Incremental change still path to success, say law department operations managers
Slow, steady progress is the way to meet the operational challenges that todays legal departments face.
August 30, 2012 at 06:49 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Slow, steady progress is the way to meet the operational challenges that today's legal departments face. That's the conclusion come to by many of the 30 people who convened earlier this week at the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) conference in Washington, D.C., to discuss legal department operation priorities and best practices, along with preliminary results of the 5th Annual Law Department Operations Survey.
Brad Blickstein, principal at the Blickstein Group, one of the survey sponsors, highlighted the three biggest challenges that those who manage law department functions identified in the survey. By a significant margin, respondents chose “identifying opportunities for business improvement and cost-savings” and “driving/implementing change” as their two biggest challenges. “Managing a budget” ranked a distant third.
When discussing ways to meet those challenges, several participants repeated the mantra of capturing low-hanging fruit. Today's legal departments are so thinly staffed that many are skeptical of disruptive changes, even those that will save time in the long run. Many attorneys also want to be assured that new processes and technology will lead to better results, not more time-consuming busy work, according to participants.
Participants also discussed their key performance indicators. Among survey participants, “actual spend vs. law department's total budget” ranked first, while “total outside counsel spend” and “total outside counsel and service-provider spend” tied for second.
Other topics covered in the 2.5 hour event included e-discovery and relationships with outside counsel.
Further results and analysis of the 5th Annual LDO Survey will be featured in a special section of the November issue of InsideCounsel magazine. LDO managers who are still interested in taking the survey, and receiving the full results when they are available, can find more information here.
Slow, steady progress is the way to meet the operational challenges that today's legal departments face. That's the conclusion come to by many of the 30 people who convened earlier this week at the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) conference in Washington, D.C., to discuss legal department operation priorities and best practices, along with preliminary results of the 5th Annual Law Department Operations Survey.
Brad Blickstein, principal at the Blickstein Group, one of the survey sponsors, highlighted the three biggest challenges that those who manage law department functions identified in the survey. By a significant margin, respondents chose “identifying opportunities for business improvement and cost-savings” and “driving/implementing change” as their two biggest challenges. “Managing a budget” ranked a distant third.
When discussing ways to meet those challenges, several participants repeated the mantra of capturing low-hanging fruit. Today's legal departments are so thinly staffed that many are skeptical of disruptive changes, even those that will save time in the long run. Many attorneys also want to be assured that new processes and technology will lead to better results, not more time-consuming busy work, according to participants.
Participants also discussed their key performance indicators. Among survey participants, “actual spend vs. law department's total budget” ranked first, while “total outside counsel spend” and “total outside counsel and service-provider spend” tied for second.
Other topics covered in the 2.5 hour event included e-discovery and relationships with outside counsel.
Further results and analysis of the 5th Annual LDO Survey will be featured in a special section of the November issue of InsideCounsel magazine. LDO managers who are still interested in taking the survey, and receiving the full results when they are available, can find more information here.
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 AllWhy ACLU's New Legal Director Says It's a 'Good Time to Take the Reins'
'Utterly Bewildering': GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes
GCs Jettisoning Zero-Based Budgeting in Quest to Be Nimble, More Efficient
3 minute readFoley & Lardner Litigator Joins Brewers Roster as Legal Chief
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Meet the Lawyers on Kamala Harris' Transition Team
- 5Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
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