Three Flavors of Change in Legal Services and Information
Written by Sean Hocking
We've been forwarded a copy of the following article by David Curle writing for Outsell Insights(USA)...
Before reading his piece we'd just like to say that we are glad that somebody else has finally picked up on the concept that as Aretha said "sisters are doing it for themselves", ok not the best analogy as most (all) law firms are run by men. So.. maybe we should say, as James Brown might have said "brothers are doing it for themselves".
What we're alluding to is Curle's assertion that .. A little more nascent, but equally inevitable, will be the rise of law firms as sources of external legal information products. In effect, legal publishers will find themselves in direct competition with some of their best customers.
HOB and our sister publication Law Librarians News has suggested a number of times over the past few years that law firms should make a lot more effort to investigate the opportunities in creating revenue from information provision to clients and other law firms.
We'd suggest for example that law firms who have been working in China for a number of years are much better placed to monetize legal information about China than the legal publishers are...and even more importantly that these firms should actively monetize their information using in-house knowledge and staff rather than falling into the trap of working with one of the larger legal publishers.
Remember.. there re plenty of legal editors out there who have been made redundant by the likes of Lexis & Westlaw who'd jump at the chance on working on new product.
Anyway we've said our bit - do take a look at Curle's piece below.
Subject: Three Flavors of Change in Legal Services and Information
==========================================================================
Outsell Insights July 21, 2008
Analysis of events, data, and trends
affecting the information industry
==========================================================================
Three Flavors of Change in Legal Services and Information
by David Curle, Director & Lead Analyst - Minneapolis, Minnesota
* General counsel of large corporations are known to be fed up with many
aspects of their relationship with outside law firms. Change is slow, but
here are some examples of the alternatives we'll see more of in the future.
Important Details: Many leaders of corporate in-house law departments are
tired of a number of law firm practices: pricing based on inputs (hours
spent) rather than value provided; use of highly-compensated personnel for
what should be routine work; a lack of innovation in the use of technology,
and a reluctance to make expertise and information available in any package
other than a one-on-one consultative relationship. To the extent that the
law firm industry changes its ways, it will largely be thanks to a number
of visionary General Counsels (GCs) that are pushing the industry to new
models. One center of thought leadership is Legal OnRamp, the social
networking site for general counsel and the firm lawyers that serve them; a
sample of the debate there can be read in a recent Adam Smith, Esq. post.
This week the Altman Weil Chief Legal Officer Survey was released,
highlighting some particular sore spots between firms and law departments.
* DIY: One key indicator is that, even in a time of extreme cost pressures,
49.2% of respondents plan to hire additional in-house lawyers, up from
39.8% the year before. The number of companies not planning to increase
in-house legal staff has fallen, from 46.7% to 36.5%. That can be
attributed to a combination of: an increasing focus on risk management
coming from their corporate leadership; decreasing inclination to simply
spend more on outside counsel; and increasing confidence in their ability
to find ways to manage legal tasks internally without going outside.
* It's not just about money: When asked what outside firms could do to
improve working relationships with law departments, the top answer was
"discounted fees", but the next three have to do with non-financial
friction points: "improved responsiveness", "improved project staffing",
and "learning our business".
* But there is a bottom line: Long-term concerns are topped by "cost
control" and "limited resources". That's followed by "compliance", an area
where many other types of outside vendors in addition to law firms are
standing by to help.
Implications: If in-house lawyers' disenchantment with law firms is here to
stay, what forms of legal services will take the place of the traditional
one-on-one relationship with a lawyer billing by the hour? That's where
there are implications for legal information providers, because there are a
number of models that are developing some momentum:
* Outsourcing the routine. Advocacy and counseling are services that law
firms perform well and are uniquely equipped to provide. More mundane
services such as legal research or simply maintaining current information
about what is and is not the law in various fields and jurisdictions are
not. Models such as LRN and Legal Research Center in the US, or Practical
Law Company (PLC) in the UK, are showing that current legal research,
analysis and expertise can be bottled in new ways that avoids the constant
re-invention of wheels. What's interesting here is that both law
departments and firms are turning to such services.
* Professionalization and automation of compliance. As the Altman Weil
study showed, compliance activities are high on the list of concerns for
general counsel and the companies they serve. Many companies are seeing a
robust compliance operation as a competitive advantage rather than simply a
defensive cost center. Technology can play a huge role in the automation of
compliance tasks, as firms like Complinet in the financial services field
shows. Compliance is one area where technology can marry information about
regulations and standards with business processes, and an increasing amount
of corporate technology investments will go to this particular form of
legal services. See The Compliance Information Landscape: National and
International Trends and Dynamics (December, 2007) for an overview of some
of those changes.
* Law firms as information providers. A little more nascent, but equally
inevitable, will be the rise of law firms as sources of external legal
information products. In effect, legal publishers will find themselves in
direct competition with some of their best customers. Morrison and
Foerster's global privacy and data security practice group put together a
database of current data privacy regulations around the world for its
clients; it has since turned that database into a subscription-based
service available to anyone, including non-clients, called Summit Privacy
Resources. With many firms putting much of their work product and expertise
on the web for marketing purposes, it's not a huge leap for them to begin
"productizing" such information.
Jeff Carr, GC of FMC, has noted that legal services consist of four
elements: advocacy, counseling/advice, content and process. The first two
will continue to be a vital and necessary component of what GCs at large
corporations will pay law firms for. But much of what a law firm now charge
high hourly rates for are the content and process aspects of their
practices, and this is what will move elsewhere, with the help of new
technology, unless the firms themselves can find new models.
So now legal publishers find themselves in a scramble with both in-house
counsel and law firms to find new ways to package information that had
previously been delivered via the old container of the hourly rate. As in
so many other parts of the industry, the idea of who should be inte the
business of providing a reliable, authoritative, and valuable information
resource is in flux.
