PARA-TECHNICALS OR IT?
There has been a growing debate amongst major law firms, vendors, and Fortune 500 companies on whether or not they should be grooming their IT professionals or paralegals into shiny new Litigation Support staff.
Both approaches have pros and cons. This week two guest writers will outline their thoughts and ideas on which is best. On Friday, I will share my thoughts given what I see on the market as a whole.
The IT Department - Litigation Support's latest recruiting ground.
By Mark Lieb
© 2006 Ad Litem Consulting, Inc.
Is a legal background a prerequisite to providing top level litigation support? Can a firm hire an IT person and teach them to provide world class litigation support? These are questions facing most firms today. As the need for litigation support professionals becomes greater, firms with existing Litigation Support Departments are looking at both the paralegal and IT markets to find that next hire. For a field that becomes more technical daily, the selection of a technically trained professional is an obvious choice.
The marketplace has plenty of network engineers and programmers. One can "borrow" from the firm's own IT Department, but then that leaves another position open. Concurrently, colleges are graduating new technicians all the time. Fresh to market, their salary expectations can be quite reasonable.
Until recently an IT position did pay more than a Litigation Support job. There was also a greater chance for advancement. This seems to be changing as supply-demand economics and larger departments raise prices and job titles. At the top are those persons with the most experience who manage the department and consult with the legal teams. Below them are the "operations" folk, who primarily load data and create cds. The introduction of electronic discovery has forced the Litigation Support role to become technical. Photocopies were easy to manage by comparison. A paralegal could work on a case and contract for legal copying. Today, Litigation Support is a full time occupation responsible for a suite of software tools, monitoring server capacity, network utilization and other technical factors. This is in addition to working on projects specific to any client matter.
Litigation Support is also responsible for managing copious amounts of data, images and associated files. Remote access, storage, backup and disaster recovery are very real concerns for the Litigation Support Department. Tools, like Dataflight's FYI Server, provide an accounting of storage, bandwidth and other, traditionally, IT concerns. A person with a technical background will feel very comfortable representing the Litigation Department's best interests when addressing these types of concerns with the IT Department and outside vendors. But, will that same person be as confident when handling litigation case issues?
The transition from IT to Lit Support worked for me and for IT people I have coached into the marketplace. One can come from a tech background and succeed in this role. In fact, a formally trained technician may be the best person to recognize tech strategies which result in quicker review and lower vendor bills. Forensics may be new to many litigators and paralegals, but the technology is old news for IT professionals. The same is true for much of the technology just now entering the litigation software marketplace. Technicians are problem solvers who handle high pressure and short turnaround times in order to support every department, application and office for their company. They should be able to support the Litigation Department and a limited suite of applications.
The question before law firms today is whether to train someone who has an advanced technology education but a novice understanding of case lifecycle and the law to provide litigation support. The answer depends upon what type of support this person will provide. If the person is modifying load files, administrating user logins, burning images and converting ediscovery into databases, a technical background is advantageous. The new hire will learn about the case lifecycle and what is important during department and case team meetings. They can attend webinars and read books, like Litigation Support Department. As this person becomes more familiar with how technology compliments the case lifecycle, they will know enough to provide consulting to the legal team. While legal strategies change from one matter to another, the case lifecycle remains consistent. Collect, review, produce, depose, trial, rinse and repeat as necessary. Once learned, the litigation support professional can provide consultative, in addition to technical effort to
the case. This person will never file a motion, read a document or depose a witness. Their concerns and value lie elsewhere.
Some law firms have each litigation support person provide both the project management and technical work for their assigned cases. For these firms, the prospect of hiring a case lifecycle novice poses operational and organizational challenges. I contend that such a firm could benefit from transferring technical work away from existing Litigation Support staff. Senior persons are able to concentrate upon advanced issues, such as qualifying vendors, project management and consulting with the legal team, while the novice recruit learns to do everything else. Some firms have already hired full time electronic discovery technicians in an effort to save cost by moving services inside to the firm. As each technician has a time entry number, the next question is whether there are at least 1,000 billable hours a year of work, so they can pay for themselves.
