Technology in the hot seat - the challenges facing law firm IT departments
The results from the latest Legal Week Intelligence IT Report show a positive response to law firm IT departments...
May 24, 2012 at 07:07 PM
5 minute read
The results from the latest Legal Week Intelligence IT Report show a positive response to law firm IT departments. Vanessa Ip reports
Lawyers are more satisfied than they were 12 months ago with the level of service provided by their IT departments. Despite budget cuts and personnel restrictions, IT directors have managed to stretch their resources to deliver more for less, but maintaining this standard of service is becoming increasingly difficult.
These findings, based on the 2011 Legal Week Information Technology Report, were discussed in a roundtable held on 22 March.
Security
Balancing client demands and law firm expectations over security is an area that is continually testing the mettle of IT directors. For these directors, however, it is a challenge to deliver improved security measures – this, just as firms are being asked to cut their prices and against the perception that 'high security' is synonymous with 'hard to use'.
SJ Berwin IT director Simon Kosminsky comments: "The dilemma over security is the same as it has always been, which is, the more secure you make systems, the harder they may become to use."
Costs
Overall, respondents felt their IT departments were performing well, but also understood that they were restricted by a lack of resources. Cost pressures remain, but some are being lifted in order to allow IT directors to invest after holding back for a couple of years.
Fifty-one percent of IT directors said that their annual budgets had increased but, according to Berwin Leighton Paisner IT director Janet Day: "It's almost like we've gone back and forward 20 years simultaneously, because 20 years ago people were saying: 'Technology is going to decrease the number of secretaries in law firms, reduce the number of lawyers doing repetitive tasks' – and here we are rolling forward saying we can use technology to reduce our costs."
Kosminsky adds: "The biggest debate we're having is not so much the cost of the box or the infrastructure. There's an assumption that technology is so critical to the ability of our lawyers to do their work that we don't want to skimp on that, and maybe even want to pay a little bit more for a degree of flexibility, such as the option to connect to the work systems using an iPad."
The cloud
Cloud computing remains one of the big issues facing IT departments and, although some people believe that outsourcing through the cloud could lead to cost savings, others are not convinced.
Sixty percent of respondents said they would support the implementation of a private cloud, with 21% putting their faith in a public cloud. Reasons for looking at implementing a cloud structure were primarily cost, but 70% of respondents also said its potential to make their law firm more agile was a big factor. Seventy-two percent of respondents cited security as the main reason for choosing not to embark on the cloud process, followed by the culture of the firm, which was one of most likely elements to lead to a security breach.
Taylor Wessing IT director Stuart Walters says: "There can be cost savings associated with the cloud if it's what I call true utility-based IT, where you pay for what you use."
But even if the cloud structure could provide savings, the perceived security of data being held in the public domain seems to be the main reason more law firms have yet to entrust their data to the cloud.
As one IT director says: "External providers such as Microsoft or Google certainly have greater resources to secure their environment compared to law firms, but partners know the IT department – they can go and see people and speak to them about what's going on, whereas a managed service feels a little bit more distant and out of their direct control."
Mobile devices and new technology
Mobile devices are the second largest factor in preventing a move to the cloud and are a major threat to data security.
Moreover, IT directors are increasingly having to support a wide variety of personal mobile devices for lawyers.
Richard Elson, chief information officer at Dundas & Wilson, comments: "The desire to use a particular device is stronger than the barriers to do so. The question is, if people don't want to follow policy procedures, whether they then resort to unsecure or unsafe behaviours to get around that."
But, as Walters adds: "You can use that desire to your benefit. We agree to let people use their personal device if they agree to adhere to the policy."
Attendees
Simon Kosminsky, SJ Berwin
Jason Deverell, Clifford Chance
Mark Walsh, EMC
Stefan Hasse, InTechnology
Janet Day, Berwin Leighton Paisner
Andrew Powell, Nabarro
Stuart Walters, Taylor Wessing
Richard Elson, Dundas & Wilson
Iain Cushion, Mills & Reeve
Lawrence Peters, Latham & Watkins
Matt Duncan, NetDocs
Des Cahill, Legal Week Intelligence
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 AllTrump and Latin America: Lawyers Brace for Hard-Line Approach to Region
BCLP Mulls Merger Prospects as Profitability Lags, Partnership Shrinks
Trending Stories
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