LawHawk Blog

Arranging meetings can be time-consuming, often involving numerous back-and-forth emails to find suitable dates and times.

Even for a simple two-person meeting, the coordination can be challenging, let alone when multiple participants are involved.

While popular paid tools like Calendly have gained popularity, not every legal team can access separate tools. Microsoft also offers a powerful yet often overlooked solution in the form of Bookings.

One of the key motivations for legal teams in adopting legal matter management solutions is often to generate comprehensive reports showcasing their active matters and demonstrating the value they provide.

Additionally, these solutions are intended to enable effective matter and team management by identifying potential issues early on and managing workloads more efficiently.

However, in reality, inflexible intake processes and user aversion to data entry often lead to insufficient data capture, undermining the expected value of analytics and reporting.

In addition to managing emails (see this earlier post on managing emails), legal teams are heavily involved in creating and working with various documents.

Traditional in-house document management methods using shared drives to save, and emailed attachments, often result in collaboration challenges, such as working with outdated versions, multiple copies of the same document, and scattered file locations.

While specialised document management solutions exist, commonly utilised by law firms, in-house legal teams often have no chance of getting such a separation solution. They are increasingly aligning themselves with their business counterparts, opting to work within Microsoft SharePoint.

SharePoint offers a broad collaboration platform utilised by thousands across the organisation, making it a natural fit for legal teams. However, additional functionality is often necessary to meet the specific requirements of legal professionals. This is where OnePlaceDocs proves to be a valuable tool.

As legal professionals, our lives revolve around email communication. I’ve tried Slack and Teams Chat, but I still prefer email, as long as it is easy for others to find and see emails when needed, and they are not locked away in Outlook, where only I can see them.

It's no wonder that any effective legal matter management solution must possess robust email management capabilities, as it’s one of the first things lawyers seek.

While most legal matter management solutions offer Outlook add-ins, their effectiveness varies.

Nowadays, many businesses heavily rely on Microsoft SharePoint, and legal teams would ideally like to store their emails alongside related documents in one central location and with all the security that comes with the Microsoft platform. Surprisingly, Microsoft hasn't made this process particularly user-friendly.

However, with help from our friends at The SharePoint Agency, we discovered OnePlace Solutions, an affordable and highly effective solution for seamless email and document management. After using it for nearly a year, we have found it to be an invaluable tool for our team. One reason that OnePlace Solutions is so strong is that email management isn’t just an add-on to what they really do – it’s their thing. They’ve also been very good at offering support where needed for the same reason.

One recurring challenge for legal teams in legal matter management is finding effective ways to train and inform the broader business on common issues.

The goal is to reduce the volume of enquiries and requests that flood the legal team, allowing the team to focus only on queries that truly require their expertise.

While certain legal matter management solutions offer functionality in this area, SharePoint stands out as a powerful tool for this purpose, given that it is already used by most legal teams and their business customers and has so many relevant features.

With its extensive range of features, SharePoint empowers legal teams to create flexible and intuitive resources, guiding the business towards the information they need when needed.

In legal matter management, few things are as vital as a well-designed intake process.

Without it, instructions can arrive from various channels like emails, phone calls, or in-person conversations (and often all of them!).

When there is no systematic method to capture this information, it often remains scattered across emails or locked away in people's minds. Consequently, it must be repeatedly entered into different documents or systems at different times.

This lack of organisation can lead to delays, necessitating clarifications and additional information requests. Moreover, it can spark disputes, with the business believing they provided instructions much earlier than the legal team believes is the case or with conflicting recollections about the requested information.

The absence of reliable data makes it more challenging for the legal team to actively manage matters, conduct reporting and analytics, and demonstrate their effective management of legal risks and opportunities for the business.

In the past few years, there’s been a tremendous increase in the adoption of legal matter management solutions.

Artificial Lawyer recently published an article by Karl Chapman, the CEO of Kim Technologies. The Democratization of Document Automation: We have Reached the Tipping Point.

I'm sure that Kim is an excellent piece of technology, and anything that can make it easier to create automated templates at lower cost is a good thing. But this article significantly oversimplifies the work required to get good outcomes from an automation project.

A lot of the focus when procuring new technology is on the initial upfront costs and the ongoing software and support costs. Fair enough, these are important in evaluating the cost of the new solution.

What often seems to be overlooked are the costs of the current process and the costs of delay. This often comes up when someone in charge of the business process has determined that they have a problem they would like to fix. When a solution they would like is agreed upon, they then need broader support from other teams, such as IT or procurement.

This can result in months, sometimes years, of delay, perhaps while the IT team consider if it would cost less for them to build a solution themselves.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment have just released an Advance Notice of their intention to re-tender the All of Government External Legal Services contract, which expires on 22 September 2023.

The revised fee structure caught my eye.