Regardless of where the new hire comes from, the future of the Litigation Support professional is very bright. This individual is in a position to evaluate the litigation technology and support at the law firm and improve it. Within the law firms, this position can be one route to management. Within litigious industries where corporations face tremendous ediscovery costs, this position may also find a friendly home.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Mark R. Lieb is the President of Ad Litem Consulting and author of the books, Litigation Support Department and Litigation Support Technical Standards. Mr. Lieb has provided Litigation Support to legal teams for cases ranging from small collections to multinational, multi-firm litigation, involving millions of pages of ediscovery. He currently consults with firms, law departments, service bureaus and software companies on litigation technology best practices. If you would like to learn more about using technology in litigation, please feel free to visit Ad Litem Consulting, www.AdLitem.com, or call (866) 477-4523.
Both approaches have pros and cons. This week two guest writers will outline their thoughts and ideas on which is best. On Friday, I will share my thoughts given what I see on the market as a whole.
The IT Department - Litigation Support's latest recruiting ground.
By Mark Lieb
© 2006 Ad Litem Consulting, Inc.
Is a legal background a prerequisite to providing top level litigation support? Can a firm hire an IT person and teach them to provide world class litigation support? These are questions facing most firms today. As the need for litigation support professionals becomes greater, firms with existing Litigation Support Departments are looking at both the paralegal and IT markets to find that next hire. For a field that becomes more technical daily, the selection of a technically trained professional is an obvious choice.
The marketplace has plenty of network engineers and programmers. One can "borrow" from the firm's own IT Department, but then that leaves another position open. Concurrently, colleges are graduating new technicians all the time. Fresh to market, their salary expectations can be quite reasonable.
Until recently an IT position did pay more than a Litigation Support job. There was also a greater chance for advancement. This seems to be changing as supply-demand economics and larger departments raise prices and job titles. At the top are those persons with the most experience who manage the department and consult with the legal teams. Below them are the "operations" folk, who primarily load data and create cds. The introduction of electronic discovery has forced the Litigation Support role to become technical. Photocopies were easy to manage by comparison. A paralegal could work on a case and contract for legal copying. Today, Litigation Support is a full time occupation responsible for a suite of software tools, monitoring server capacity, network utilization and other technical factors. This is in addition to working on projects specific to any client matter.
Litigation Support is also responsible for managing copious amounts of data, images and associated files. Remote access, storage, backup and disaster recovery are very real concerns for the Litigation Support Department. Tools, like Dataflight's FYI Server, provide an accounting of storage, bandwidth and other, traditionally, IT concerns. A person with a technical background will feel very comfortable representing the Litigation Department's best interests when addressing these types of concerns with the IT Department and outside vendors. But, will that same person be as confident when handling litigation case issues?
The transition from IT to Lit Support worked for me and for IT people I have coached into the marketplace. One can come from a tech background and succeed in this role. In fact, a formally trained technician may be the best person to recognize tech strategies which result in quicker review and lower vendor bills. Forensics may be new to many litigators and paralegals, but the technology is old news for IT professionals. The same is true for much of the technology just now entering the litigation software marketplace. Technicians are problem solvers who handle high pressure and short turnaround times in order to support every department, application and office for their company. They should be able to support the Litigation Department and a limited suite of applications.
The question before law firms today is whether to train someone who has an advanced technology education but a novice understanding of case lifecycle and the law to provide litigation support. The answer depends upon what type of support this person will provide. If the person is modifying load files, administrating user logins, burning images and converting ediscovery into databases, a technical background is advantageous. The new hire will learn about the case lifecycle and what is important during department and case team meetings. They can attend webinars and read books, like Litigation Support Department. As this person becomes more familiar with how technology compliments the case lifecycle, they will know enough to provide consulting to the legal team. While legal strategies change from one matter to another, the case lifecycle remains consistent. Collect, review, produce, depose, trial, rinse and repeat as necessary. Once learned, the litigation support professional can provide consultative, in addition to technical effort to
the case. This person will never file a motion, read a document or depose a witness. Their concerns and value lie elsewhere.
