Rise of iPad generation sees firms face up to mobile working demands
Many of the UK's leading law firms are overhauling their IT strategies as the rapid rise of mobile devices such as the iPhone and iPad and increased demand for mobile working pushes firms to rethink the way their lawyers use technology. The proliferation of mobile technology has blurred the distinction between professional and personal for many lawyers, prompting firms to look at ways to boost their mobile working capacity as increasing numbers of lawyers use their own devices for work purposes.
November 09, 2011 at 07:03 PM
3 minute read
Trend for cutting-edge consumer technology sees mounting pressure on firms to adapt
Many of the UK's leading law firms are overhauling their IT strategies as the rapid rise of mobile devices such as the iPhone and iPad and increased demand for mobile working pushes firms to rethink the way their lawyers use technology.
The proliferation of mobile technology has blurred the distinction between professional and personal for many lawyers, prompting firms to look at ways to boost their mobile working capacity as increasing numbers of lawyers use their own devices for work purposes.
A key driver behind this trend is the rise of the iPad, Apple's tablet device, which has now been trialled at a raft of UK top 50 firms including Eversheds, Bird & Bird, Shoosmiths and Addleshaw Goddard.
Eversheds has since deployed 500 iPads to staff across its UK and international offices, while Bird & Bird has given out 60 to partners and Addleshaws 20.
Meanwhile, firms including Norton Rose, Berwin Leighton Paisner (BLP), Wragge & Co and Burges Salmon are either considering providing iPads to staff or enabling them to use their own securely in the office.
BLP is currently moving towards a 'virtualisation' of the firm's desktop infrastructure that will allow its 1,500 lawyers to work remotely and securely on both laptops and handheld devices, while Norton Rose is planning to phase in iPads across its Dubai, Hong Kong, Frankfurt, Paris and Singapore bases before rolling them out more widely.
BLP IT director Janet Day said: "Mobile working is a fact of life now. Everything we can do to support it can only be a good thing as the benefits outweigh the costs. We just have to ensure that it happens in a secure environment."
However, mitigating the risk of data loss remains an overriding concern, as was starkly highlighted last month, when millions of BlackBerry users were left without email, web browsing and messaging capabilities due to server problems at Research In Motion's Slough data centre.
DLA Piper Americas chief information officer (CIO) Don Jaycox said last month that the shutdown had brought a switch from BlackBerrys to iPhones and Android devices "to the front burner".
DLA Piper International CIO Daniel Pollick (pictured) commented: "Firms are under pressure from lawyers to use devices such as iPads and smart phones at work. These devices were never designed with enterprise in mind, so the big challenge is dealing with this consumer-driven demand without compromising IT security."
Legal Week Intelligence's recent IT survey, which canvassed employees at 54 major law firms, showed that lawyers believe their firms' capacity for mobile working has improved over the past year, with firms' average rating out of five by its staff rising from 3.6 last year to 3.8.
BLP placed top of the rankings of how staff rate their firms' mobile and home working provisions, securing an average rating of 4.5, followed by Eversheds, Hogan Lovells, Latham & Watkins and Addleshaw Goddard.
Norton Rose technology and innovation manager Vlad Botic said: "There has been a mental shift in the way we think about IT. Whereas the home user and the enterprise user were always separate, the line is now blurred. It won't be going away any time soon, either, so we need to embrace it."
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 AllLexisNexis Responds to Canadian Professor’s Criticism of Lexis+ AI
Pinsent Masons Launches AML Artificial Intelligence Tool in Wake of SRA Crackdown
3 minute readGowling WLG’s Commitment to AI and Innovation Attracts New Director of AI
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
- 2Warner Bros. Accused of Misleading Investors on NBA Talks
- 3FTC Settles With Security Firm Over AI Claims Under Agency's Compliance Program
- 4'Water Cooler Discussions': US Judge Questions DOJ Request in Google Search Case
- 5Court rejects request to sideline San Jose State volleyball player on grounds she’s transgender
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