Second Opinions

Please Evaluate Corporate Software

By David Munn

FRANKLY, so would I. Other than vendor Web sites, it's very hard to find information about these kinds of systems. There are a lot of choices in software specifically designed for corporate law departments (including Case & Point, CaseTrack, Chief Legal Officer, Corporate Legal Management System, Corprasoft Legal Desktop, eCounsel, LawQuest, LAWTRAC, PMTI Practice Manager, and TyMetrix); there is no apparent market leader.

The vendors continue to release new and updated systems; and there is a dearth of useful, up-to-date comparative information. Embarking on a study of software available for managing a corporate law department can be like wading into a swamp in the dark with no compass and an old map. And the swamp keeps moving!

To make this even more complicated, there are some excellent case and matter management programs that, while primarily intended for the private practice market, can be customized and adapted to work reasonably well in a corporate law department. We can at least be thankful that there is no shortage of information and reviews on these types of systems.

I take it that you must have the sense that Chief Legal Officer is not meeting all of your needs, but that you don't have a pressing need to move to a new system. The fact that you are already using a law department management program indicates that your department is probably already reasonably well organized. In other words, you are probably not at the pointwhere a crush of unorganized files and information makes the adoption of a matter management system an urgent priority, so you don't need to rush into anything.

While there are newer and fuller-featured products available today (including a newer Web-based product from Corprasoft), I think even better programs are on the horizon. Unless you have an immediate need, this may notbe the best time for you to go through the trouble and expense of making a change in your software.

If you don't need to make a decision right now, take your time and study what's available and what's coming. If you or someone else in your department has in interest in technology, subscribe to some of the legal technology publications, sign up for an on-line interest group (such as technolawyer.com), talk to other corporate attorneys about what they use, get on the vendors' Web sites and talk with them.

Going to some of the national legal technology shows that are held around the country can be interesting, but my experience has been that a lot of the in-house matter management vendors don't exhibit at those shows.

If you don't have any techies in-house who can take the time to do this kind of research, or if you need a new system to integrate with other systems in your office, you may want to consider hiring a consultant. There are consulting firms that work with corporate law departments and have technology specialists that can help you evaluate your options and even install, set up, and train you on the systems. This can be a good investment, especially when you consider how much lawyer and staff time it can save.

Unless you are intent on a corporate-specific program, more general programs such as Time Matters and Amicus Attorney are worth looking at. They have been around for a while, but they continue to evolve and add new features and functionality -- at an extremely attractive price. Time Matters, in particular, allows a high degree of customization to tailor the program to your particular needs.

There are also consultants all over the country who specialize in one or the other of these systems, although most of them probably won't have much experience in customizing the products for the needs of a corporate law department. These programs offer features such as document management and generation, integration with e-mail and calendar programs, synchronization with handheld devices, and even wireless access, that are not available in or not as well integrated into some of the corporate-specific programs.

With user bases numbering in the tens of thousands, the companies that produce Time Matters and Amicus can afford to keep up with the latest technology, and they have a lot of incentive to get the bugs out of their systems before releasing them to the general user community. This may not always be the case with the systems designed for the corporate market, which have, at most, a few hundred departments using them.

Both types of products will handle the basic case/matter groupware functions you are familiar with from using Chief Legal Officer. What you will probably give up with the non-specific programs are the ability to track budgets and outside counsel expenses and to generate management reports that are useful to in-house departments. Whether that is important to you is something you have to decide.

Every system available today represents some tradeoffs and compromises. Different lawyers and different departments will find some features more useful than others, and the choice of systems should come down to which offer the particular features that are important to you at a price that's within your budget.

Reason to Wait

One reason I think it pays to wait to see what happens in this market is that I am excited by the possibilities offered by Web-based systems. The Internet will continue to affect how we practice law, and it's already starting to affect the corporate matter management system market. Some matter management vendors are starting to move their systems to the Web, and more will follow. Systems such as Bridgeway's eCounsel and Corprasoft's Legal Desktop are already fully Web-based, although those companies have told me they are focusing those products only on the large department market at this time. I see no reason these types of Web-based systems cannot become practical and affordable for even smaller departments if the vendors can attract a large enough client base to make it worth their time to pursue that market. I think that, within the next two years, some very interesting new systems for corporate legal departments will emerge, and some of the existing vendors will disappear from the market if they are not able to keep up with advances in technology. Also, the vendors of Windows-based systems may stop further development on those systems in favor of Web-based systems.

While there is reason to be cautious about the Internet, for reasons such as concerns about speed, reliability, and security, I think the advantages it offers will eventually win out. Web-based systems offer the ability to allow us to work from almost anywhere, and to share information and collaborate with clients and outside counsel around the world, who only need a Web browser and minimal training to access and use the systems. Systems that are hosted and maintained by third party application service providers (ASPs) remove much of the burden of maintaining and upgrading hardware and software from in-house departments that often lack dedicated IT resources.

Finally, I'm intrigued by a new Web-based system that Tymetrix is now beginning to roll out to a few clients on an ASP basis. The company has been known in the past for electronic billing and invoice processing, and its new "integrated, collaborative" matter management system for corporate law departments builds on that e-billing expertise. What I find most interesting, however, is that itsmatter management system seems to be built around a workflow and process model that mirrors the way we actually practice law (or in some cases the way we should be practicing).

Rather than just keeping track of information, the TyMetrix system is said to greatly streamline the process of setting up files, establishing budgets and deadlines, and keeping projects on track. It does this by automatically requesting information when needed, presenting easy data input mechanisms that take advantage of what is already known about the matter, presenting assessment and practice tools and other information when needed, and sending out electronic reminders if the process begins to get off-track. The matter management system is integrated as part of both a secure collaboration system for sharing selected information among in-house and outside firm personnel, and the TyMetrix e-invoicing system. While other systems claim to have workflow and collaborative capability, if you invest enough effort in setting them up properly, the TyMetrix system sounds as though these processes will be available immediately upon implementation.

Because so much of what in-house law departments do is really project management, a system like this could represent a significant leap in law office automation and efficiency, especially if it is as easy to use as the company says it is. Stay tuned for more information on this system.

David A. Munn has just relocated to Minneapolis, leaving Iowa's Pella Corp., where he was general counsel.