Practice Management

Legal research: the good, the bad and the ugly.

Posted on March 3, 2010. Filed under: Practice Management, Productivity, Research, The times they are a'changin', Web 2.0 | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

Drlogo11This week’s Daily Record column is entitled “Legal research: the good the bad and the ugly.”

A pdf of the article can be found here and my past Daily Record articles can be accessed here.

******

Legal research: the good, the bad and the ugly.

There is a grand scale transformation of legal research plat- forms occurring right now, which is a good thing for the legal profession as a whole.

While none of the existing services are necessarily ugly or bad, some of the most prominent platforms — ones with which we lawyers have always had a love/hate relationship — are antiquated and have been in desperate need of a re-haul for years now.
New entrants into the legal research space have caused fierce competition for customers. The increased competition has resulted in a rich variety of legal research options for lawyers. Some services provide more in-depth results than others, some have very user- friendly interfaces and some are inexpensive, or even free.

At LegalTech New York in February, the two largest, most familiar and most costly legal research platforms in the industry rolled out new products as part of an attempt to keep their offerings fresh and current.

Westlaw introduced WestlawNext, the next generation of Westlaw, a platform that had not changed substantially since its last revamp in 1998. An online brochure describes the platform: “Legal research that’s more human gives you an easier way to search, yet delivers all of what you’re looking for. … [Y]ou can apply intelligent tools to help you work smarter and faster with total confidence you have the information you need. All of which makes life easier.”
There has been some criticism expressed in the legal blogos- phere regarding the added “premium” users must pay in order to access the new platform, and some have decried West’s apparent lack of transparency in that regard.

LexisNexis also announced plans to roll out a new version of its platform, tentatively called “Lexis New,” later this year. In the meantime, Lexis introduced Lexis/Microsoft Office inte- gration, also during LegalTech. The company’s Web site states the new product allows lawyers “reviewing a Word document or an Outlook e-mail message … [to] seamlessly access content and resources from LexisNexis, the open Web, or their law firm or corporate files.”
LexisNexis also offers an iPhone app that allows subscribers to check case citations on the fly.

Two cheaper platforms have been around for at least a decade,Fastcase (www.fastcase.com) and LoisLaw (www.loislaw.com). Both offer subscribers the ability to access case law and statutes via user-friendly Web interfaces.
Fastcase, a 10-year-old legal research company, already serves more than 380,000 lawyers nationwide and has 17 state and local bar associations as its clients. One new notable feature from Fastcase is a free iPhone app. I downloaded the app when it was first released and, in my opinion, it’s a must-have for any lawyer who owns an iPhone. It allows users to quickly and easily search Fastcase’s entire case law database using the intuitive iPhone interface. And, you certainly can’t beat the price.
Another free legal research alternative is Google Legal Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/), which debuted at the end of 2009 and offers a free searchable database of U.S. case law from federal and state courts dating back 80 years, as well as U.S. Supreme Court decisions dating back to 1791 and law review articles. Google Legal Scholar is a great resource and, for some lawyers, may offer a good alternative to the traditional legal research platforms.

Finally, a new contender is Bloomberg Law, which will be released later this year The product has been in beta testing for the last year and is offered by the well-established and well known financial news and information services media company, Bloomberg LLC. As described at its Web site, Bloomberg Law will provide an “the all-in-one legal research platform that integrates legal content with proprietary news and business intelligence.”
Many predict that the platform will appeal mostly to larger law firms as a feasible alternative to LexisNexis and Westlaw.

There is no doubt 2010 will be an interesting, and tumultuous, year for legal research providers and the lawyers who use their services. Only time will tell which platforms will win the battle for user loyalty. In the meantime, at least lawyers have far more choices than ever before.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Advertisements
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Watch the latest lawtechTalk episode for free!

Posted on January 26, 2010. Filed under: Cloud computing, Collaboration, Practice Management, Web 2.0 |

This screencast features, and is sponsored by, the following legal technology products:

  • Firmexprovides secure, virtual data rooms, which
    can be used in a legal corporate environment to manage online due diligence,
    exchange closing drafts, create digital record books, share litigation
    documents and secure client access to important files.
  • Mavenlink–provides an online collaborative workspace that allows lawyers to manage a client's case from start to finish, including uploading and collaborating on documents with clients and communicating with clients about their case in a secure, easily viewable environment.

