In legal automation, the most important thing is actually getting started and finding an initial project to get going with. Too many legal teams think about it, and think about it, and never actually start. But where do you start?
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Document Assembly, Self-Service Legal Automation, Automated NDAs, Legal Automation, Legal Operations, Contract Management, Productivity
Research by Deloitte in their In-house Insights Report “Trusted navigators in complex and challenging environments” prepared in response to a September 2022 survey of New Zealand's in-house legal community, showed that keeping up-to-date and compliance with legal, regulatory and government policy updates was the number one issue that legal teams are concerned about.
Regulatory compliance has become increasingly onerous, but in my view, traditional methods of managing compliance are no longer fit for purpose as a means of keeping up.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Self-Service Legal Automation, Compliance, Legal Automation, Legal Operations, Productivity
I'm looking forward to the 2024 ILANZ conference on 22 and 23 May. It's a great opportunity to get a feel for the issues and priorities of the New Zealand in-house legal community, as well as to connect with others who are working with, and providing solutions to, in-house lawyers.
This year, I'll be particularly interested in gauging in-house lawyers' feelings about technology and their plans to invest in it. Even as recently as September 2022, Deloitte's research in their In-house Insights Report “Trusted navigators in complex and challenging environments” prepared in response to a September 2022 survey of New Zealand's in-house legal community, showed that more than half of in-house teams were planning no change in their investment in technology. I found that surprising at the time.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Document Assembly, Self-Service Legal Automation, Compliance, Legal Automation, Matter Management, Legal Operations, Contract Management
I found the latest podcast by Ron Baker and Ed Kless in The Soul of Enterprise (The Time Tax: The Crime of Stealing Customers’ Time) very thought provoking. I recommend it highly.
It is based on an article by B Joseph Pine II and James H Gilmore – Competing for Customer Time.
While there is ongoing discussion about the hourly billing model and lawyers charging for their time, the focus in the podcast and article is on the value of the client’s time and how to avoid wasting it.
Pine and Gilmore come out strongly:
"While not crimes against humanity, time-wasters are certainly offences against human customers. The worst thing you can do is waste your customers’ time – yet companies do it all the time.”
They go on to say:
“Companies can create value for customers by eliminating activities that waste their time; saving their time when so desired; offering experiences where time is valued; and even helping customers to wisely invest their time.”
and
“No company should impose wasted time on customers. The primary strategic choices today focus on time well saved and time well spent.”
This made me think about how this applies to our business, LawHawk, and the legal automation solutions we design, build and support. I have set out my thoughts below.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Law Firm Management, Self-Service Legal Automation, Legal Automation, Matter Management, Legal Operations, Contract Management
Because of our focus on document and legal automation, you might expect us to advocate for automating everything, but as with most things, it’s about context.
Automation is great when you have very high volumes, many standard options you need to choose from, and/or details that need to be entered multiple times. In those situations, you can save 75% or more of the drafting time while ensuring that the right clauses are inserted in the correct format. It can get you 90% or more of the way there, allowing you time to add the final 10%.
You don’t need to automate all documents, though.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Document Assembly, Self-Service Legal Automation, Legal Automation, Legal Operations, Contract Management
Earlier this month I was at the ILANZ conference. It was an excellent event - the best ILANZ I have been to.
There were several indications that technology for lawyers has matured a lot over the last year.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Document Assembly, Digital Signatures, Self-Service Legal Automation, Compliance, Legal Automation, Legal Operations, Contract Management
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.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Document Assembly, Law Firm Management, Digital Signatures, Self-Service Legal Automation, Automated NDAs, Legal Automation, Matter Management, Legal Operations, Contract Management
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
Last week said I think there is too much focus on whether a new initiative is innovative, which stops people progressing worthwhile, low risk, and easy to implement improvements that would make things better.
I recommend focussing on the problems to be solved and the required outcomes, using well-proven solutions to minimise risks. Each small step you take provides quick wins while opening more opportunities for further improvement. Whether is it is "innovative" shouldn’t come into it.
As an example of this approach towards continuous improvement, accumulating smaller wins towards more significant outcomes, consider what the Air New Zealand legal team - winners of the ILANZ 2021 In-house Legal Team of the Year Award - did recently.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Document Automation, Legal Technology, In-House Legal, Self-Service Legal Automation, Automated NDAs
021 339 527
lawhawk@lawhawk.nz
