Case management software has been available for many years in the UK. It is used mainly to support the conduct of high-volume, low-value repetitive cases. Most large firms earn most of their profits from higher-value, less predictable work.

Matter management systems are more prevalent in the US. They increasingly use the same workflow technology as case management, but they have a different purpose – to support and standardise the processes of matter administration and technical supervision.

The article will compare and contrast the two types of system, and explain the benefit and relevance of matter management to all firms, not just the specialist firms or departments that need case management.

Workflow

Both case and matter management use the same underlying technology – workflow. Workflow represents a matter as a task plan alongside a database record. The task plan describes the sequence of tasks needed to complete the matter. The database record holds all the data about the matter – contacts, financial details, legal details, current status, etc. Often, the database is the firm's practice management system (PMS) database or an extension thereof.

From the fee earner's perspective, a workflow system provides a number of useful functions:

. Worklist showing tasks due to be completed, now or in the near future, on all of his/her matters. A good system will allow filtering by date due, type of matter and type of task.

. Matter-specific diary and history showing, for any selected matter, the (known) future tasks and the completed tasks.

. Automated production of documents based on matter-specific data. This is potentially a source of great benefits but also of great costs. In practice, substantial work is needed to set up and maintain document templates sophisticated enough to handle the variability needed in each 'standard' document.

. Exception alerts and reports based on matter-specific data. Alerts are online messages, delivered either within the workflow system itself or via e-mail, about individual matters. Reports can be produced from the matter database, relating either to individual matters or selected groups of matters.

Case management

Case management is the application of workflow technology to the conduct of a particular type of matter. The entire matter lifecycle is mapped out into specific defined tasks, which are structured into a task plan.

This approach works well for high-volume, low-value repetitive work such as debt collection, residential conveyancing, and fast track personal injury. Where the work varies more from case to case, case management begins to struggle. The number of possible paths through the task plan grows and the system needs more and more input from fee earners to enable it to stay on track. Rather than the system helping the fee earner, the fee earner ends up helping the system.

Thus, only a few firms have succeeded in implementing some level of case management for work types such as multi-track personal injury or commercial conveyancing, and fewer still (if any) are using case management in areas such as M&A and corporate litigation.

Firms have invested heavily and mostly unsuccessfully trying to take case management 'up-market' to less repetitive work types. Lawyers and IT departments misunderstand what it can do. Vendors understand better, but are often reluctant to draw attention to their own products' limitations.

Matter management

In the US, matter management or docketing systems have long been used to manage and report on critical aspects of legal work, such as key dates for litigation and other court procedures. Originally database and reporting systems, they now increasingly include workflow technology to support team-based working.

Firms in the US use matter management systems to reduce their risk and costs. If implemented correctly, they provide a high level of assurance that all critical procedural exceptions are known. No system can assure the quality of a firm's legal work, but a matter management system can ensure that staff, fee earners and partners alike all adhere to the firm's matter administration and supervision standards.

Firms also see the benefits in their client relationships. Most large corporate legal departments use matter management systems to track the work they have placed with multiple law firms. They expect, and in some cases require, that these firms have the same quality of management information and exception reporting in the firms' own systems.

In the UK, matter management systems per se are relatively uncommon in larger firms. Such firms have substantial amounts of matter data held in their PMS systems but have shied away from case management. Their fee earners typically use the PMS for financial enquiries and reporting, not matter administration.

Peak performance

So how should firms take advantage of workflow technology to gain the benefits of US-style matter management?

The key success factor is keeping it simple – not overengineering the system so that it becomes a case management system. Workflow technology includes automated document production, which it would be perverse not to use for quick wins. It also includes auto-mated conditional branching – the ability for the workflow to branch in different directions depending on case data.

The challenge in configuring a matter management system is to use these technologies only where they help to meet the objectives for matter management. Avoid trying to capture every item of data about each case in your database. Avoid also trying to plan all the tasks that will be needed to complete the case.

Implementation issues

Matter management is not a computer system to be implemented within an unchanging legal process. Rather, it is a type of system that can support a fundamental improvement in the efficiency and quality of a firm's legal process. Such improvement may involve organisation changes – for example, changing team structures to promote better matching of tasks with skills, or defining a case manager role with responsibility for leading the introduction and ongoing use of matter management.

As for any change involving business processes, it is imperative to define the new processes before putting new technology in place. The two can go together: the new technology can help justify and drive the introduction of the new process.

If your firm is looking at the benefits of legal process change, it is worth considering matter management.

Peter Kelly is a senior associate at Baker Robbins & Company.