Making IT work

Considered investment in IT infrastructure can make a significant difference to a law firm’s bottom line, boosting efficiency and increasing client satisfaction. Treating it in isolation is complacent, however, and risks causing more harm than good. IT should be a core part of a managing partner’s wider strategy.

By Rosemary Kind, former IT director at Shoosmiths

Many lawyers consider the IT department to be a place in which ‘dark arts’ are practised using a foreign language. Information technology is a department that spends large amounts of the firm’s precious resources and where projects can take a frustratingly long time to produce visible results. However, efficient operation of IT and a good business relationship can go a long way to helping maintain and improve the firm’s results. For the managing partner, the skill is not so much to understand the detailed workings of IT systems, but to know what the key pitfalls are and what measures can be taken to ensure the best use of this valuable resource.

Lack of business focus

An IT department working in isolation from the business will waste significant resources. Where a firm has communicated its overall business strategy to the departments, those departments can align their endeavours to that strategy. New initiatives can be pursued with confidence where they support the goals of the firm, while ideas that don’t support the strategy will not be allowed to cause a diversion. But the IT department should have a documented strategy of its own, showing how the department’s work will deliver the objectives of the firm. This must be a living document, updated regularly. It needs to be communicated to the team so they understand what they are trying to achieve and why certain projects will receive higher priority. In all its activities, the IT department needs to ask the question: ‘Does this add value to the business?’

An IT strategy must also be set out in accessible language. The IT team must be encouraged to communicate in a non-technical way with all their clients, understanding the business and being able to drive the business initiatives forwards. At the same time, they need to provide the infrastructure at the level the business objectives require. A team that is too ‘technically focused’ will be significantly less able to provide the flexibility required to meet the complexities of client demands. A team that is highly ‘business focused’ will be an essential part of delivering a firm’s overall objectives.

Project management

It is impractical for managing partners to be closely involved in all projects,
but failing to monitor and steer projects can be a critical mistake. To be successful, a project needs a clearly defined purpose, a specification and a properly managed implementation plan. From a management perspective, the business need should be agreed or challenged, the specification should accurately reflect the requirements, and projects should be prioritised to optimise limited resources (and monitored to keep them on track). There also needs to be a process to stop projects that are going wrong. Stopping a project is a difficult decision that IT should not make alone. They will see themselves as tasked with delivery at whatever cost and are not in the best position to stand back from a failing project and take the courageous decision to terminate it. If a project is not working, the sooner the decision is made to stop it, the less valuable resource is wasted.

How does a firm achieve all of this? The business needs to have a ‘project prioritisation and steering team’, chaired by a senior partner and comprising IT and non-IT personnel. This team is responsible for ensuring projects meet the strategic goals of the firm, that they will deliver a suitable return for the business and that the firm avoids ‘fads’ and prioritises genuine requirements. They must also avoid thinking something must be important just because it sounds technical, and shouldn’t be reluctant to ask questions for fear of appearing ignorant in IT matters. The onus should be on the IT team to present projects in readily understandable language.

Each project should also have a partner as its ‘business sponsor’ who is responsible for delivery, as well as the project steering committee, made up of the business sponsor and key members of the project team. The team’s business sponsor is then answerable to the firm-wide project steering committee.

Browne Jacobson is a law firm that has always taken IT investment extremely seriously, ensuring the necessary tools are available to provide an efficient service for clients. Peter Birley, IT director, says: “IT is a fast-moving element that always requires additional investment. When there are a number of areas competing for funds, going to ask for more money requires a sound business case in support.

He adds that explaining the requirements in isolation is difficult, particularly as some are the less ‘sexy’, or behind-the-scenes projects essential to continuing effective operations. The firm is generally supportive of IT, but at face value it appears to be a massive investment. Approaching each project separately would lead to repeated discussions regarding priorities and other business objectives. A more structured approach is required.

Steering the strategy: Browne Jacobson

The Browne Jacobson IT team put together an overall IT strategy. Titled ‘Strengthening the Core, Extending the Reach’, it aimed to give the overarching technology rationale in language the business could understand, explaining how all projects fitted together and could move the business forwards. These objectives were also matched to the firm’s overall strategy and the individual business plans of the practice areas. This provided the IT team with the opportunity to align work very clearly with the wider business. The strategy covered a three-year period with a commitment to update it every
12 months. As part of this, the IT team included a phase of work to help the practice areas identify and achieve efficiencies.

Browne Jacobson moved from having an ‘IT shadow partner’ providing support and a sounding board to the IT director, to a system of having one partner from each practice area, providing advice and input to the strategy as a group. This more collaborative approach had the effect of giving the whole partnership confidence in the work being undertaken. The representative group of partners still meets on a monthly basis to act as a ‘steering group’.

The strategy has provided a clear map to help the partnership understand the IT investment and its delivery to the business. It also provides a better picture of the total investment over the three-year period and a reduced risk of ‘surprises’.

Key to the success has been the involvement of the firm in developing the strategy and its clear communication throughout the business. This has been effective both at a macro level and for individual projects. Communication has been part of the overall ‘change management programme’ for the larger projects and has involved everything from awareness sessions to discussion boards and even T-shirts.

Now one year in, with an update about to be undertaken, has the approach made a difference? Peter Birley believes the firm has made great strides and much has been achieved that would have been impossible without the plan. Managing partner Brian Smith says: “Working to the strategy and ensuring this is fully aligned to the business has enabled IT to achieve a great deal in 12 months and provide a level of transparency that helps the whole business see themselves as part of the process.”

Keeping it simple

The 80:20 rule applies to IT as it does to most areas. IT staff will pursue the perfect solution because it is technically possible and because they are proud of their work. This needs balancing with whether the time and cost of achieving the final 20 per cent adds sufficient value to the business. The overall project steering group can provide a sense-check that the business ‘needs’ these functions rather than simply ‘would like’ to have them, or whether the 80 per cent that can be delivered easily is the right business solution.

Although it is possible to provide ‘whistles and bells’, this may not be a good use of money. You may be developing ‘IT perfection’ but leaving users unable to absorb the full extent of the capabilities. The more straightforward the system and the more intuitive, the more effectively it will be used. The popularity of products such as the Blackberry and digital dictation is largely due to their incredible simplicity. By contrast, when basic products are ‘customised’, there is a risk of complications arising. Many law firms have experienced significant problems exchanging documents with other businesses because of the bespoke changes to Word that take place.

It would really be in the interests of any firm to begin a ‘simplification programme’, focusing on making technology easy to use and getting the best out of what they have, rather than constantly chasing new products and never fully implementing existing ones. Lawyers are a highly intelligent and very demanding group of people. As a rule, they are impatient when it comes to understanding technology that is not immediately obvious. Projects are delivered to the firm by technically competent staff and not by those who find technology frustrating. Every project should contain a technical ‘no hoper’ as a means of ensuring that the final delivery is truly user-friendly – not just for the technically-aware members of staff.

Outsourcing

Outsourcing can be effective when it comes to meeting a specific need, but there is a danger it is seen as a panacea for poor internal management. Outsourcing is often pursued as a cost-saving strategy, but the true cost of an outsourced service is not always adequately considered. Savings can sometimes be achieved, but with the level of internal monitoring and liaison required, and the loss of internal knowledge, these are rarely as significant as suppliers suggest. Outsourcing does not act in the manner of a ‘paracetemol for a headache’, simply taking away the whole activity. In order to get the best out of any function it is essential for the business to remain involved.

There are times that every business will benefit from some outsourcing but how can the management team know when these are? Essentially, there are three main scenarios when outsourcing can be practical:

When speed is of the essence. There may be a new area of business that needs establishing quickly and where there isn’t the opportunity to create an internal service. Outsourcing can provide an appropriate solution;
Where the scale of activity cannot justify the required service. An example of this would be the firm’s website, for which access will be required without interruption. It would be impractical to establish a 24-hour IT operation and would be more efficient to outsource support of the site to a specialist provider that already provides this service;
Where the area of activity is not core. This may be the case with systems development, where a firm prefers to buy in the resource from suppliers as necessary, rather than carry an in-house team. It is rarely a cheap solution and can have the added disadvantage of not retaining the acquired business knowledge established during the project.

Using outsourcing when the internal management of the function is poor may appear to provide a significant improvement in service level, but often this could also have been achieved if the internal function were managed effectively and to similar service levels. What can often be learnt from outsourcing is just what those service levels and measures are – enabling an internally-run operation to ensure that the standards they offer are at least equal to any outsourced alternative.

A well-run IT department will have a scale of possible cost according to the service level provided to the business. A firm approaching the question of outsourcing simply from a cost perspective should start with a clear picture of the service level they want delivered and compare this with existing standards to see if internal changes need to be made.

