M - Voice For The Defense Online

VOICE for the defense
Dear Reader: I know what you are thinking —“Not another article on
law office technology!” How dry, boring, and what a waste of time. A
bunch of overpriced, unreliable, incomprehensible toys that will not help
me win cases and will just cause frustration and anxiety. I will never be
able to figure them out. Fahgedaboudit. Gimme an IBM Selectric® any
day. The secretaries can make do with what they have.
:: feature article
A persistent myth exists that a good lawyer armed with nothing more
than his file, a pen, and a legal pad can go down to the courthouse and
work magic. I cannot say whether this has ever been true. It is certainly
not true in the 21st century. Today, the results obtained in a case are
often directly related to the resources available with which to fight the
case. This does not mean money is never wasted on poorly or underutilized
technology or that spending more money guarantees better
results. Nor does it mean that unnecessary bells and whistles never
get in the way, acting as a detriment to productivity. Getting the right
technology integrated into your practice, so that everything there is
needed and everything needed is there, is one of the most important
decisions we can make in shaping our practices. Computer hardware
may be commoditized (or nearly so), but the creation of an information
technology (IT) system for a small law office 2 remains an art form — one
is not taught in most law schools.
ogy:
Office
This may explain why so few small law firms have good IT systems.
Their systems do not appear large enough to justify paying a high-priced
consultant to design and set them up; lawyers often do not know where
to find good consultants at a reasonable price; and the users are not
technically sophisticated enough to know what they are missing by
suffering with a poorly-considered system. Technology in many law offices
accumulates and is added to or replaced in a slap-dash, haphazard
manner. Instead of well-integrated systems, most small firms purchase
pieces/parts as needs arise, without considering how they will work
within the larger network. Pieces/parts get replaced or upgraded when
they break or become incompatible with newer pieces/parts, again
without a view to a larger design.
In June 2006, when our former law firm dissolved, Paul Looney, Kathryn
Marteeny and I began the firm of Conrad, Marteeny & Looney, P.C.
Because of our dissatisfaction with the resources of our former firm,
we decided to build a network that would impose greater efficiency
and work as a tool for winning cases through better preparation and
presentation. With a background in entertainment technology, I was
comfortable with using technology as a tool for greater productivity and
creativity, and aware of the pitfalls of poorly utilized technology. The
system we developed employs readily available, relatively inexpensive
tools, and resources that are easily mastered and maintained. It does
so systematically in a way that gets the most productivity from each
piece. Moreover, the entire system, including software and training, was
obtained for well under $17,000. The final price included the services
of a certified Microsoft® technician to get it up and running.
17 |