Deconstructing the Desktop: Inside Law Firms' Mobile App Evolution
Need to call clients from home or keep track of your billable hours out of the office? Your law firm wants you to have an app for that.
November 05, 2018 at 09:30 AM
11 minute read
This article first appeared in the October issue of The American Lawyer and Corporate Counsel as “An App a Day Keeps the Stagnation Away.”
In the law firm world, few—if any—attorneys work “nine-to-five” jobs. Client requests, case developments and even new legislation don't stop after an office closes. So over the years, attorneys have learned to be agile, ready to “plug in” at a moment's notice.
Luckily, these exacting work demands can be easier to manage in the digital age. Today's attorneys have the luxury of carrying a pocket-sized personal computer around with them at all times. And unsurprisingly, a large number of law firms are encouraging their attorneys to go mobile.
According to the 2018 LTN Law Firm Tech Survey, 77 percent of law firms have a bring-your-own-device (BYOD) policy at the office, allowing attorneys the use of their own personal smartphones for work. When asked about the biggest benefit of allowing mobile devices in-house, 30 percent of surveyed firms cite increased flexibility, while 28 percent cite increased productivity. A quarter also said mobile devices helped enable better client services.
To be sure, it's not the device itself that provides these benefits. Instead, the benefits come from the various mobile applications each device carries. These apps enable attorneys to work out of the office more efficiently, but more crucially, they also change the type of legal work attorneys produce and build client expectations around attorney availability.
On a broader scale, use of mobile apps by attorneys likewise allows law firms to experiment with new ways to empower their workforce. But it also means they have to better manage the security of their information and networks, which can be now dispersed across numerous constantly-moving devices.
Still, while a mixed blessing, it's clear that these tools are here to stay. One only need look at the diverse ways in which mobile apps are used in law firms, or how such apps are enthusiastically adopted by attorneys, to understand that legal has gone mobile. There's no turning back.
|Secure the Landing
Blackberry phones were the first mobile devices to be used extensively in law firms, but few firms secured or actively managed them in-house. By contrast, in today's world where smartphones have almost completely replaced Blackberry phones, most law firms have implemented mobile device policies, and by extension, are taking charge over what apps their lawyers use.
Victor Barkalov, chief information officer and chief digital officer at Jackson Lewis, was instrumental in implementing a firm-wide mobile security policy after he arrived at Jackson Lewis in early 2017. At the heart of Barkalov's effort was the requirement that all attorney mobile devices install IBM's MaaS360, a security solution that combines mobile device management (MDM) and mobile application management (MAM). While MDM allows Jackson Lewis to track and enforce security measures and remotely erase any mobile device used by their attorneys, MAM also gives the firm the ability to create and manage an encrypted container, such as a folder, on each device, where it can isolate and further secure certain applications and data.
Hybrid MDM and MAM security solutions like the one Jackson Lewis implemented are highly popular with law firms that have mobile attorneys. For instance, Christopher Zegers, chief information officer at Lowenstein Sandler, says his firm also uses a hybrid solution called AirWatch—according to the Legaltech News survey, AirWatch is one of the most popular security solutions and used by 39 percent of surveyed firms.
Likewise, Judith Flournoy, chief information officer at Kelley Drye & Warren, notes her firm uses a similar solution named MobileIron—the second most prevalent platform, used by 18 percent of surveyed law firms.
So why are hybrid MAM and MDM solutions so popular? For one, they provide multiple layers of security and control over a device. But equally as important, they also allow firms to push out mobile apps to their attorneys. With these solutions in place, firms can place apps directly on their users' devices or create a proprietary “app store” with a curated list of apps to download.
|Desktop Disassembled
The apps law firms push out to their attorneys will vary from office to office. But for the most part, these apps are provided by third-party tech vendors, whose platforms the law firm trusts and that work similarly to desktop programs. “Basically, we want to dissemble the desktop and in effect, make it available on apps,” says Barry Steinberg, IT director at Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor.
Some of the most commonly used and downloaded apps at law firms are ones that help attorneys better manage some of their essential work demands. Email and calendar apps, for instance, are universal, but are often connected to, or restricted by, the hybrid MDM and MAM solution securing the device. Barkalov says IBM MaaS360, for example, has a native app that must be used for email and scheduling. Meanwhile, Zegers notes that AirWatch allows those with iPhones “to use the native iOS email client and for Android users, they have choice of email clients that are supported.”
Many law firms also offer timekeeping apps that connect to their internal systems so their attorneys can input and track their billable hours remotely. Young Conaway and Jackson Lewis, for instance, both use a timekeeping app provided by Intapp, while Lowenstein Sandler went with a timekeeping app provided by Aderant.
Beyond enabling emails and timekeeping on the go, law firms are pushing basic communication apps to help their attorneys remotely connect with clients and colleagues as well. Lawyers at Clifford Chance, for instance “have access to Skype for business so they can easily conduct a video call… and they can use a voiceover IP (VOIP) app to conduct and participate in conference calls,” says Evette Pastoriza, the firm's global director of technology services.
Some firms, however, encourage attorneys to use certain communications apps that integrate directly with office infrastructure. But why would an attorney need a phone app on their mobile phone? Zegers, whose firm Lowenstein Sandler offers Cisco Jabber to its attorneys, says it's a matter of quality. “When they are making these calls over Wi-Fi, the sound quality is better than if they were making a cell phone call,” he explains.
