phone +1(718) 618-9891 | [email protected]

LTC4 Member Login


<< First  < Prev   ...   8   9   10   11   12   Next >  Last >> 
  • Friday, July 18, 2014 1:05 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    This report contains the findings of a Price Waterhouse Cooper survey from 2013.

    Key points include:

    • Firms will need to find new and innovative ways to deliver legal services if they are to meet the changing demands from clients.
    • Making the best use of technology will be key to future success as will finding more efficient and effective ways of managing their most important asset – people.
    • The most agile firms are anticipating change and adapting their firms to meet changing markets. The medium term future of firms who don’t adapt cannot be assured.

  • Friday, July 18, 2014 1:01 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    The 2012 Adoption Insight Report is the fourth report produced by Neochange focused on the state of end-user adoption.

    The survey is the result of analyzing 300 respondents from various industries. All responses represent the perspective of service functions focused on enterprise software adoption.

    Read the Survey Report here

  • Friday, July 18, 2014 12:42 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    This document provides a summary of the NeoChange/Capensys 2013 Legal Technology Survey.

    Some Key Points:

    • Legal technology laggards fall behind in resource efficiency and competitiveness.
    • The adoption gap is a function of fear and poorly focused investments.
    • Legal technology leaders use modern education practices optimized by continual measurement.

  • Thursday, April 10, 2014 12:25 PM | Deleted user

    Why Are Core Competencies Important to the Firm?

    A recent report by Neochange (experts in user adoption) finds that “average end-user productivity loss is 17%. 17% - that’s like giving everyone Friday off! In terms of billable hours (at $450/£300 per hour), this loss represents $130k/ £87k per attorney per annum. In a firm of 200 attorneys, this amounts to $26 Million/£17 Million per year lost revenue.

    Another survey done by Thomson Reuters in APAC found that only 17% of the attorneys questioned said they got the most out of the current workflow and research tools at their disposal and the majority (76%) claimed this had a negative impact on their time efficiency. This same survey revealed that 56% of attorneys were underestimating the time they billed. If you take an average attorney’s billing rate of $450 an hour, billing 5 hours a day and increase this by just 10% (by better skills and user adoption), this amounts to increased revenue of $54k per attorney per year.

    Firms are now quantifying the savings that can be achieved with increased productivity. For example, a CIO of a 250 attorney firm calculated that if each attorney saved 1 minute per day (by speeding up search times, reducing the time to profile a document, etc.), the annualized savings to the firm would be $200k.
    With the increasing frequency of Fixed Fee Arrangements, firms need to be as proficient as possible so as to maintain profitability while handling the client’s matter. Any wasted time has a negative impact on the margin.

    Articles such as the one in the Economist on January 18, 2014 entitled “Lawyers’ biggest customers are discovering that they can haggle” state that realization rates have dropped from 92% in 2007 to an all-time low of 83.5% in 2013 as discounts are increasingly applied. So firms must look at reducing any time wasted time to make sure that their profitability is maintained.

    In another law firm survey done by Neochange and Capensys, it was shown that firms with the highest rates of technology adoption billed 25% more time than those with low adoption rates; there is a direct correlation between firms with the highest rates of technology adoption and those with the highest percentage of time billed.

    So traditional attorneys can no longer remain in their comfort zone, oblivious to technology, while younger tech-savvy attorneys are not exempt either – they need to recognize there are still important gaps in their knowledge. Attorneys are required to serve the best interests of their clients and good legal content alone will not suffice. As the ABA has recently recognized, IT skills play a part in good client service. Documents need to be accurate, risk-free, and in compliance with client- or court-driven standards. And they need to be completed as quickly as possible, so as not to incur unnecessary production costs to the client.

    LTC4™ Core Competencies maximize the use of the firm’s technology to support the practice of law.
    It is easier for a firm to put core competency into place using accepted legal industry technology standards, rather than inventing and imposing their own, or using the Microsoft Office Specialist exam which is not legal-specific. Certification allows the firm to market the message to potential clients that this level of skill permeates the firm, and is not limited to the IT department.

