Page 93 - The Handbook - Law Firm Networks 2018
P. 93
The Handbook: Law Firm Networks
Why Networks Do Not Use Technology
Technology is not something that can be touched. It is an intangible. The results of technology can be
measured, but many of the results are word of mouth. The return on investment is difficult to measure, and
the short-, medium-, and long-term benefits are not easy to understand. The use of the technology will vary
from member to member depending on how the members use their own technology. Use will also vary
because of cultural differences. In some cultures an associate would never send an email to a group in which
there are partners. While the performance-price ratio continues to fall, technology still costs money.
Technology has its proponents and its doubters. A recent survey ranking how receptive law firms are to
technology in the marketing function is indicative of the attitudes found in a legal network.413 The survey
results demonstrate that most firms are receptive to marketing technology, including its latest developments.
They were asked to rate their firm’s receptiveness on a 0-to-10 scale. The average response was 6.6 —
meaning the opinions were somewhat positive. They were neither resistant to nor enthusiastic about
technology. Firms with fewer than 200 lawyers were less open to implementing marketing technology than
larger firms (6.2 versus 7.2 mean ratings). This was probably because of budget issues rather than a dislike of
technology.
They were asked to name the primary barriers to obtaining needed technologies; an
overwhelming 74 percent cited competing demands for budget dollars. Second, an
inability to effectively demonstrate return on investment was cited by 37 percent. Others
noted that it can be difficult to make business cases for technologies such as automated
proposal generation — where the ROI makes theoretical sense but is not easily
quantifiable — or alumni programs, which have considerable intangible value but may
not generate direct revenue. Lastly, while lawyer skepticism and resistance to legal
technology does exist in many firms, only 27 percent said partner objections were the
main barrier.414
In firms as well as in networks there is another intangible barrier to the use of technology. Ownership of
information is valuable to those who possess it. Ownership is rewarded in hierarchical businesses, which
would include law and accounting firms. When information is freely shared, the result can be a perceived
loss or gain of power by those in the network. “Evidence suggests that existing power centers may
discourage the adoption of information technology systems that reduce their authority and, ceteris paribus,
new IT systems tend to reinforce preexisting cultural norms and control structures.”415
Lastly, implementing information in a network requires vision and commitment. Vision is required to see the
direction in which the business world is headed and to factor in the changing dynamics, demographics, and
conditions of the network equation. Informational technology is a long-term commitment that does not
provide an immediate ROI, but if the vision is correct and the network moves forward, the results can be
worth the investment.
Professional services networks and their members should recognize and embrace that they are ultimate
beneficiaries of the technology revolution. Few networks have done this.
413 S. Allison & L. Meagley, Tracking Law Firm Marketing Technology, 34 L. PRAC. 123 (Jan. 2008).
414 Id.
415 Van Alstyne, supra note 9, citing P. Attewell & J. Rule, Computing and Organizations: What We Know and What We Don't Know, COMM. OF THE
ACM 1184-1192 (1984); see also K. Crowston & T. Malone, Information Technology and Work Organization, in HANDBOOK OF HUMAN-COMPUTER
INTERACTION 1051-1069 (M. Helander, Ed. 1988); see also M. L. Markus, Power, Politics, and MIS Implementation, 6 COMM. OF THE ACM 430,
430-444 (1983); see also J. Pfeffer, Power in Organizations, HARPER BUS. 391 (1981).
- 80 -
Why Networks Do Not Use Technology
Technology is not something that can be touched. It is an intangible. The results of technology can be
measured, but many of the results are word of mouth. The return on investment is difficult to measure, and
the short-, medium-, and long-term benefits are not easy to understand. The use of the technology will vary
from member to member depending on how the members use their own technology. Use will also vary
because of cultural differences. In some cultures an associate would never send an email to a group in which
there are partners. While the performance-price ratio continues to fall, technology still costs money.
Technology has its proponents and its doubters. A recent survey ranking how receptive law firms are to
technology in the marketing function is indicative of the attitudes found in a legal network.413 The survey
results demonstrate that most firms are receptive to marketing technology, including its latest developments.
They were asked to rate their firm’s receptiveness on a 0-to-10 scale. The average response was 6.6 —
meaning the opinions were somewhat positive. They were neither resistant to nor enthusiastic about
technology. Firms with fewer than 200 lawyers were less open to implementing marketing technology than
larger firms (6.2 versus 7.2 mean ratings). This was probably because of budget issues rather than a dislike of
technology.
They were asked to name the primary barriers to obtaining needed technologies; an
overwhelming 74 percent cited competing demands for budget dollars. Second, an
inability to effectively demonstrate return on investment was cited by 37 percent. Others
noted that it can be difficult to make business cases for technologies such as automated
proposal generation — where the ROI makes theoretical sense but is not easily
quantifiable — or alumni programs, which have considerable intangible value but may
not generate direct revenue. Lastly, while lawyer skepticism and resistance to legal
technology does exist in many firms, only 27 percent said partner objections were the
main barrier.414
In firms as well as in networks there is another intangible barrier to the use of technology. Ownership of
information is valuable to those who possess it. Ownership is rewarded in hierarchical businesses, which
would include law and accounting firms. When information is freely shared, the result can be a perceived
loss or gain of power by those in the network. “Evidence suggests that existing power centers may
discourage the adoption of information technology systems that reduce their authority and, ceteris paribus,
new IT systems tend to reinforce preexisting cultural norms and control structures.”415
Lastly, implementing information in a network requires vision and commitment. Vision is required to see the
direction in which the business world is headed and to factor in the changing dynamics, demographics, and
conditions of the network equation. Informational technology is a long-term commitment that does not
provide an immediate ROI, but if the vision is correct and the network moves forward, the results can be
worth the investment.
Professional services networks and their members should recognize and embrace that they are ultimate
beneficiaries of the technology revolution. Few networks have done this.
413 S. Allison & L. Meagley, Tracking Law Firm Marketing Technology, 34 L. PRAC. 123 (Jan. 2008).
414 Id.
415 Van Alstyne, supra note 9, citing P. Attewell & J. Rule, Computing and Organizations: What We Know and What We Don't Know, COMM. OF THE
ACM 1184-1192 (1984); see also K. Crowston & T. Malone, Information Technology and Work Organization, in HANDBOOK OF HUMAN-COMPUTER
INTERACTION 1051-1069 (M. Helander, Ed. 1988); see also M. L. Markus, Power, Politics, and MIS Implementation, 6 COMM. OF THE ACM 430,
430-444 (1983); see also J. Pfeffer, Power in Organizations, HARPER BUS. 391 (1981).
- 80 -