What's more, the app also ensures that attorneys are recognized by one single number. “From a client perspective, I know when I get a call, I recognize certain numbers. And I wouldn't necessarily want to have a vendor or someone I am working with calling from different numbers,” Zegers says.
As some law firms are leveraging apps to make mobile devices better communication tools, others are using them to free their attorneys from having to carry around documents wherever they go. Lawyers at Clifford Chance have access to Microsoft's OneNote app “so they can refer to meeting notes or take meeting notes without carrying around pads and papers,” Pastoriza says.
Some firms likewise push apps that give their attorneys access to their work files remotely. Young Conaway and Lowenstein Sandler, for example, both encourage their attorneys to download a document management app provided by iManage. The app, however, has limited functionality compared to the desktop version of the software. “There is no editing feature in the app, so it's more about ease of access,” Zegers says.
Indeed, for all the capabilities mobile apps can provide, some still see word processing as their limit, especially with smartphones. “It's difficult to do editing on the iPhone because of the size,” Flournoy says, adding that she believes apps that allow editing aren't the most useful.
Beyond empowering attorneys with work tools, law firms are also pushing apps they believe will foster better client services. Jackson Lewis, for instance, is looking to roll out a business intake app that will connect with the firm's internal processes that determine whether representing certain clients will create a conflict of interest. The goal of the app, Barkalov says, is to allow the attorneys to quickly determine whether they can meet with potential clients.
To better foster collaboration with clients, some law firms are also turning to mobile apps that can be accessed by their clients as well. Zegers noted his firm's attorneys are encouraged to use the Citrix ShareFile app, which is similar to the public Dropbox in that it's a place where clients “can share data with us, and we can give them data.” Similarly, Clifford Chance's attorneys utilize client collaboration app SharePoint, which is connected to Microsoft Office 365 and allows external sharing, Pastoriza says.
To enable their attorneys to more quickly answer client queries, law firms are also pushing a number of research apps. Kelley Drye offers its attorneys access to the mobile app versions of research solutions Westlaw and Lexis Advance, while Lowenstein Sandler provides Research Hub, an app that automatically logs attorneys into a number of subscription-based research repositories and news publications.
|Unintended Consequences?
Though law firms have a lot control over the mobile apps attorneys have on their devices, rarely, if ever, do they actively manage how attorneys use them. Barkalov, for example, notes that Jackson Lewis will automatically download an app to devices used by attorneys in a certain practice group if they feel it is beneficial to their work. For other attorneys, it will offer the app in the firm's proprietary “app store” and give them the option to download it themselves.
But Jackson Lewis attorneys are not required to even open any mobile app pushed by the firm. “If the attorney choses to turn off all notifications from an app and it remains silent on their phone, we are not going to reach into their phone and turn the notifications back,” says Gregory Alvarez, principal at Jackson Lewis. Other firms have taken similar approaches, with Clifford Chance's Pastoriza adding, “We certainly give our lawyers the choice to work in the way that is best suited for them and that they feel will best service their clients.”
Many firms don't mandate using certain mobile apps because they feel, in all likelihood, attorneys will voluntarily use them anyway. “I think there is a real positive attitude toward working with these tools, and I think there is a lot of enthusiasm around the programs that we put in place,” Pastoriza explains.
In fact, the reason firms even began supporting mobile app use in the first place was in response to the way attorneys were already working. “Mobile devices are part of our life,” Kelley Drye's Flournoy says. “And with everything we do now, the firm understands that and provides support for that.”
Far from just a temporary trend then, the emergence of mobile apps in law firms is an evolution of how lawyers want to be equipped to handle their work. “I think this lawyer mobile experience is sort of the next frontier,” Barkalov says. “It's no longer the legal desktop that is needed for the lawyer to have all the tools at their disposal. It's now a legal mobile ecosystem that is needed for the lawyer to have largely the same tools, but now have them even if they're not in the office or in front of a big screen.”
But this evolution comes at a price. Using mobile apps means attorneys are always connected to their devices and potentially always available to clients. “I'm working at all hours of the night with clients sometimes,” Alvarez says. He adds that because of mobile work, attorneys have “had to adapt and provide the service and speed clients want, which changes the work product.”
With so much technology at attorneys' fingertips, there is an ability to serve more clients. But this means there is less time to do more focused and in-depth legal work. “There are less memos these days,” Alvarez explains. “Clients don't want memos; they want quicker answers.”
Of course, technology has always been a mixed blessing, increasing one's productivity, but also pushing them to stretch the limits of what they can do. Yet for many in legal, more responsibilities and a faster paced work life may be unavoidable. With mobile app use becoming more prevalent in law firms, there is no way attorneys are slowing down now.
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Kirkland's Daniel Lavon-Krein: Staying Ahead of Private Equity Consolidation
- 2Many Southeast Law Firms Planned New, Smaller Offices in 2024
- 3On the Move and After Hours: Goldberg Segalla, Faegre Drinker, Pashman Stein
- 4Recent FTC Cases Against Auto Dealers Suggest Regulators Are Keeping Foot on Accelerator
- 5‘Not A Kindergarten Teacher’: Judge Blasts Keller Postman, Jenner & Block, in Mass Arb Dispute
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