Can Legal and IT Agree?
Yes, and four steps to get there.
May 16, 2010 at 08:00 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
During a lunch out of the office, the general counsel for a large organization shared his frustration. “Our IT department is driving me crazy. It is impossible to work with.” He related how a number of his initiatives for better legal tools and process have been stymied by the IT group. Informal polls I have conducted at legal conferences indicate that he is not alone in his frustration with IT.
Perhaps what made the GC's comments paradoxical was a discussion I had with the chief information officer of a medium-sized organization the month before: “I can't get anything out of legal.” This CIO went on to explain that when seeking advice from his legal group on what e-mail to save in the archiving system, its response was to form a committee. “All the committee does is meet and meet,” he said. “I can't even get them to agree we should save e-mail.”
Some may argue that in a difficult economy with limited budgets, the conflict between legal and IT is inevitable. I disagree. Corporate legal and IT organizations each have much more to lose by failing to cooperate.
It is interesting to note that as corporate departments, the legal and IT groups have more in common than not: They are being asked to do more with fewer resources. They need to adapt to changing business climate. Also, both functions tend to get negative attention when things go wrong but little credit when the ship is on course. Having worked many years with both legal and IT, I believe that the differences between these two groups are more cultural and stylistic, not substantive. Still they don't always get along. So if legal and IT should work together, how? This relationship is fixable, and here are four steps for getting there:
Step 1: Let's Try and Speak the Same Language Often IT organizations communicate in techno-babble that is difficult to understand, and in-house counsel are too intimidated to ask questions. An in-house director of litigation called me for help right after a meeting with IT on a document management system. “The IT people kept on talking about 'fuzzy logic,'” she said. “I have no clue what they were talking about.” I explained to her that fuzzy logic is a method for searching through information using imprecise terms, often used in document identification and review. “That's useful. I wish they had explained that to me,” she commented. Inside counsel can often be equally obtuse to IT staff, throwing around terms such as FRE, custodians, spoliation, etc. Legal concepts are difficult to understand by a lay person. Ask, ask, ask. Explain, explain, explain. We will all be better off.
Step 2: Address the “Who Pays” Elephant in the Room An IT project manager for a large retailer told me she knew one particular IT technology that could save the legal group and the company potentially millions of dollars per year. I asked her why she had not suggested this system to the legal group. “Even though I know this will save the company money overall, currently IT has no funding for this type of system,” she explained. “If I as an IT person suggest it, IT would have to budget for it. That would be career suicide for me.” Many legal and IT groups play a similar budgetary game, creating a stalemate where each side awaits the other side to raise their hand first, and hence take budgetary ownership of a project.
Legal and IT should work together to break this habit. Address the budget issue elephant in the room early and often. Discuss the benefits and cost savings, and get creative about funding. Look at other groups that may benefit and contribute to the funding of IT/legal projects (audit, finance and business units to name a few). You might be amazed how monies can be found with some more open communication.
Step 3: Be Prescriptive One legal group wanted IT to implement a record retention policy for electronic documents but would only provide a vague, high-level retention policy. Legal thought it was being clear, IT didn't. Nothing got done. Coming from different cultures, legal and IT need to make an extra effort to be prescriptive on policies and processes when working together. Be clear about what legal specifically wants IT to do. Make sure you are open for questions, and follow up. Use specific examples. While you may believe you are being perfectly clear, what matters is that the recipient understands exactly what you want.
Step 4: Find and Communicate the Common Win When looking at a new initiative, don't focus on the win for just legal or IT. Nearly every joint legal and IT initiative has a win for both, as well as other groups in the organization. Don't talk only about how a particular project will help legal. Talk (and sell) the benefits for others.
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
© 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 AllFrom Reluctant Lawyer to Legal Trailblazer: Agiloft's GC on Redefining In-House Counsel With Innovation and Tech
7 minute readLegal Tech's Predictions for Legal Ops & In-House in 2025
Lawyers Drowning in Cases Are Embracing AI Fastest—and Say It's Yielding Better Outcomes for Clients
Trending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
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