In this episode of lawtechTalk, like the last episode, I'm experimenting with a new format. During each screencast and demo, I'll be interviewing a representative
from each company. Hopefully this interactivity will make the
screencast even more interesting for you, the viewer.

There are 3 parts to this episode, which you can access by scrolling through and clicking on each segment below:

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( Comments Off on Watch the latest lawtechTalk episode for free! )

Change is good

Posted on November 24, 2009. Filed under: Cloud computing, Collaboration, Portability, Practice Management, Social Media, The times they are a'changin', Web 2.0 |

Drlogo11This week’s Daily Record column is entitled “Is cloud computing really less secure than the status quo?”

A pdf of the article can be found here and my past Daily Record articles can be accessed here.

*****

Change is good

Last week I attended on a press pass the Canadian Bar Association’s “Law Firm Leadership Conference.”

The conference’s theme was “Change Management” and, accordingly, the focus was on ways in which law firms can innovate, and thereby alter, the course of theprofession.

One of my all-time favorite legal scholars, Richard Susskind, spoke at the conference, one of the main reasons I chose to attend it. I’m very glad that I did. All in all it was an enjoyable and educational conference, and I left Toronto with a number of thought provoking issues to ponder.

First, should the leaders in our field be benevolent custodians or jealous guardians of the profession? When phrased that way, the answer seems obvious: Of course we want to be benevolent custodians with only the best intentions, carefully making choices that will improve our profession for the generations that inherit it.

The reality, however, is just the opposite. Lawyers tend to carefully guard the profession and are reluctant make changes that might alter the way things have always been done. We revere precedent and distrust change. As a result, we cling to the past, making decisions about technological changes and innovation that ultimately harm our profession in the long run.

That is a mistake since, as Susskind aptly noted, any lawyer who takes the time to research emerging technologies would wholeheartedly agree that these new platforms fundamentally change the practice of law. Attorneys who deny that fact are reacting emotionally, rather than intellectually.

New technologies have the potential to radically alter the ways in which legal services are delivered to consumers. Forward thinking attorneys are embracing virtual law offices, law practice management cloud computing platforms, social media and collaboration tools. Innovative practitioners understand the importance of using knowledge management to alter the consumer experience first, and the law firm’s systems second.

There has been much talk in recent years about pricing legal services differently, including the death of the billable hour and the increase of flat fee services. As Susskind stressed, however, the key to change is to deliver legal services effectively and efficiently. Ultimately, it boils down to delivering value to legal consumers by working differently, rather than through pricing services differently.

The key to working differently is the use of emerging technologies. To do so, the legal profession as a whole must embrace technological change. Attorneys must make it a priority to learn about and understand new technologies, then incorporate them into their practices.

As another conference speaker, Patrick Lamb, noted, law firms must change their culture. That’s not simply a matter of using one or two new technologies, but a matter of changing attitudes. He emphasized that law firms’ youngest members are the key to accomplishing the attitude makeover required.

Generation Y attorneys are less attached to the status quo. They are part of the connected generation and grew up with the Internet. For them, it’s not business as usual: They understand how to use the new technologies and are not averse to change. These attorneys are the future and the inheritors of the profession. Law firms should be generous benefactors and give their younger attorneys the opportunity to lead the charge to change.

Because, as we all must understand —change is good.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Is cloud computing really less secure than the status quo?

Posted on November 16, 2009. Filed under: Cloud computing, Practice Management, The times they are a'changin', Uncategorized |

Drlogo11This week’s Daily Record column is entitled “Is cloud computing really less secure than the status quo?”

A pdf of the article can be found here and my past Daily Record articles can be accessed here.

*****

Is cloud computing really less secure than the status quo?Cloud computing, defined at Webopedia.com as the “sharing [of] computing resources rather than having local servers or personal devices to handle applications,” is a buzzword that has many lawyers up in arms.

For an even better description of cloud computing, watch this Common Craft video online at http://www.commoncraft.com/cloud-computing-video.

Examples of cloud computing used by many lawyers and their clients on a regular basis include Gmail and other Web-based e-mail services. Many platforms and services available to attorneys for use in their law practice that are cloud computing-based include practice management and document management software.

Cloud computing critics decry the trend of using cloud computing services in law practices. One of the main criticisms is that cloud computing may result in the loss or disclosure of confidential client data. Such concerns certainly are valid, and most certainly there are a number of issues that need to be addressed.

I would argue the security risks posed by cloud computing platforms are far less than the systems currently in place in most U.S. law offices. If the majority of law offices began using cloud computing services in their practice, client data would be far more secure than it is now.

