An issue with getting a legal technology project approved in an organisation is proving the importance of the project and that there will be a good return on investment.
It can be easy to focus too narrowly on what the benefits will be.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Self-Service Legal Automation, Legal Automation, Matter Management, Legal Operations, Contract Management
In an earlier post, I suggested that customers should focus more on the relationship with their suppliers and less on the current technology features. Because requirements are changing so quickly, the supplier must be able to keep up.
A great relationship should not just be reactive. A good supplier will understand and care enough about the customer's business and changing requirements to proactively suggest improvements that the customer can adopt to get even better results.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Procurement, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Digital Signatures, Legal Automation, Matter Management, Legal Operations, Contract Management
One of the challenges in legal process automation projects is that it can be hard to figure out the current process and agree on what it ideally should be.
In many legal processes, there is no written process map at all.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Legal Automation, Email Management, Legal Operations, Contract Management
A lot of technology is bought and sold based on how many features it has.
Vendors are certainly responsible for a lot of marketing, emphasising all their features while simultaneously claiming that their solution is incredibly simple and intuitive.
Buyers, especially those going through formal procurement processes with RFPs, massively overcomplicate things by including spreadsheets with tens, if not hundreds, of requirements.
At some point, everyone loses sight of two of the most important things:
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Compliance, Legal Automation, Matter Management, Legal Operations, Contract Management
The longer I've been working with legal technology, the more convinced I am that customers should be looking for relationships, not technology or particular solutions.
What do I mean?
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Legal Automation, Matter Management, Legal Operations, Contract Management
There’s an ongoing debate about whether it’s better to have “point solutions” that only do one thing really well or a single platform that can do nearly everything.
There’s no obvious right answer but here's my thoughts.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Document autom, Legal Automation, Matter Management, Legal Operations
If you want to manage your legal matters better, a matter management system should be an excellent investment - if you're prepared to invest the time to set it up and use it properly.
However, if you're really just looking for a better way to use SharePoint and file your emails and documents, a matter management system is a costly way to go about it. There are better options at much lower costs.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Legal Automation, Email Management, Matter Management, Legal Operations
021 339 527
lawhawk@lawhawk.nz
