Choosing Legal Operations Software That Works for You
Choosing the right software to match a team's specific needs can mean the difference between a well-oiled machine and one that's just spinning its wheels.
January 11, 2019 at 07:00 AM
4 minute read
We've talked about measuring what matters and key characteristics of a high-functioning legal operations team, but how does legal software fit into your organization's larger business strategy? The right software can help your legal operations team achieve maximum efficiency so they can spend less time on day-to-day tasks and more time driving true business value.
But what exactly is “the right software”? The answer will be different for every organization. Each corporation has its own goals, and no two legal operations departments are alike. Legal operations teams come in different sizes and have their own unique workloads. Choosing the right software to match a team's specific needs can mean the difference between a well-oiled machine and one that's just spinning its wheels.
However, with a number of options on the market, there are a few common denominators that define 'world-class' legal operations software. Here are two to look for:
Work With Vendors Willing to Make You Their Partner
Legal operations software is an investment, and to ensure you are able to leverage the software for maximum value, your vendor needs to be all in—not just during the sales process and implementation, but throughout the lifecycle of the solution. Work with vendors who see you as a partner, not a customer. At the start, look for solution providers that have demonstrated a robust understanding of your business processes and are willing to collaborate with you to configure their software to fit your needs. Your solution should be defined to fit your organization's style, not the other way around. Additionally, this will reduce the time it takes to integrate the technology into the business.
Make sure the vendor gives you the opportunity to get involved in the design process and/or software testing to ensure that it actually works as you expected it would. The software should ideally minimize movement between systems and truly integrate into not only existing workflows, but other tools. For example, if you're a Microsoft Office shop, make sure you know whether the proposed software integrates with that solution. If possible, look for a tool that requires very little (if any) adjustment to use and integrate.
Once you are up and running, there should be a strong vendor support structure, including training specialists and named account managers to address any questions you may have. There should also be client user groups and focus groups that let you provide input into product roadmaps and the chance to network with other clients to share best practices. Best in class vendors understand these engagements help optimize the experience and make life better for everybody.
Find the Right Balance Between Features and Usability
Legal operations teams wear a number of hats, spanning multiple departments—these teams don't need their jobs complicated by overly-complex software. There is a delicate balance between essential features and ease of use.
The technology should be easy to navigate, so users can quickly access the core features they need to do their jobs in an efficient manner. Users should intuitively know where to go and what features to use to accomplish their tasks. Those steps should be minimal and clearly marked so that users spend less time trying to figure out what to do, and more time getting their work done. After all, if your legal operations software complicates your business more than it helps, then it's not doing its job.
You can help by keeping things simple. Before purchasing the software, create a short list of requirements that are essential to your team's success. Focus on software that highlights those features above all else, preemptively reducing extraneous noise. As with most things, legal operations software should follow the Goldilocks principle: an effective tool strikes a balance between too little or too many features.
The right legal technology for your organization might be hard to find and, ultimately, whichever solution you decide on should be the system that best fits your particular situation. But overall, your vendor should be a partner committed to your success, and your technology should ensure your operations run smoothly and doesn't leave your team spinning its wheels.
Nathan Cemenska, JD/MBA, is the Director of Legal Operations and Industry Insights at Wolters Kluwer's ELM Solutions. He previously worked in management consultancy helping GC's improve law department performance and has prior experience as a legal operations business analyst. In past lives, Nathan owned and operated a small law firm and wrote two books about election law. He holds degrees from Northwestern University, Ohio State University and Cleveland State University.
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
© 2025 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
- 1Law Firms Expand Scope of Immigration Expertise, Amid Blitz of Trump Orders
- 2Latest Boutique Combination in Florida Continues Am Law 200 Merger Activity
- 3Sarno da Costa D’Aniello Maceri LLC Announces Addition of New Office in Eatontown, NJ, and Named Partner
- 4Friday Newspaper
- 5Public Notices/Calendars
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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