Are the Gates Separating Law Firm Managers From New Innovations Too High?
Those wanting to test out innovative tech in-house must first get past their firms' “gatekeepers” who are empowered to limit spending on tech, and essentially block access to vendors and key partners.
May 14, 2019 at 07:39 PM
3 minute read
Getting innovation through the door of a law firm is easier said than done. The “Overcoming Structural Impediments to Adoption of Tech Solutions” panel held Tuesday during the Corporate Legal Operations Consortium (CLOC) 2019 institute dove into some of the challenges firms face in adopting new tech solutions.
Two of the main problems identified were intertwined: managers need greater exposure to some of the tech solutions on the marketplace, but “gatekeepers” within the firm empowered to limit spending on tech can block access to vendors and key partners.
“I think in general law firms look at technology as a expense,” Pat Archbold, vice president of the leaders and partners practice at Intapp, said.
There are other practical obstacles to consider as well. Alan Bryan, senior associate general counsel for Walmart Inc., pointed out that clients can be a significant force behind the adoption of new technology, but there is a hurdle in getting them comfortable with how new solutions will work and the reliability of the results delivered.
He also argued for finding ways to use or implement a new piece of technology that doesn't require broad, systemic changes within an organization.
“The more you can break down the buy-in and the cost, the more legal innovation you're going to see,” Bryan said.
A willingness to embrace innovation is crucial not only for the law firms, but tech companies as well. While he acknowledged that the “gatekeeper” role within firms is a necessary one, Josh Becker, chairman of Lex Machina, has experienced some of the frustrations emanating from the other side of the fence.
He recalled a period from earlier in his career where it took years to get a product in front of a law firm's managing partner. Once partners had the opportunity to evaluate the solution and cast their vote, the solution was adopted within five days. Becker argued that if a new technology can't find an adopter, it will eventually die.
“We need people who are going to try things out and give them a shot within firms,” Becker said.
Tessa Schwartz, a managing partner at Morrison & Foerster, posited that the work done by law firms and their chief information officers wasn't so much about keeping all vendors out, but rather letting the right ones inside the gates.
She said that firms are focused on leveraging innovation to meet increasing client demands. However, a point in the right direction would be helpful.
“What we really need help with is finding the right partners so that we can really invest,” Schwartz said.
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
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