Legal Ops Chiefs Want New, Better Technology in 2018
About 69 percent of respondents to a survey from Consero Group said they were working with inadequate legal technology.
January 19, 2018 at 05:39 PM
4 minute read
Courtesy of Consero.
The majority of legal operations chiefs in a recent survey were unhappy with the technology in their legal departments, saying it did not meet their needs.
And most of them expected to spend more in 2018 on new technology, according to just-released survey results from Consero Group, a planner of executive conferences, in partnership with Thomson Reuters Legal Tracker.
About 69 percent of survey respondents said they were working with inadequate legal technology. The number is not so much a negative trend as an accurate reflection “that most operations functions are in mid-development,” said Mike Haven, head of legal operations at GAP Inc., based in the San Francisco area.
Mike Haven, Senior Director, AGC, and Head of Legal Operations at Gap Inc.
“That is no surprise,” Haven explained. “The [legal ops] role is relatively new in most companies, and it takes substantial time to mature.”
The survey results seem to corroborate Haven's statements. Some 45 percent of legal ops chiefs said their operations are in use and still evolving, while 33 percent reported their functions are in the early stages of adoption.
Mark Smolik, general counsel of Columbus, Ohio-based DHL Supply Chain Americas, said he thought the 69 percent stat seemed high. But he attributed it to “a high level of review and evaluation, and perhaps dissatisfaction whether or not the technology is being leveraged to its best use, even in my own organization.” Smolik's legal department has a seven-person legal ops team, led by Kelli Saunders.
Rob Gitell, senior director of sales at Legal Tracker, said, “The pressure on legal departments to develop legal operations that deliver results is only going to increase in the next year, especially as new technologies enter the market.”
Some 54 percent of the respondents said they expect their legal technology spend to increase in 2018, while only 8 percent predicted a decrease.
One area most legal ops heads are considering is artificial intelligence. Only 8 percent of respondents said they are using AI, while 92 percent said they are in the early stages of implementing it or that it's still under development.
Mark Smolik, DHL supply general counsel.Smolik is in that 92 percent. “We've been evaluating AI extensively for use with commercial contracts for 18 months,” he said. “And we probably need another 12 months. At the end of the day when we look at what we need, the technology has not matured enough to say this is what I want to invest in. We are waiting for it to mature a bit.”
The survey, conducted at a Consero forum for senior-level legal operations executives from companies with between 5,000 to 100,000-plus employees, had 65 respondents. While not a large sample size, the group's replies still offer important insights into legal operations at their companies.
In other areas, the survey showed:
- About 78 percent of respondents reported using a third-party e-billing system, with the chief advantage being ease of reporting on legal spending and budgets.
- Some 45 percent of the legal ops chiefs have two to five staff members on their teams; 27 percent had only one person; while 17 percent have six to nine, and 11 percent have more than 10 people.
- Despite the importance of metrics, 56 percent of respondents said they did not have a formal metrics program to measure the value delivered by legal operations.
- The top priorities for respondents in 2018 are legal tech management, with 50 percent, and legal department cost control, with 45 percent. Cybersecurity and data privacy ranked a distant third, at 18 percent.
- Haven said his priority this year is process automation, both within legal and across the enterprise. “Knowledge management is also very high on the list,” he said. “The ability to leverage metrics effectively is the most important tool in our arsenal.”
For Smolik, the top priority in 2018 is upgrading technology. “We do not have the best in class,” he said, “so we are evaluating all platforms, including matter management and e-billing. We just completed an evaluation of e-discovery. And we are evaluating a lot of vendors right now.”
Smolik is moving cautiously because, he explained, most tech vendors require general counsel to commit to a three-year contract. “And three years is almost an eternity in the fast-changing world of technology,” he noted.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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 AllHealth Care Giants Sue FTC, Allege Lina Khan Using Loaded Process to Vilify Pharmacy Benefit Managers
3 minute readPorsche's Venture Capital Arm Adds General Counsel From Clifford Chance
How a 200,000-Worker Global Enterprise Took Down the Silos and Made ESG Its Mission
4 minute readCorporate Counsel's 2024 Award Winners Performed Legal Wizardry, Gave a Hand Up to Others
Trending Stories
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