Liz Kurtz, in a recent article for Small Law, reports on the results of the University of Florida Levin School of Law's "2010
Perfect Practice Legal Technology Institute Study" (PP-LTI
Study). Two findings from this study that stand out are:
- Most small firms are not using document management systems (only 52% of all lawyers report using DMS and of those, 80% work in large law firms).
- Half of all small firms report that they do not use practice management systems.
- "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" - what they have is working fine and it isn't worth the effort to change;
- the cost of maintaining these systems (also interesting: the study found "that those firms without a practice management system estimated its cost as more than double what those who do use such software actually paid); and
- difficulty in integrating with other technologies
If nearly half of small law firms have not yet adopted document and practice management technology it seems unlikely that legal project management will make swift headway in these firms. That said, it is important to note that (from my personal observations) that:
- Of those firms that ARE adopting document and practice-management technologies, many are early adapters and are ahead of the technology curve. Small firms are more nimble and can move and change faster than large firms. For example, I see small firms driving adaption and development of cloud-based practice, document, and project management systems.
- Sometimes "if it ain't broke don't fix it" is the right attitude. Those commenting on these studies like to paint non-adopters as ignorant Luddites. But sometimes a thorough assessment of a technology leads to an informed decision to not adopt it. While it may seem strange that a firm would not have a practice-management software system in place, they obviously have some system to manage their legal matters. This system also most likely involves a lot of technology. It would be difficult to find any firm that does not use computers and relies only on technology commonly used by lawyers in the 1950s.
What these studies are talking about are all-in-one practice management applications like ProLaw, Time Matters, and Amicus Attorney. These bring together contact, calendar, task, and document management, along with time tracking and billing into one application. Generally, in my experience, none of these systems offers best-in-class functionality for any piece of the practice-management puzzle. It can make a lot of sense to use different tools for different purposes, even if that means you are not using a "practice-management application."
Given these observations, I think there is hope for adoption of legal project management in small firms--even by those who are less enthusiastic about jumping on latest technology bandwagon. As I've said before, project management is not a tool.
[1] Liz Kurtz, New Study Paints Unflattering Portrait of Technology Adoption at Small Firms, SmallLaw (Technolawyer Cmty.), Apr. 19, 2010.
Become a Fan of LPM