Some law firms have each litigation support person provide both the project management and technical work for their assigned cases. For these firms, the prospect of hiring a case lifecycle novice poses operational and organizational challenges. I contend that such a firm could benefit from transferring technical work away from existing Litigation Support staff. Senior persons are able to concentrate upon advanced issues, such as qualifying vendors, project management and consulting with the legal team, while the novice recruit learns to do everything else. Some firms have already hired full time electronic discovery technicians in an effort to save cost by moving services inside to the firm. As each technician has a time entry number, the next question is whether there are at least 1,000 billable hours a year of work, so they can pay for themselves.
Regardless of where the new hire comes from, the future of the Litigation Support professional is very bright. This individual is in a position to evaluate the litigation technology and support at the law firm and improve it. Within the law firms, this position can be one route to management. Within litigious industries where corporations face tremendous ediscovery costs, this position may also find a friendly home.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Mark R. Lieb is the President of Ad Litem Consulting and author of the books, Litigation Support Department and Litigation Support Technical Standards. Mr. Lieb has provided Litigation Support to legal teams for cases ranging from small collections to multinational, multi-firm litigation, involving millions of pages of ediscovery. He currently consults with firms, law departments, service bureaus and software companies on litigation technology best practices. If you would like to learn more about using technology in litigation, please feel free to visit Ad Litem Consulting, www.AdLitem.com, or call (866) 477-4523.
1 Comments:
It's an interesting quandary, but not one that cannot be solved with a little out of the box thinking.
There is no doubt there is a dearth of mature talent in the marketspace. Fortune 1000 Corporations and the AMLAW 250 have been fishing in the same finite Litigation/Practice Support talent pool for a few years now and as to be expected, the mature stock has been depleted. So, the question, so aptly put by Mark is, grow organically or import? If you grow organically, there are largely 2 groups from which to pull talent, IT and the Paralegal Corps. One can certainly groom a tech savvy legal assistant for the litigation support role and the same is true for IT folks that have the aptitude and desire to learn more about the Litigation Data Lifecycle issues and processes. I doubt there is little argument against this approach, in fact its the right thing for many organizations that want to fill the traditional litigation support role.
I think the last 4 words of the above paragraph should trigger some thinking. If you are grooming to backfill a role, fine. If you are grooming to have competitive advantage and differentiators that affect the bottom line, perhaps a slightly different approach might be in order. Lets face it, given the ever increasingly technical and procedural complexities brought on by legal precedent and legislation, in the litigation support data lifecycle management field and the role of the litigation support department is increasingly advisory. Once upon a time (its still the case to a large extent), litigation support personnel were perceived as data jockeys.
Today, its not uncommon to have litigation support personnel assist with FRCP 26 planning and conferences. Obviously, this level of assistance is of a highly consultative nature, notwithstanding the fact that the personnel that render this kind of assistance have the corps competencies of their more traditional predecessors. The "new" litigation support professional bills (to the extent this is the model used by the firm) at a higher rate, and is a client facing person who can also help clients with litigation response plans.
Where might one find the profile for this type of person? Law schools. What qualifications may they have? When I was in law school I met lots of folks that had MICROSOFT certifications, networking experience and the like - I was one of them. A good complement of these folks are seeking the kind of career paths that many law firms could and should offer them, but the out of the box thinking that facilitates these types of dialogs, simply have not gained significant ground yet.
At the end of the day, the point is as follows; yes...its great to cross pollinate from the existing stock, but if we use nature as a guide, enhancing the gene pool with an infusion of characteristics and traits from non traditional human capital resource pools that create a new litigation support phenotype (I was a bio major once) and skillset profile is probably where we're we'll see the industry heading.
Richard E. Davis | Practice Support Manager
Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
One Broadway | New York, NY 10004-1007
212.908.6478 Phone |
By
Anonymous, at 5/23/2006 12:51 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home