Australian Corporate Lawyer - Autumn 2017

acla.acc.com
team only access, restricted business use,
or companywide? How does it need to be
accessed, i.e. from phone and smart devices?
• Budget – sometimes it is useful to show the
business cost saving and efficiency gains
which would outweigh the budget required
for the new technology. Most software
requires servicing and maintenance, which
could incur ongoing costs.
• Integration – assessing the ability to
integrate with other systems. Like every
company, our organisation works with
a number of technologies and there is
often resistance to implementing new
technology that has to be supported,
internally and externally. Therefore, the
more these systems can speak to each
other, remove duplications and provide a
smoother user experience the better.
• Implementation – consider implementation
and migration from other systems and
create a project plan.
• Assessment of potential vendors – running
a procurement process could be a good
way of getting a competitive offer and
additional benefits. It is also important to
think of ongoing support from the vendor
and how accessible that would be.
L.O.: For legal-led solutions, we take a
collaborative approach. Being that our
business is technology and especially data
security, we have a firm grasp on the core
drivers for any particular technology and the
associated risks. So once that due diligence
is complete, we let members of the team
assess how useful the technology would be to
them in their practice, then look at the wider
departmental, business and financial benefits.
Of course, internal security and IT stakeholders
will also have particular expertise and can be
an excellent resource to help understand the
“nuts and bolts” of a solution.
5. To what extent is a change in
corporate culture required when
adopting new legal technology?
How have you encouraged your
team and the wider organisation
to embrace the adoption of new
legal technology?
C.S.: I’ve been fortunate enough to work
in innovative and disruptive companies,
which means the conversation with the
wider organisation is often straight-forward.
Encouraging a team approach and having
team members participate in or lead the
process of assessing the team’s challenges and
finding the solutions can help. Taking small
steps rather than trying one “big bang” roll-out
can also be useful.
V.K.: Some of our systems now require clients
to do more via self-service portals, which
helps them help us. For example, we have
implemented an automated system, whereby
a user will answer a list of questions (and
sometimes have choices from a drop down
menu) to determine what contract they need
and what information should be included
in the contract. We are currently working
on further automating this process with
the intent that the system will generate the
agreement and the legal team will only have
to review the end product.
L.O.: Being a technology company, our
corporate culture is one of innovation,
collaboration and best practice. It’s my
expectation and that of my team that we
remain open to new ways of doing things
and always seek to refine and improve our
capabilities (both as practitioners and the tools
we can leverage). We want to deliver the best
possible outcomes for our clients. That means
that we must at all times have a frank and
open flow of information and ideas amongst
the team. Without exception, each team
member absolutely must feel empowered to
raise their voice and suggest improvements.
In my view, this is a fundamental tenet of
effective modern legal practice.
6. What approaches have you
taken to manage the
expectations of board members
or senior executives in your
organisation when adopting
new legal technology?
V.K.: We focus on highlighting the benefits,
efficiencies and advantages. Yet we also take
the time to explain that no system is perfect
and limitations exist in every new technology.
Certain technologies completely change the
way we work, as well as the user experience
and the interface, which means that we
need to factor an adaptation phase and
sometimes resistance from team members
and the business. There is an education and
change management side that needs to be
considered and built into the implementation
process so that people have time to adjust
and embrace the technology. Constructive
feedback is also helpful, but with the
understanding that a solution may not satisfy
everyone’s wish list.
7. How do you measure the
efficiencies brought about from
adopting new technology?
C.S.: This can be challenging, particularly
if there was no measure of efficiency or
output before adopting the new technology.
The solution itself might help measure
improvements over time. A sometimes
overlooked measure of success is stakeholder
feedback, whether informal or more objective
(such as using a “net promoter score” approach
which can be repeated over time).
D.B.: I think a broad measure of time savings
would be a strong contender here. If querying
regulations to find an answer drops from
hours to minutes, then it’s a clear winner. If a
machine learning engine can read a disclosure
document and flag 80% of infringing content
in seconds; it naturally follows that your time
and money can be directed elsewhere.
V.K.: Time, accessibility, transparency,
reporting abilities and budget.
L.O.: Data is critical, but so too is honest user
feedback and personal experience. For making
a proper assessment in relation to efficiency, it
would be imprudent to ignore either measure.
Sometimes the data can obscure or skew
the human element of human-technology
interaction. Likewise, the human element
VOLUME 27, ISSUE 1 – AUTUMN 2017
9