand the needs and systems required to deal with colleagues in-house and also in terms of the relationships with external legal specialists.

Q A

What benefit can the ‘onestop-shop’ IT providers such as Advanced Computer Software Group add to the legal sector? The legal IT sector is fragmented. Even now, I’m surprised that the market is flooded with a high number of small players operating on a small scale. If the legal services sector is worth £25.4 billion, shouldn’t it warrant bigger, stronger, more capable players? Smaller vendors tend to offer third-party technology. We can create bespoke solutions, rolled out across a variety of leading sectors. Third-party technology doesn’t allow for innovation in the market either – something that we excel in. For example, we created a medicalbased facility for mobile devices to allow nurses to securely register information onto the GP record when visiting patients. It took us two years to get the compliance and security agreed with the NHS, if you remove the medical record, we now have the security and viability to push this kind of secure mobile function to law firms. In terms of accessing and working on secure systems on mobile devices, we have already developed our capability around iPhones and iPads and we are actively working on Android. Our work in the healthcare sector – which demands the highest

IRIS Legal Interview

“My view is that technology moves ahead of customers – they take a lot longer to get there than innovation in IT suggests. We’ll take the customer there when they are ready to do so” level of security – is hugely beneficial to those in the legal sector as we can apply the same principles to legal technology, with proven capability and security. Customer service is also a top priority and the customers of Advanced Legal will still have their project manager on side to help with issues and new developments. It is their job to ensure that when the customer wants something, they include the expert from the relevant unit – for example, to help legal customers access the Business Services Division. This means you are always dealt with by the expert in the field, rather than sold something by a generalist. The project manager attends all the pitches and is always on-hand but the unit expert works with the customer to create the solution they need.

Q A

What are the key challenges for Advanced Legal? To some degree, the customers have faced a certain amount of uncertainty in the past but this has changed already and we’re addressing a range of areas to support our customers. We have also appointed people across a range of services to help drive the business forward. We will not ‘end of life’ anything either, as that can cause disruption. We are one of the largest providers of .net and Progress capability in the UK. There has been a lot of talk about IRIS and some of the decisions that were made when I left the CSH business in 2007 in terms of products that were dropped. End of Life-ing products was not a decision I made! Advanced will not drop a product if clients are using it or force them to change. It has to be their decision. We are, of course, always checking that products are not coming to the end of their life in terms of the technology they reside on, e.g Microsoft Xp– if this happens then we need to

work closely with the clients to transfer them across sensibly. We are looking to drive growth for the Group in a sensible manner, not by forcing customers to take solutions they don’t need or want. We intend to be here for the long-run. Our focus on customer services has been a critical component of the Group’s success and that won’t change in the legal market.

Q A

What is the future of IT and business solutions for the legal sector; what will it need? My view is that technology moves ahead of customers – they take a lot longer to get there than innovation in IT suggests. We’ll take the customer there when they are ready to do so. The fact they take longer involves an element of culture change; the legal sector is still somewhat conservative but opportunity and change in the sector has enabled us to open lawyers’ eyes. There are also more IT directors entering legal services from the commercial sector, bringing new knowledge and experience with them – highlighting things that law firms would love to work with. Again, this is because the sector is changing and new entrants bring change and competition. I think we’re quite unique in our positioning amidst this change as we already offer innovative solutions to 20,000 customers – which already operate like ABSs – that can now be expanded to Advanced Legal customers. We can also offer confidence to external investors in law firms and ABSs, which will be looking for robust business solutions in the models they seek to invest in. We have unique depth and capability to work with legal service providers to help them achieve growth and the drivers they want for success. It’s really quite an exciting time and I’m looking forward to the future.

The buy-out

Advanced Computer Software Group plc (Advanced), which specialises in providing healthcare and business management software and services, made the recent announcement of the acquisition of Computer Software Holdings (CSH) from HgCapital LP (HG) for £110m. CSH provides accounting and back office software to the UK professional services market (legal and coroners) and Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software for the not-forprofit (NFP) market. It also provides accounting software to SMEs, as well as mobile solutions for field services operations. The acquisition marks the group’s biggest deal to date and will enlarge Advanced Business Solutions and 365 Managed Services divisions. Vin Murria, Chief Executive of Advanced, said: “This immediately earnings enhancing acquisition is a tremendous opportunity for both Advanced and CSH which will also significantly enhance the scale of our Business Solutions and Managed Services divisions. The business and many of the management team are well known to us, which will simplify the integration process. “CSH has strong recurring revenues and cash generation and proprietary software IP. The addition of this business will enable us to widen our addressable markets and, in particular, to grow our back office solutions capabilities. The enlarged Group will be highly cash generative with over £160m recurring and repeating revenues and we expect our net debt to decrease swiftly. “The acquisition also provides multiple opportunities for cross-selling our growing portfolio of products and services, as businesses and organisations increasingly seek technology solutions to improve business performance and deliver economies.”

ML // IT Supplement 2013

00 30

????final word The

The final word So, what have we learnt?