Despite coverage in the mainstream media suggesting otherwise, the vast majority of lawyers are solo practitioners.  According to a 2006 report issued by the New York State Commission to Examine Solo and Small Firm Practice, more than 83 percent of New York attorneys are solo practitioners; 14.7 percent work in offices of between two and nine attorneys, and only 1.8 percent of attorneys work in large firms with 10 or more attorneys (See http://www.nycourts.gov/ip/solosmallfirmpractice/index.shtml.)

In other words, nearly 95 percent of New York lawyers work in very small law offices. The vast majority of those small firms don’t have IT support on staff, and most lawyers in those firms don’t know the first thing about computers.

Undoubtedly those attorneys continue to use systems and software from the late 1990s —at least, that’s the case in many law offices I’ve visited. Their anti-virus software is antiquated and their practice management software, if they even have it, has never been updated because most attorneys are too busy practicing law to bother with that “computer stuff.” Many don’t understand the importance of updating software and the security issues created when security patches are not installed.

For the vast majority lawyers, as long as their computers are basically functional, it’s business as usual because, as we all know, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

I would argue these law offices —like the vast majority throughout the country —are walking security hazards. Anyone with minimal computer skills and a passing interest in hacking into a law office’s computer system could do so in a heartbeat.

Cloud computing providers are newcomers to the legal software market. Their products aren’t perfect, but they are responding quickly to concerns raised regarding security and other issues. The cloud computing providers that offer software services host the software and data at extremely secure facilities with high levels of bank-grade encryption and update their programs automatically. The attorneys using the services no longer need to worry about these issues and are, in my opinion, in far better shape security-wise than they were before they began using cloud computing services.

Discounting the technologies by using scare tactics and rhetoric is short-sighted and harms the profession in the long run. Cloud computing technology providers are receptive to feedback and continuously adapt their products to meet critics’ legitimate concerns. While the technologies may not be perfect, they are improving rapidly and are a much better alternative to the current computing status quo at most law offices.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 5 so far )

Does cloud computing compromise clients?

Posted on November 9, 2009. Filed under: Cloud computing, Practice Management, The times they are a'changin' |

Drlogo11This week’s Daily Record column is entitled “Does cloud computing compromise clients?”

A pdf of the article can be found here and my past Daily Record articles can be accessed here.

******

Does cloud computing compromise clients?

I predict that within about two to three years, lawyers in most jurisdictions will communicate and collaborate with clients using some type of an encrypted network.

A number of states, including Massachusetts and Nevada, already have passed laws or regulations requiring certain types of confidential data to be sent electronically only via encrypted communications. More laws of that nature most certainly will follow, both at the state and federal level.

In my opinion, such laws —most of which apply primarily to financial institutions —ultimately will incorporate some of the types of client information contained in attorney-client communications, in large part because of rising concerns due to recent large-scale data disclosures.

In fact, that type of data breach is one of the primary reservations expressed by lawyers when considering whether to implement cloud computing platforms in their law practice.

A recent federal court decision fanned the fire, causing many attorneys to decry the use of cloud computing and assert that doing so violated the very basic obligation to protect confidential client communications and data.

In a decision issued last week by the U.S. District Court for District of Oregon, in In re U.S., Nos. 08-9131-MC, 08-9147- MC, the government argued successfully that it need not notify the account holder regarding a warrant served on the ISP holder of the e-mail account. In reaching its decision, the court gave lip service to the concept that e-mails are entitled to Fourth Amendment protections, but then stated:

Much of the reluctance to apply traditional notions of third-party disclosure to the e-mail context seems to stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of the lack of privacy we all have in our e-mails. Some people seem to think that they are as private as letters, phone calls, or journal entries. The blunt fact is, they are not.

In comparison, however, see footnote 7 from the October Memorandum and Order issued by the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, inU.S. v. Cioffi:

One preliminary matter is not in question: The government does not dispute that Tannin has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of his personal e-mail account.” See U.S. v. Zavala, 541 F3d 562,577 (Fifth Circuit 2008) (‘[C]ell phones contain a wealth of private information, including emails, text messages, call histories, address books, and subscriber numbers. [The defendant] had a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding this information.’); U.S. v. Forrester, 512 F3d 500, 511 (Ninth Circuit 2008) (‘E-mail, like physical mail, has an outside address ‘visible’ to the third-party carriers that transmit it to its intended location, and also a package of content that the sender presumes will be read only by the intended recipient. The privacy interests in these two forms of communication are identical. The contents may deserve Fourth Amendment protection, but the address and size of the package do not.’).