    Why Are Core Competencies Important to Clients?

    It’s easy for those of us in IT positions to recognize why our users need to have better skill levels, but how do we convince the firm to put in place an industry standard core competency program which might take attorneys away from a few of their billable hours?

    Clients have a choice of which outside counsel to use. Increasingly they want to know that their chosen law firm is skilled in technology, processes their matters with maximum efficiency and compliance, and that they are not being charged for “wasted” time.  They need to be assured that there will be fewer versioning problems, fewer metadata embarrassments, fewer corrupt documents, no missed deadlines, and that they will get timely responses to their inquiries. 

    In a recent survey it emerged that 51% of legal departments had fired outside counsel for sub-par document delivery.  (Interestingly, only 3% of law firms surveyed believed they had been fired for similar causes)

    There is, of course, the prospect of the Suffolk/Flaherty Audit, which will allow clients to have a direct insight into the skill levels of their potential outside counsel. 

    When a firm can state that its staff and attorneys are certified in a set of industry standard, law-firm-approved core competencies, the client is reassured that their chosen law firm has the most suitable skillset for handling their complex matters dependably and professionally.

  • Thursday, April 10, 2014 12:25 PM | Deleted user

     Most law firms could provide more efficient legal services to clients by improving technological competency among attorneys. CIOs and IT training managers recognize this fact but historically have found it challenging to get buy-in from their firms. It’s time to upskill to gain a competitive edge.


  • Friday, October 09, 2009 12:16 AM | Deleted user

    There has been seismic activity in the legal technology training world brought about by the Suffolk/Flaherty Audit (the “Tech Audit”) initiated by D. Casey Flaherty, Corporate Counsel for Kia Motors.  Casey has been auditing the technology skills of his potential outside counsel's lawyers by evaluating what he considers the basic IT skills a lawyer should have for the practice of law.  He reports that none of the firms he has audited has yet passed.

    Read the complete article:

  • Friday, May 29, 2009 8:36 AM | Deleted user

    How LTC4™ started and what was its purpose?

    LTC4™ (Legal Technology Core Competencies Certification Coalition) came together in 2010 when senior training professionals were united by a common desire to establish IT core competencies that all law firms could use.

    Some members of the original steering group already had core competency programs in place which they wanted to build on and make more goal-based.  The group was hearing that many of their peers in the industry were also being asked to produce IT Core Competencies in their own firms, but didn’t know where to start, or didn’t have the time to do justice to such a large task. So the group felt that all law firms could benefit from having a commonly accepted industry standard which would give core competency programs more clout and much higher visibility.  This offer of an industry standard has struck a common cord as LTC4 is now over 50 firms.

    To make the competencies relevant, the group examined in detail how users in law firms worked and what their typical workflows were, so that the core competencies could be designed as workflows, rather than a litany of features and functions.  The group worked diligently (meeting every two weeks for several years) to identify a firm’s business goals for technology, and what the individual user goals would be, so that the core competencies would be designed to combine both - for maximum relevance and benefit to both user and the firm.

    While traditionally IT core competencies were normally only applied to support staff, the group made the decision early on that they should also identify attorneys IT core competencies, as attorneys need to be skilled-up too. 

    As a result of all the combined thinking and applied knowledge, the competencies which resulted are work-flow based and cover the main aspects of legal work supported by technology including:

    ·       Working with Client Documents

    ·       Managing Electronically Stored Documents/Emails

    ·       Collaborating with Others: Sharing E-mails and Documents

    ·       Time and Billing

    ·       Road Warriors  - Working Remotely

    ·       Data, Reports & Exhibits

    ·       Security

    Historically, when a firm introduced core competencies, it generally meant that there would be ensuing “Assessments” with all the associated angst and trepidation. LTC4 was adamant that these core competencies would be presented as continual improvement programs, leading to a positive outcome, such as self-development, certification and credits (including CLE).   The notion of “Assessments” was expunged from the group’s vocabulary, in favor of a program which would be positive and where possible, fun to do.

<< First  < Prev   ...   8   9   10   11   12   Next >  Last >> 
Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software