As Charles Christian says in his opening address (page 5): ‘Much as it may break the IT salesman’s heart to hear these words... just because a computer system is old, it doesn’t automatically mean it needs replacing. What many have done is to add more sophisticated management reporting and information tools... No firm has the resources to buy them all.’

t’s clear from the contribution to this specialist supplement that technology and IT infrastructure are at the forefront of change and efficiency in the legal market. How legal entities approach investment into new / expanding systems and how quickly they invest varies – as would be expected. This is, believes Jon Brewer, Chief Executive of Evident, due to a slow-moving culture and perhaps the decision making structure of traditional law firm and chambers models, but things are changing with competition of new entrants to the market and their deep investor pockets.

Working with providers A key message when looking to work with outsourced vendors is to look to providers that offer flexibility in IT solutions – whether it be with the larger vendors and niche that work alongside the client to ensure their specialist technological support enables colleagues, as well as customers, to do more for themselves. But you can’t buy everything and sometimes you only need to tweak. Ask yourself the question; what do you want your IT to do for you?

“Technology that enhances your business, improves processes, creates efficiencies, is regularly updated and ultimately helps drive revenue...who wouldn’t want that?” Tony Brown, Chief Executive, RJP Pellys Solicitors

ML // IT Supplement 2013

So what works for you? For the Clarion IT Director, Nigel Stott, a pay-as-you-go model is the most cost and innovation-friendly effective as it allows, ‘the latest versions of client and server software to be acquired and used on a month by month basis’ (page 18-19). The question of whether you outsource major new solutions is one facing IT Directors on a daily basis. For Vin Murria, Advanced Computer Software Group, the benefits are that major suppliers often ‘own the intellectual property’ and have the capacity to research and develop on your behalf, as well as testing innovation in other, Tier 1 sectors first and bringing those benefits to legal entities. Craig Jones, Simpson Millar, has a contrary view. At Simpson Millar, the needs of the firm’s client base and the service element are of ‘paramount importance’ to technology investment choices. Outsourcing isn’t always the way for Simpson Millar to get there either. Jones’ hesitancy is due to the fact that they have ‘rarely lived up to my expectations but rather provided a constant tension between the objectives of our business and those of the provider’. But what about the cost of self-sufficiency, are there benefits? “The growing interest in mobile telephone applications is one we identified some time ago. We also found the cost of developing that software externally to be prohibitive. But with solid, in-house knowledge of software development we were able to turn our attention to mobile platforms and write our own mobile applications. “Interestingly, in these times where many are talking about unbundling legal services, we are doing the same thing with our mobile apps – doing a

“Schedule your IT procurement plans and cherry pick the systems you really need now, as distinct from all the ones it would be nice to have maybe sometime later.” Charles Christian, The Orange Rag lot of the development ourselves and then seeking specialist assistance for the parts which are outside of our area of expertise,” he says. This suggests that in-house IT skillsets are more important than ever for those looking to gain control over their solutions and processes – offering the potential for further growth in services as well as the ability to develop systems in a cost-effective manner, relevant to the needs of the business.

A case-by-case approach As Thereza Snyman, Head of IT at Kingsley Napley, attests (page 23): ‘The urgency with which law firms – and their IT capability – will have to cater for these demands will depend on the firm, their type of client and the sector(s) in which they operate’. Luigi Salzano, Associate Director – Systems Development at Pannone LLP agrees, adding that systems have to bit fit for the future. This not only suggests the need to know what’s out there but also what your pre-existing systems can achieve (page 20-21). But Snyman sums things up rather well: ‘The ‘new normal’ will be here tomorrow, which can be frightening or not. It should be neither...if firms step up, embrace change and, with common sense and pragmatism, direct and control change.’ I’d like to extend my thanks to all the contributors and I’d like to know what you think and where you are at with your legal IT innovations / confabulations. Emma Waddingham Chief Editor, Modern Law Emma.waddingham@charltongrant.co.uk

EclipseProclaimCMSLogo_PIAwards2P.indd 1

14/05/2009 12:39

Are you the next legal star? 25th September 2013 The Dorchester, Park Lane The Modern Law Awards 2013 have been launched to celebrate and identify the sparkling talent and success in the modern Legal Services arena. ABS of the Year –up to 10 employees ABS of the Year – up to 100 employees ABS of the Year – over 100 employees Lawyer of the year Non Lawyer of the year Team of the year Rising Star of the year Innovation of the year Entrepreneur of the year COLP of the year COFA of the year Client care initiative of the year Deal of the year New entrant of the year Best marketing campaign of the year Outstanding Achievement Award Lifetime Achievement Award

Nominate now at www.modernlawawards.co.uk

Law is changing Reboot your law firm: Give clients and customers self-service control, 24/7

Don’t get left behinD

Create a superb experience to maximise recommendations Gain the competitive edge with the only solution of its kind Spend less time on admin and more time maximising profits

The ultimate self-service solution has arrived With NEW TouchPoint from Eclipse Legal Systems, you can give your clients, customers and partners true self-service control. TouchPoint enables a device-independent, interactive experience – securely and in real-time. Providing access to a huge range of information, TouchPoint is an ‘always on, always visible’ solution. From contact management and targeted cross-selling, through to visual KPI presentation and dynamic report commissioning, TouchPoint sets you apart from the competition.

You’ve just been handed the competitive edge

Call 01274 704 100 Visit eclipselegal.co.uk or email info@eclipselegal.co.uk