Accordingly, despite the fact the dicta in the Oregon decision flies in the face of binding precedent, online commentators repeatedly raised concerns regarding the decision, asserting it was further evidence that the use of cloud computing in law practices is ill-advised.

I would assert to the contrary the Oregon dicta is further evidence that the incorporation of encrypted client communications in cloud computing may well be the primary factor that convinces attorneys to accept cloud computing services as a legitimate law practice management alternative to traditional software packages.

A number of well-established cloud computing providers already incorporate encrypted communications in their platforms. For example, VLOTech, Clio and NetDocuments allow for varying types of encrypted communication with clients. Another online legal platform, NKrypt, is devoted to providing a secure, encrypted e-mail network.

Cloud computing providers are adapting quickly to and responding to the concerns raised by lawyers. As a result, lawyers are becoming increasingly comfortable with the concept of cloud computing. In fact, according to the 2009 Am Law Tech Survey, 84 percent of responding law firms already use SaaS (Software as a Service), a form of cloud computing, in some capacity.

As cloud computing becomes more prevalent in the legal field, more lawyers will understand the importance of carefully negotiating their contracts with the services providers to ensure that, for example, they are notified if a warrant relating to their data is served.

Mark my words: Cloud computing is the wave of the future, and encrypted communication is one of the keys to  putting attorney’s minds at ease regarding an emerging technology. Astute providers will incorporate encrypted communication into their platforms, and smart lawyers will learn about and use the emerging technology in their practice.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )

lawtechTalk Episode #5-Cloud Computing and Your Law Practice

Posted on September 11, 2009. Filed under: Practice Management |

Checkmark The fifth episode of lawtechTalk is now available.

This presentation will focus on three different types of online legal technologies.  In it I’ll discuss the concept of “cloud computing” and explore the main features of  each to help you figure out which will best meet your law firm’s needs.

This episode is a little over one hour long and is sponsored by the three companies featured in the screencast: VLOTech (a virtual law office platform), NKrypt (offers a secure, encrypted email network), and NetDocuments (online document management) and for a limited time, is available at no cost.

As a reader of my blog, you can simply click here to access this episode, instead of contacting me for information regarding how to access it.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( Comments Off on lawtechTalk Episode #5-Cloud Computing and Your Law Practice )

Should lawyers be wary of cloud computing and SaaS?

Posted on August 25, 2009. Filed under: Practice Management, Social Media, The times they are a'changin', Web 2.0 |

Drlogo11

This week’s Daily Record column is entitled “Should Lawyers Be Wary of Saas?.”

A pdf of the article can be found here and my past Daily Record articles can be accessed here.

*****

Should Lawyers Be Wary of SaaS?

Online services for lawyers are becoming increasingly common and, for many lawyers, are an attractive alternative to the traditional law practice management software installed and maintained on a local server within a law office.

Online services available to attorneys now include law practice management systems, document management platforms, secure email networks, digital dictation services and billing/timekeeping services.  The online platforms are attractive, economical and viable alternatives for firms of all sizes.

Online e-mail platforms also are increasing in popularity. Yahoo, Hotmail and Gmail now are the top three e-mail service providers in the United States, and are used by lawyers and clients alike.

The one thing these various platforms have in common is that the data created and managed by these services are stored offsite, in the “cloud.”   The offsite data storage issue has resulted in much speculation among lawyers regarding issues of data security and attorney-client confidentiality.

Before addressing those concerns, let’s define the concepts at issue.

“Cloud computing” is a “type of computing that is comparable to grid computing, relies on sharing computing resources rather than having local servers or personal devices to handle applications. The goal of cloud computing is to apply traditional supercomputing power (normally used by military and research facilities) to perform tens of trillions of computations per second.”

Software as a service —or SaaS —is defined at Oracle.com as “[a] software delivery model in which a software firm provides daily technical operation, maintenance, and support for the software provided to their client.”

In my opinion, the data security and confidentiality concerns regarding cloud computing are exaggerated and overblown.

Of course an attorney has an obligation to research how an SaaS provider will handle confidential information, and should determine how securely the data is stored. It is important to ensure the company stores the data on servers that meet current industry standards, performs back-ups regularly, and that you are satisfied
data will not be lost should a catastrophic event occur.

