How Better Data and Analytics Help General Counsel Achieve Legal and Financial Goals
A look at how in-house legal leaders can use data to manage budget cuts.
July 25, 2023 at 09:00 AM
4 minute read
LitigationIn-house law departments are experiencing a significant increase in work volume and complexity at a time their budgets are under scrutiny, a recent Law.com article reports. In fact, 98 percent of those surveyed say current economic conditions have required budget cuts in their legal departments.
This financial crunch is creating greater pressure on general counsel (GCs) to show CFOs and executive boards how their legal teams can reduce, manage and forecast costs to meet financial expectations – without compromising their mandate to lessen organizational risk by trying to accurately predict litigation outcomes.
Like other business unit leaders, GCs today must run their departments with an eye toward the bottom line. They need a more cost-efficient way to protect the organization from risk while aligning with stakeholders' needs for more informed mitigation decisions.
So, GCs need access to greater and better data from a broad range of sources—for example, statistics on how judges rule in certain matters and industrywide figures on how long resolution takes—to improve those decisions. In addition, legal leaders and other executives making financial decisions need these powerful new tools that combine benchmarking with judicial analytics to offer enhanced insights ranging from how potential litigation plays out to which law firms are best for the job.
How data leads the way for legal
"Increasing demands on in-house counsel call for creative methods of coordinating with an organization's financial goals while enhancing the delivery of legal services," says Mark A. Smolik, General Counsel and board member of DHL Supply Chain Americas. He has witnessed firsthand how expectations of GCs have changed over the years.
Smolik's advice? All in-house counsel should ask themselves: "What are you doing to convince your CEO and your CFO that you're truly delivering value?"
This mindset requires law departments to make greater use of data, court analytics and industry benchmarking tools so they can calculate litigation risk and cost while monitoring the interaction between them. Those litigation and legal spend analytics will then allow for the prediction of outcomes based on numerous evaluations, including, for example, the qualitative performance of law firms the organizations may seek to hire.
"The most successful people are the ones that come in with the data, collaborate on the data, get people aligned with the data, make a decision on the data and act on it," Smolik says.
Creating a better platform
Another issue facing in-house counsel is that they are so busy servicing their organization's needs they lack the time to develop outside networks that provide industry benchmarking tools. In the past, such advice would be shared through networking. The absence of networks means in-house counsel may not know which law firms, strategies and jurisdictions their colleagues have found to be best for a particular case.
"They're looking for ways to get access to data to help guide them in their decision-making," Smolik adds.
GCs need a new type of platform to carry them through the process.
To address these issues, DXC Technology, which has extensive experience developing software for the insurance market and for monitoring claims litigation, is launching DXC Assure Legal Insights – a platform featuring data from all federal U.S. courts and almost all state and local courts. With access to this data, users can evaluate everything from the odds of whether a judge will rule in the organization's favor, to the time a particular matter will take to resolve, to law firms' win/loss records in a certain jurisdiction.
Only DXC Assure Legal Insights leverages cross-dataset analysis to combine cost benchmarking and court data in a single interface, enabling legal and claims teams to accurately analyze both matter outcomes and cost, as well as how they interact. To learn more, visit DXC Legal Solutions.
Pamela Brownstein is a freelance writer covering legal issues and the business of law.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBosworth Claims It Was Kline & Specter, Not Him, That Breached Settlement Terms
4 minute readDrugmaker Wins $70.5M After Fed Judge Says Generic Sales Were Blocked
4 minute readThe Week in Data Nov. 10: A Look at Legal Industry Trends By the Numbers
'Innovation Over Regulation': Tech Litigators and Experts Share Insights on the Future of AI, Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Under Trump
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 2Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 3US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 4Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 5McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250