Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Creating a Catalyst For Change
Like many other companies, my employer, Rockwell Automation, wanted to become more cost-efficient, have the capability to perform benchmarking, make the best staffing decisions and serve our business proactively by providing legal advice that helps lower and manage the company's risks. However, our inability to monitor and report on our outside counsel spending was holding us back from meeting these goals. With the help of an outside consultant, we were advised to implement a solution that combines e-billing, matter management and reporting ' which was a fairly new concept a few years ago.
Under the direction of Doug Hagerman, our new general counsel (“GC”), I was assigned to lead a team in implementing a legal enterprise management system from Bridgeway Software. Serving as both Law Department Advisor and Project Manager, my role was to help select, design and implement an e-billing/matter management solution, which can be tricky business to say the least. I knew this firsthand because we had already implemented two different solutions over the span of three years. Implementing Bridgeway's matter-management offering, eCounsel, as our second solution was a success due to many factors, but there is no question that lessons learned from the first implementation came in very handy this time around.
Based on this course of implementation, my team and I recognized four major areas that led to the overall success of the project.
Four Keys to Success
Success Key #1. “Tone from the top” was the first step in our successful implementation. After all, if we were unable to get buy-in from our own GC and other law department leaders, why would our users or outside law firms? Recognizing this, Hagerman set the tone early on and challenged us to become an “information-enabled department.” By articulating his expectations, vision and supportive direction, he has helped guide my team and communicate goals to colleagues and outside counsel.
Internally, our team responded to the call. One cannot stress how important it is to set expectations and let management know that key staff will be spending a considerable amount of time supporting the new implementation. Even though it is a temporary situation, it is still critical that management allow this level of attention to the project.
Externally, we held firm on the decision that if a law firm wants to do business with us, they will need to comply with our billing requirements. Well-prepared and organized communications, particularly those endorsed by the GC, are essential when you contact law firms about your project. You must establish your requirements and really mean what you say. For example, out of almost 150 firms we instructed to submit e-bills, only one firm refused. We no longer use that firm, and we've never had another decline.
Success Key #2. We didn't rush our custom business and invoice rules. While other organizations may attempt to make the system perfect on Day One with every requirement in place, we took a more pragmatic approach.
For instance, we went live with the matter management and e-billing solution using the pre-defined rules, knowing we would add custom rules in the following months. Taking the time to decide what you can use out-of-the-box, and agreeing to fill in any remaining requirements with custom rules at a later date, is often the best solution, particularly because the standard rule set will meet most of a client's needs. Let's face it, the more diverse your practice groups, the tougher it is to build custom rules that will work within them. What works for your patent prosecution matters may not work for your litigation matters.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.