JordanFurlong + change   10

Engagement and Encouragement: How In-House Directors Drive Tech Adoption | Legaltech News
Although the road to new tech may be laborious, the tech directors agreed there are some universal objectives that, if met, could deliver high usage. According to the panel, strategies to successfully implement new technology include: obtaining the GC-level blessing that’ll sway the c-suite and employees, and training that takes the suggestions and concerns of users seriously. In addition, it’s also important to encourage a perspective of adopting new technology as part of a new culture in the legal department and not a project with an eventual end date, and ensuring the new process focuses on storing and collecting data in a central location, the panel said.
change  client  it 
may 2019 by JordanFurlong
Your Guide to Change Management - Adam Smith, Esq.
Change is both an institutional journey and a very personal one. People spend many hours each week at work; many think of their colleagues as a second family. Individuals (or teams of individuals) need to know how their work will change, what is expected of them during and after the change program, how they will be measured, and what success or failure will mean for them and those around them. Team leaders should be as honest and explicit as possible. People will react to what they see and hear around them, and need to be involved in the change process. Highly visible rewards, such as promotion, recognition, and bonuses, should be provided as dramatic reinforcement for embracing change. Sanction or removal of people standing in the way of change will reinforce the institution’s commitment.

Most leaders contemplating change know that people matter. It is all too tempting, however, to dwell on the plans and processes, which don’t talk back and don’t respond emotionally, rather than face up to the more difficult and more critical human issues. But mastering the “soft” side of change management needn’t be a mystery.
march 2019 by JordanFurlong
'Change' Is a Mantra for Law Firms, But Will They Tune In? |
To Ralph Baxter, the former chairman of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, nearly everything about law firms will need to change if they are to be successful in the near future. They will need to re-examine their financial model; their resources model; their underlying legal services delivery model; and their investment model, Baxter said.
“Associates earn $200,000 when they barely know where the office is,” said Baxter, who is now a board member of professional services technology company Intapp. “That is the lowest-cost resource in a law firm. And you’re going to compete with [alternative providers]? Nobody starting from scratch would start with that model. And so you have to address that. And if you’re not willing to address that, you’re not going to have a chance at competing.”

While Baxter’s message may ultimately be right, according to James Goodnow, the managing partner of Am Law 200 firm Fennemore Craig, there is also a risk that what conversations about change will be tuned out by law firm partners who are still making healthy salaries from traditional law firm models.

“Until it starts hitting partners in the pocketbook, they will not believe it,” Goodnow said. “There is no existential threat, or perceived existential threat, and so that is why there’s no change. So what’s the problem? We are all part of the problem. We have been saying the same thing over and over again. We’ve said, ‘Change is coming. We need to rethink everything.’ And the partners at the law firms have heard this. And it’s like the boy who cried wolf. Nothing has happened. And the law firm partners are doing very well. So because of that, you have tremendous skepticism among a group of people who are very skeptical to begin with.”
change  innovation  process  firms  partners  competition 
january 2019 by JordanFurlong
Driving Analytics Into Practice: Advice from the Data Driven Lawyers | Dewey B Strategic
Overcoming Resistance. Readers who have met resistance from lawyers when they tried to introduce analytics products in their firms will find some insights to justify exploration of analytics products in their firms. Of course every new technology introduces new risks as well as rewards. Back in the 1980’s some lawyers refused to try the early versions of Lexis and Westlaw. Some lawyers relied on online research results without understanding the limits of the content or the ineffectiveness of their search strategy.  We face  similar  risks with  analytics. both Reckless and uninformed over reliance on  analytics could have adverse consequences and slow adoption.
data  analytics  change  clients 
january 2019 by JordanFurlong
CLOC London – Getting To Grips With Data + Better Contracting – Artificial Lawyer
Artificial Lawyer attended the CLOC EMEA conference in London yesterday, and as well as meeting and chatting with an array of great legal innovation and legal ops folk, managed to attend a couple of sessions. The first was on data in the inhouse world, the other was on rationalising contract processes and legal automation.