Concerns that third parties could access the data while traveling through the “cloud” are downright silly, in my opinion. Third parties always have had access to confidential client information, including process servers, court employees, document processing companies, external copy centers and legal document delivery services.

Employees of the building in which a law office is located also have had access to confidential files, including the cleaning service and other employees who maintain the premises. What about summer interns, temporary employees and contract attorneys?

The employees who manage and have access to computer servers are no different. In order to practice law effectively, third parties necessarily must have access to certain files. Assurances that the company in question will make reasonable efforts to ensure employees will not access confidential information is all that’s required.

The New York State Bar Association Committee on Professional Ethics reached a similar conclusion in Opinion 820-2/08/08, where it answered: “May a lawyer use an e-mail service provider that scans e-mails by computer for keywords and then sends or displays instantaneously (to the side of the e-mails in question) computer-generated advertisements to users of the service based on the e-mail communications?”

The committee concluded: “Unless the lawyer learns information suggesting that the provider is materially departing from conventional privacy policies or is using the information it obtains by computer-scanning of e-mails for a purpose that,
unlike computer-generated advertising, puts confidentiality at risk, the use of such e-mail services comports with DR 4-101…A lawyer may use an e-mail service provider that conducts computer scans of e-mails to generate computer advertising, where the e-mails are not reviewed by or provided to other individuals.”

In other words, common sense prevails. Lawyers must resist the urge to overreact to emerging technologies.

Common sense dictates that the same confidentiality standards applicable to physical client files likewise apply to computer-generated data. To conclude otherwise would be to prohibit lawyers from using computers in their law practices —an unrealistic and, quite frankly, ridiculous alternative.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 25 so far )

Getting Things Done Productivity System-The Weekly Review

Posted on July 17, 2009. Filed under: Practice Management |

RocketMatter Today, I bring you a guest post from my good friend, Larry Port, Founding Partner and Chief Software Architect for Rocket Matter, LLC (http://www.rocketmatter.com), a web-based law practice management system.  You can follow him on Twitter here: (http://www.twitter.com/rocketmatter).

*****

GTD For Legal: The Weekly Review

As part of our weeklong legal efficiency-fest, we’re discussing the Getting Things Done productivity system in the context of a law firm.  Each day this week, we’ll write guest posts at prominent legal blogs exploring the system in more detail.

A perfect way to wrap our Legal Getting Things Done Week is a discussion of the Weekly Review, one of the most important ideas in the GTD system.  In fact, I would argue that if you were going to take away one thing from GTD, implementing the Weekly Review will keep you in touch with your priorities and prevent your organizational system from coming unhinged.

What is the Weekly Review?

It’s a simple concept, but harder than it sounds.  You need to find an hour or two each week.  Block off time on your calendar where the phone can’t ring and the door can’t open.  For a busy attorney this can be very difficult, since deadlines, opposing counsel, and judges can pop in at any time.  We have some ideas about scheduling later on in this post.

In these review sessions, you must clear your head and process everything that happened that week.  Any notes jotted on legal pads, calendar appointments, or loose ideas need to be gathered up and captured.  It’s also a good time for a mini Mind-Sweep (click here to read our post on Mind-Sweeps).

Once you capture all of your loose ends, take a look at upcoming calendar events and determine any actions they need.  Then, organize your inbox into lists and review everything.  According to the GTD book, you’re done with your Weekly Review if you can say “I absolutely know right now everything I’m not doing but could be doing if I decided to” (Getting Things Done, Chapter 8).

Review your projects and take note of their status.  Examine your Next Action and Waiting For lists to check off anything completed and note supporting actions that might need to occur.  Look at your “Someday/Maybe” lists and see if you’d like to promote a project or remove ones that no longer hold your interest.  If you missed our discussion on some of these list categories, click here for an explanation.

Why is the Weekly Review of such paramount importance?

Busy lifestyles aren’t the problem.  It’s when an individual has a constant whirlwind of activity and doesn’t take time to organize action based on priority.  Attorneys, who live under the threat of looming deadlines, get called away to handle emergencies, and have family commitments, can quickly become overwhelmed by responsibilities. The result is that individuals constantly find themselves in “reaction” mode, leaving the individual unfocused, and when the dust clears, there’s not a system in place to handle activities in an organized way.

The Weekly Review allows you to operate as your own CEO.  Your Next Actions will descend from your priorities, and you can see each project or matter from a clear perspective.  You will also permit yourself to play catch-up with all of the incoming bits of information you collect throughout the week (that you can’t possibly deal with as they stream in).

I’m so busy.  How and when could I possibly schedule a Weekly Review?

Since the Weekly Review is very important to your organizational life, you’re going to want to make a positive habit out of it.  Even if your life seems too crazy to accommodate a couple of hours a week, it helps to recognize “the value of sacrificing the seemingly urgent for the truly important” (Getting Things Done, Chapter 8).

For attorneys, who often deal with mission-critical situations, you may need to find islands of time beyond normal work hours.  If you can swing Friday afternoon from 4-6PM or early Saturday morning, the extra time investment will pay dividends in the rest of your weekly operations.  At those periods at the end of the week, fresh from the week’s battle, you allow yourself to clear your mind, set up your next week, and focus on the weekend.

Thanks For Reading!

We hope our legal GTD week blog posts are beneficial to you.  For a list of all five posts for the week, click here for your future reference.  And thanks to our host bloggers, The Mac Lawyer, Grant Griffiths, Sam Glover, and Niki Black for allowing us to guest post on their sites this week!

Purchase “Getting Things Done” at Amazon.com.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( Comments Off on Getting Things Done Productivity System-The Weekly Review )

Law Practice Management in the Cloud

Posted on May 12, 2009. Filed under: Portability, Practice Management |

Drlogo11
This week’s Daily Record column is entitled “Law Practice Management in the Cloud.”

A pdf of the article can be found here and my past Daily Record articles can be accessed here.

*****

Software as a service (SaaS) is defined at Oracle.com as “[a] software delivery model in which a software firm provides daily technical operation, maintenance, and support for the software provided to their client.”

At Webopedia.com “cloud computing” is defined as a “type of computing that is comparable to grid computing, relies on sharing computing resources rather than having local servers or personal devices to handle applications. The goal of cloud computing is to apply traditional supercomputing power (normally used by military and research facilities) to perform tens of trillions of computations per second.”

The complexities of modern law practice are such that managing a law office in the absence of practice management software programs is nothing short of impossible. Traditional law practice management software can be expensive, however, cumbersome to navigate and prone to annoying glitches that occur so frequently that your IT consultant becomes a permanent fixture in your law office.

Sound familiar? Well, it doesn’t have to: Law firms today can avoid the headaches caused by traditional practice management software by using the services of any of a number of companies that provide SaaS.

Taking advantage of SaaS law practice management software allows firms to focus on the ever-important task of practicing law while the SaaS provider operates, updates and maintains the practice management software.

Advantages include lower costs due to reduced overhead, less hassle related to maintaining the and upgrading the case management system and greater flexibility, since the Web-based system can be accessed anywhere, at anytime.

Before making the leap to a Web-based practice management system, however, there are a number of important factors to consider.

Learn how the company will handle confidential data, the portability of the data and the format in which information will be provided should your firm choose to remove data from the system.

The contract with an SaaS provider should address those issues and also include a non-disclosure clause that indicates that all data are the property of the law firm and may be exported in a readable format on demand.

The security of your firm’s data is of paramount concern. Security issues to consider include: What type of facility will host the data? How frequently are back-ups performed? Is data backed up to more than one server? How secure are the data centers? What types of encryption methods are used and how are passwords stored? Are there redundant power supplies? Is there more than one server? Where are the servers located? If a natural disaster strikes one geographic region, would all data be lost?

If, after balancing the benefits and drawbacks, you decide to use a Web-based practice management system, there are a number of excellent SaaS providers that offer software to manage law practices online, including Clio (www.goclio.com), Rocket Matter (www.rocketmatter.com) and LawRD (www.lawrd.com).

Each software platform offers unique and useful features, which I’ll be comparing and contrasting later in the month during a screencast at lawtechTalk.com.

When law practice management software creates more problems than it solves, it may be time to make a change. After careful consideration, firms may find that the affordability and ease of use of a Web-based practice management system make it a perfect fit.

Attorneys may just find themselves praising, rather than cursing, newfangled technologies.

Now that would be a nice change.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 7 so far )

Don’t Fear Technology-Change is Good.

Posted on January 23, 2009. Filed under: Practice Management, Productivity, Social Media, The times they are a'changin', Uncategorized, Web 2.0 |

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about “There’s No Need To Fear Technology a…“, posted with vodpod

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

« Previous Entries

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...