Business Intelligence Finally Knocking at the Legal Department Door
Legal departments are expected to do more with less and are now charged with better controlling and reducing costs, continuously evaluating and improving processes, and wherever possible, retaining and re-using historical data and knowledge.
March 26, 2018 at 12:55 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Legal departments are expected to do more with less and are now charged with better controlling and reducing costs, continuously evaluating and improving processes, and wherever possible, retaining and re-using historical data and knowledge. Cue business intelligence (BI). Sales and marketing organizations have used BI technology and processes for many years to make smart data-driven decisions.
With pressure to run law departments more like other units, legal is starting to adopt BI.
Legal operations is a growing function across enterprise legal departments. According to the Corporate Legal Operations Consortium, “legal operations is a multi-disciplinary function that optimizes legal services delivery to a business or government entity.” By focusing on core principles, including strategic planning, financial management, data analytics and knowledge management, legal departments are adding a layer of business logic to the practice of law to drive peak performance.
In this article, I will address the evolving role of general counsel and the legal operations function, why legal departments have lagged in adopting BI, and what departments can do today to gain real-time insight across their legal operation.
- As expectations evolve, so does the role of general counsel and the legal team.
No longer is it sufficient for law departments to simply oversee litigation and regulatory compliance. General counsel and their teams are increasingly being called upon to provide fact-supported business insight regarding matter management, financial spend and data lifecycle across the department to executives or for board decisions. Today's general counsel often lead corporate and information governance initiatives, and help manage enterprise risk—including IT and cybersecurity.
As in-house legal teams assume greater responsibility and become more accountable, they are seeking efficient and cost-effective ways to improve transparency—including aggregating and analyzing key metrics—to help run their department more like a business. Such insight not only supports core legal department functions, like resource planning and spend analysis for e-discovery, but it also provides macro analytics to support data-driven decisions on how the department should evolve based on past performance.
- Silos are great for storing grain, but not for running your legal department.
Legal departments have historically managed their portfolios in silos. Not only are teams not sharing information across function (for example, litigation versus regulatory), they typically do not even share information within each function. They essentially recreate the wheel for each new matter. Such inefficiencies make day-to-day management unnecessarily challenging, and make analyzing the aggregate almost impossible. Only able to see the trees, legal teams have struggled to make sense of the forest.
E-Discovery provides a great example. Many legal departments still use manual processes for legal holds. Manual hold tracking—often in a spreadsheet—is inefficient and costly, fraught with risk, and it doesn't support macro analytics. Legal teams regularly burden high-value custodians to collect for each new matter, using a variety collections resources. Collected data is then “thrown over the fence” to outside counsel, who have preferred e-discovery tools and vendors, none of whom have any insight into institutional knowledge or prior coding decisions. Multiply this process ten-fold for large organizations, and it's easy to see why legal departments struggle to learn from prior engagements and re-use existing work-product.
- Perform like a well-oiled machine with proper BI tools and strategy.
Good BI technology and process underlie good BI strategy. Good BI strategy can dramatically improve a law department's day-to-day efficiency, and provides historical knowledge to support continuous evolution.
When evaluating a BI strategy, ask whether it achieves:
- Optimized Daily Operations: Does it provide visibility into status and progress, allowing us to deliver legal operations on time and within budget? Does it quantify and help efficiently allocate potential resources?
- Informed Strategic Decisions: Does it integrate prior review metrics, allowing fact-based decisions about collections and providing budgeting insight? Can I assess outside counsel and other vendor value-add and spend—and is such analysis only quantitative (how much did this cost) or is it also qualitative (did we have a good result)?
- Broad Adoption and Longevity: Does it have the flexibility to accommodate evolving department inputs and requirements? Is It user-friendly, and does it support external reporting, to get information into the hands of critical players who might not proactively engage the system?
A good BI solution should provide insight across an enterprise's custodians, collections, matters, deadlines, resources and resource allocation, historical review metrics, and robust financial reporting across all costs. It should provide key performance indicators, so that at all times legal operations professionals can easily understand their data universe, track the progress of cases, ensure proper resource allocations based on deadlines and other factors, evaluate pricing models, assess legal spend across vendors and firms, and generally use data to inform any number of other strategic decisions.
- Conclusion
General counsel and legal operations professionals increasingly understand that access to meaningful metrics and other business intelligence is a key component to managing spend and risk—and ultimately running the law department more like a business unit. Getting there shouldn't be so difficult. With proper BI strategy, supported by experienced professionals, legal departments can improve daily operations, better align across functions, and continually evolve their organization through data-driven insight.
Eric Willis is vice president, enterprise solutions at Catalyst, where he advises and collaborates with corporate legal departments to design strategies for the data management lifecycle. He may be reached at [email protected].
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 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 AllExxon Mobil Assistant GC Joins Duane Morris as Trial Partner in Houston and NY
2 minute readGreenberg Traurig Hires 2 GCs to Boost Corporate, PE and Compliance Practices
2 minute readTaylor English, Seeing 'Strong' Demand in GC Practice, Adds Former Tesla Lawyer
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1OCR Issues 'Dear Colleagues' Letter Regarding AI in Medicine
- 2Corporate Litigator Joins BakerHostetler From Fish & Richardson
- 3E-Discovery Provider Casepoint Merges With Government Software Company OPEXUS
- 4How I Made Partner: 'Focus on Being the Best Advocate for Clients,' Says Lauren Reichardt of Cooley
- 5People in the News—Jan. 27, 2025—Barley Snyder
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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