The two sessions neatly summed up the wide range of experiences across the inhouse legal world, ranging from elementary needs such as collecting data on which law firms you are using, to creating massive clause banks and working with LPOs and a range of tech companies to drive document automation at a truly industrial scale.
ops  metrics  clients  change 
january 2019 by JordanFurlong
The Law Firm Disrupted: The Most Bedeviling Aspect of Law Firm Change |
Um lays out a helpful response to this pit of frustration and confusion, which can be the feeling presented by a hype cycle. If you’re told everything is changing but you see that nothing is changing, why bother? Um points out that the challenges of innovation are not unique to lawyers and law firms. Change is difficult in almost all business environments.

Why? She says people are persistently bad at picturing the future—often underestimating long-term change as we overestimate short-term change. People are also wrong in repeatable and predictable ways. And that is further amplified by public discourse. Um’s final point is to acknowledge that change is hard.

But if you want to make it happen, stay the course. Don’t give in to cynicism.

That’s a good lens through which to view a survey put out this week by Buying Legal Council, a trade group for legal procurement professionals.

For anybody thinking there has been a massive change in legal spending, the report might be a damper. The biggest businesses still spend 82 percent of their overall legal budget on traditional law firms and only 5 percent on alternative legal services providers.

But the report also asked about individual experiences. What actions led to savings?

An interesting result on that question was the finding that the amount of time a company has pursued savings through procurement was the biggest indicator of success.

Companies with 10 or more years in legal procurement on average achieved 19 percent in savings, the most of any group.

“The biggest factor is time: Tenure in the legal category has significant effects on what procurement can achieve,” the report says.

So, as Um writes, the lesson might be to tune out the noise. If efficiency and savings are what your legal department or law firm are looking for, stay committed to making the changes in front of you. What does it matter that most others don’t view alternative legal service providers as worthy of their money? If you’re committed they would work for your problem, give it a shot.
change  firms  partners  pricing  procurement 
april 2018 by JordanFurlong
3 Geeks and a Law Blog: Give Me Some Change
I remember one of my first lawyer conversations around LPM - a few years and firms back. A big-ticket litigator was blathering on about why the firm would have to embrace LPM to remain competitive. I turned the question on him and asked him what he would do when a project manager questioned his overuse of resources on a particular task. His reply: I would tell them to get the hell out of my office. (He actually did not use the word "hell," but that was as much as I thought I could get away with here). That interaction stuck with me over the years.
process  innovation  change  firms 
october 2017 by JordanFurlong
Classic: Four lessons in the art of motivating change - Remaking Law Firms
The first, more obvious point, is the need to meet people where they are and move in small steps. The second, more interesting point, is the embedded assumption in the analogy: that someone knows where we want Pigeon, Esq. to end up, and can place the real-world equivalent of food pellets in a neat path toward that destination.
For us at Seyfarth, real life turned out to be a bit more complicated than a box, and our path has been neither neat nor linear. In fact, our journey has led us to some places we would never have predicted. Because there is nothing neat or linear about the journey, the trick is how to make the elephant dance; that is, how can we be more agile and adaptive to the lessons we learn along the way?
change  management  leadership 
september 2017 by JordanFurlong
Perspective: What Law Firms Can Learn From a McKinsey Consultant | Big Law Business
firms are struggling because “expert work is misaligned with customer value.” He cited four reasons, all deeply embedded in the cultures and assumptions of the law firms, which, by word and deed, emphasized:

Expertise over service
Knowledge over management
“Craftwork” over continuous improvement
Individuals over teams.
What does that mean in practice? Bollard offered four examples of how the misalignment between service providers and clients manifested itself. They included:

Expertise was “valued for its own sake, rather than for contributing to customer value.”
Knowledge was shared via “ad hoc apprenticeship, [and was not] codified or shareable.”
Experts “own tasks” and fail to improve “the way organizations perform tasks.”
Finally, there was a glaring lack of teamwork, no “end-to-end ownership” of the client’s experience, and a failure to create and enforce “standard ways of working.”
firms  partners  management  change 
june 2016 by JordanFurlong
When it comes to a radical change (and remember, whether the change is radical is in the eye of the beholder), the more adaptive are likely to resist, and the innovative are more likely to advocate for it. Similarly, when it comes to tweaking or perfecting the current system, the more adaptive are more likely to advocate and the more innovative will resist because the change doesn’t go far enough.
change  firms 
april 2016 by JordanFurlong

Copy this bookmark: