Author:
24 Jan 2008 | 00:04
Lawyers and their support teams exist to serve their clients' requirements. Clients' requirements are always satisfied directly by lawyers in a personal relationship. The success of any law partnership is dependent on the successful delivery of services to clients by all the lawyers in the firm. However, at the moment a series of challenges have surfaced which has made this more difficult: escalating costs; lack of office space; backlogs in letter production and documentation due to staff shortages; the necessity of using temporary staff to alleviate short-term staff shortages; changes to the Legal Services Bill and a lack of qualified staff. Legal process outsourcing is undoubtedly an option that can help law firms address key challenges, but only if done correctly.
So how can a firm best go about using legal process outsourcing to their advantage?
- Minimise set up and management time. If getting an outsourcing arrangement right requires too much effort or time from fee earners, the direct cost savings will be lost, and it will lead to much in-house frustration and a lack of buy-in from key people. For example, dictation per minute/per line is hugely time consuming (in terms of set up and constant management) for the law firm. Fee earners should be spending their time on their core activities, servicing clients and billing for these services and not on the firm's outsourcing contracts. It should not be expended on systems changes and personnel issues. When an outsourcing relationship is set up, this potential pitfall must be avoided.
- Implementation needs to be evolutionary. The implementation of an outsourcing strategy need not be the cataclysmic, big-bang scenario that some might suggest, but an evolutionary process leading to business transformation. This needs to be characterised by a lack of redundancy for permanent back office staff, the implementation of progressive systems and the contracting of a UK company to manage the offshore relationship. By developing an outsourcing relationship that maximises the benefits of an offshoring strategy while minimising day-to-day disruption, the impact on the firm can be managed effectively.
Changes should be implemented gradually, rather than wholesale changes in one go. This will win over sceptical internal audiences who would not respond well to sudden large-scale disruption. In addition, focusing on areas where firms may already have high attrition, use temporary resources or have unacceptable documentation backlogs is potentially the best place to start an offshoring strategy, in order to increase service delivery with no reduction in UK headcount.
- Choose the correct processes to outsource. It is crucial to choose the correct processes to outsource, as well as the correct location to send these processes to. The multishoring model means different types of process can be sent to different locations. An example of a process not to outsource is customer contact - this is something that is core to all law firms' businesses. Secretarial work is a particularly good process to outsource as it allows in-house secretaries to focus on becoming paralegals - performing value-added tasks rather than the audio and copy typing that can be performed offshore. The offshoring of some basic secretarial services allows in-house secretaries to focus on higher-value, client-facing roles and provides them with an opportunity to fulfil their potential. This drives staff satisfaction and ensures quality staff are retained in-house, and attrition is lowered.
- It is vital to look beyond the cost savings. Focusing purely on cost savings would be a mistake. Service quality and convenience must be high on all lawyers' agendas. A common sentiment among lawyers seems to be, 'I do not care what it takes, just do it now and get it right first time'. This may be applicable to a lawyer's demands of their back office and equally of a client's demands from a lawyer. Outsourcing provides a means whereby a firm's support staff raise their game. By outsourcing the mundane day-to-day work to an environment where service delivery can be instilled via a contractual relationship (including weekend working or 24/7 working), in-house support staff will do more interesting and higher value tasks and therefore staff retention will increase.
- Planning and implementation must be done correctly from the outset, in order to maintain UK headcount and increase margins. Focusing on the back-office, mundane client business support functions, and the commoditised, non-client-facing repetitive legal processes (e.g. bulk conveyancing and initial contract drafting) can realise significant tangible and intangible benefits for UK law firms (including significant cost savings).
In terms of cost savings, a London law firm employing four secretaries will incur a cost of about £150,000 a year (including all ancillary benefits, bonuses, sickness and national insurance, etc). Typically, but dependent upon the individual department, around half of this work will be copy and audio transcription. If the copy and audio typing is performed offshore, a firm can expect to save £50,000 per year. Additionally, financial savings are accrued from a variable costing model whereby offshore support staff are not directly employed by the UK law firm and therefore the UK firm only pays for work completed. The overhead savings go beyond the salary differential. By moving the workload to another location, a firm can realise additional benefits in terms of office accommodation, either by closing offices (or downsizing), or by fitting more fee earners into office-space previously occupied by secretaries.
- Communication is key. To achieve success within an outsourcing arrangement it is vital that everyone involved understands the rationale behind the deal, the benefits, the approach and the timetable. In conjunction with this, open and honest communications with the law firm at large, will leave everyone well-informed of the firm's intentions. Offshoring is a realistic and cost-effective opportunity, but only if it is the right process that is outsourced, to the right partner, in the right location, in the right way.
Paul Aggett is chairman of Magellan Consultancy Services.
COMMENTS (TOTAL 1 COMMENTS)
Anyone who has experienced an overseas call centre recently will have come across the shortcomings of offshore outsourcing, in terms of it being good for cost-cutting but bad for customer service. This makes the concept of sending legal work abroad, however commoditised it may be, look shaky, particularly if the legal profession is to improve its well-publicised reputation for customer service. My company retains an experienced team of trained legal typists all based in the UK and many of our customers have switched to us following negative experiences with offshore outsourcing. Solicitors Vizards Tweedie selected an offshore outsourced transcription company as its principal supplier but soon found the service had limitations. A spokesperson from Vizards told us: "While there was a minimal time difference, we found that cultural factors still had an impact on the quality of transcriptions we received. Little things like typists not being able to spell 'Piccadilly' proved annoying, especially when we had paid the supplier a premium to give each document a second proofreading. More significantly, we also encountered a certain amount of internal resistance from fee earners, who had ethical reservations about sending work abroad. They felt that such work should be retained in the UK."Consequently, Vizards began looking into the transcription options available closer to home and now employs our services. Sending sensitive information abroad comes with other risks. In the case of India, even its own legal profession is concerned by the country's inability to deal with data theft, highlighted by a number of recent fraud cases involving outsourced financial services workers. Another critical point made in the article was that outsourcing legal work abroad would result in significant cost and time savings for busy firms. There is a case for this, but an equally strong case for the same savings being made by outsourcing within the UK. Before firms take the potentially risky step of sending work to places where it appears cheaper but comes with a hidden price, perhaps they would do better to look at their onshore outsourcing options first?
Posted by: Richard Bate, Voicepath
29 Jan 2008 | 15:36
RELATED JOBS
FURTHER READING
MOST READ
MOST COMMENTED
Advertisement
IT WHITE PAPERS
LATEST JOBS
Advertisement
RECRUITERS
COURSES
LEGAL EVENTS
SERVICES SECTION
The British Legal Awards recognize excellence, achievement and innovation. Awards entries open Monday 15 June 2009.
Search the UK for your next legal role using the interactive map feature on Regional Legal. Search by location or search by your particular skill set.
Empowering Individuals to Achieve Success - Lynn Wong Associates
Follow legalweekjobs.com on twitter and get the latest vacancies first. Make social networking work for you and receive updates every time a new job is added.
Join the LinkedIn In-house lawyers group to exchange information and forge working relationships.