New systems

When is it right to replace a system and when should you use training to get more out of existing systems? Lawyers have a low threshold for tolerating anything they perceive ‘does not work’. However, this can sometimes lead to good systems, which have not been fully implemented, being replaced by new systems that will not be fully implemented themselves. How much of the functionality of existing, fully paid-for software are you using? If staff are ‘too busy’ to learn, they will not have the time to be involved in replacing the software. In this scenario, wasting resources will simply be an ongoing process.

The same is true of upgrading software. Upgrade too soon and you spend more resource than necessary. Upgrade too late and you do it as a matter of urgency, without the ability to plan cost effectively. It is easy to make a case for upgrading to every new version and live in a perpetual upgrade cycle with regard to regular conflicts in software and bugs to be fixed. However, then you may never benefit from a stable platform that allows you to look at the bigger picture.

You choose the software to do a job. If the work is largely unchanged, why change the software and unbalance the stable state? When new requirements arise, there will be a need to identify suitable solutions and the answer may indeed be to upgrade the existing solution, but that is not simply upgrading for the sake of it. In the meantime, almost every business would benefit by placing a greater emphasis on training.

Prioritising people

The most important resource in any IT department is its people. It is not enough for an IT director to be technically competent. He/she must also be astute, a sound businessperson, a good people manager and an effective communicator. They must be able to ensure that their team are round pegs in round holes – and that skills are not being hidden while a staff member struggles to do tasks for which they are not suited.

As times change, so do the structures required to meet the challenge. IT goes in phases with key implementations followed by opportunities to consolidate, including simplification and thorough training.

The structure may also change to reflect the changing nature of the business, with new teams developed or areas reducing in importance. For example, there may be a change in the department a function should report to, such as project management and training. These are not absolutes with right or wrong answers. Often the key is where they will be best managed.
Ultimately, getting the people wrong will lead to many other problems within IT. A good, business-focused and skilled IT team has the potential to save a firm from complete disaster in a worst-case scenario. In everyday situations, having the right people in the right roles can lead to IT being a real asset in any business.

Investment in training: Bond Pearce

The delivery of IT in a business tends to go in phases. Law firm Bond Pearce recently found itself at the end of an aggressive phase of project delivery. “The focus had been on getting the core systems in place, but when this was complete it was important to move to a phase where we could consolidate and get the best use out of those systems. To achieve this it was necessary to put more emphasis on support and training and less on project delivery,” says IT services manager, James May.

The restructure was not an exercise in saving money, but rather a refocus to achieve the results the firm now needed. Everyone’s roles changed to some extent, some completely. To ensure the team fully supported the process, they were consulted and involved throughout. Job descriptions were publicised and work was done to build a strong team spirit and remove barriers between staff based at the two main offices.

As a result of the restructure it has been possible to place a much greater emphasis on induction training and ‘one-to-one’ coaching. The firm has also been able to introduce a ‘minimum standards process’ for the core software in use. All staff using the software are expected to meet those standards – with whatever training is needed from IT to help them. “It is easy to deploy new software but difficult to get the best use out of it,” explains May. “The project aims to get the best use out of all assets across the firm.”

To ensure the IT department meets the objectives of the business, IT governance has transferred to a group called ‘My Days Work’. The group, which is headed by one of the firm’s partners, comprises IT and non-IT staff together with the My Days Work project manager, who is responsible for determining key policies such as security and internet usage, as well as all project prioritisation. My Days Work is there to ask awkward questions – and 18 months in it has had an impact on the overall understanding of IT in the business and helped the IT department to be more business-focused and communicate in a language that the business will understand.

As a result of the restructure, the whole department has become more client-focused. The overall ethos is to run the department with a better service level than if it was running on a contract basis, ensuring the firm would be confident in wanting to renew that contract. IT pledges the service will always lead to fixing problems as soon as possible, particularly in the four key systems that have been determined as essential to business continuity. The result is the business having faith that the IT department will always do its best. Project partner Nick Barwood sums it up. “The challenge for all professional-services firms is how to make best use of technology to deliver a better user and client experience. I believe that the lawyer-leading focus of the group across all current and past projects is now starting to make a real difference to the delivery of services.”

For managing partners and their teams, IT should be something that enhances the business in terms of
both profile and profitability. The onus must be on the IT department to be accessible to the whole firm and to communicate in a manner that makes them readily understood. There are many potential pitfalls, but having an IT department that can be as professional and business/client-focused as the lawyers, is a real asset in any law firm.