It probably wouldn't surprise very many people to know that clients drive much of the technology law firms are implementing. However, thanks to the rise of consumer-driven technology, the employees working inside those firms may have stronger opinions than ever about the hardware and solutions they deploy in their everyday work.

Just how influential those preferences are in determining the course a firm takes with regard to its technology likely varies from practice to practice, but chances are legal teams are taking more of an interest in how their chosen solutions are meeting the needs and expectations of their employees.

Kermit Wallace, chief information officer at Day Pitney, attributes that growth in part to the multitude of tech options that lawyers and support staff have grown accustomed to in their personal lives. For example, there was a time when attorneys may have relied heavily upon BlackBerry mobile devices until Apple's iPhone presented a viable alternative.

"I think that there's a lot more avenues for people to be aware of technology, and you can't ignore that. So the response has been, at least from my perspective, you have to do the best you can, you have to get in front of this and solicit that feedback," Wallace said.

Edward Lin, director of practice technology at Crowell & Moring, agreed that law firms are generally taking care to solicit employee input on the solutions they employ, whether it's in the legal or administrative departments. His reasoning has less to do with cultural trends than it does with simple practicality.

"These products are very costly, and [employee input] is something you need to solicit to get buy-in. Because you are expending a fair amount of resources to bring in this technology, you don't want to bring in something that ultimately no one is going to use," Lin said.

So firms want employee input on technology, but how are they making sure that its solicited from the appropriate source? While there are some solutions that are used exclusively by either attorneys or support staff, other hardware has crossover appeal between the two groups, though it is leveraged toward very different purposes.

Splitting the difference can be a matter of providing options. Crowell & Moring, for example, is preparing to update its laptops and created a voting system so that attorneys, paralegals and other staff could submit their own preferences and needs. Based on that feedback, the firm will now make three computer models available to employees to choose from.

"[We] try to accommodate what everybody's business use is," Lin said.

When exploring a new solution or piece of technology, both Crowell & Moring and Day Pitney make use of pilot groups composed of representatives from the departments that will be ultimately be leveraging said products.

Wallace noted that Day Pitney focuses specific deployment efforts on targeted audiences or departments, a practice that he believes most firms emulate. Crowell & Moring for instance, convenes a test group of e-discovery shareholders when exploring new solution in that realm.

Some projects, like the new records system that Day Pitney is preparing to put in place, touch on more departments than one and require a broader cross-section of input.

"When you're filing a record, what's important? When you're trying to retrieve a record, what's important?" Wallace asked.

But Wallace pointed out that there are limits to what a law firm may be willing to change in order to accommodate its employees. While PDF platforms or billing solutions may be up for discussion, a firm that has built the majority of its infrastructure around Microsoft Office is unlikely to rock that boat.

"You want people to be happy and satisfied but there's also a reason why it's called 'work,'" Wallace said.