Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Three-Way Stop: Project Management, Technology and Process Improvement

By Micah Ascano
September 01, 2016

Legal Project Management has seen an explosion of interest from the legal industry in recent years. It has been touted as the key to efficient legal work and a cure-all for the woes of fixed fees, fee caps, and lawyers who blow budgets. However, I think there has become a disconnect with understanding why legal project management has been beneficial in creating efficiencies, to the point where it isn't understood why it doesn't or won't create efficiencies in certain situations.

Legal Project Management (LPM) consists of conducting legal matters with project management principles; Initiating, Planning, Managing/Monitoring, and Review. Initiating is focused on the opening of the matter and clearing identifying client goals as well as the scope of the matter. Planning focuses on both an initial timeline of work, what work will be done, and who will be doing it. Many lawyers get hung up on the idea that they can't have a plan because you can't see months, if not years, into the future of litigation. However, a plan is meant to be based on the best information available combined with reasonable assumptions, and should be updated and modified as more information is available. Managing/Monitoring is doing the work that was planned and monitoring that the plan is being followed as well as monitoring that the budget is on track. Last, Reviewing takes place at the close of a matter to see how the matter went in regard to how accurate the initial plan was, how closely the budget was followed, how satisfied the client is, and what can be done better next time.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.