Category: Enterprise Legal Management

The Long Road to Business Process Automation and Apptitude Part II: More Early Predecessors

Posted on January 16, 2019 by - Business Process Management, Contract Lifecycle Management, Enterprise Legal Management

“Daedalus…had the power to construct statues endowed with motion and to compel gold to feel human sensations.”
– Callistratus, Descriptions, 4th century A.D.

In part one of this series we discussed some early attempts at automation, some more successful than others. Surprisingly, we can push the history of automation back even further to about 762 B.C. in ancient Greece. In Homer’s Illiad, he discusses the workshop of Hephaestus and the automatons that worked for him. These automatons were basically mechanical robots that served different purposes. For example, his tripodes khryseoi (golden tripods) were wheeled tripods that would wheel themselves in and out of the halls of the gods during the great feasts as they were needed. There were at least seven other named automatons used to carry out various tasks and missions. Although these automatons lived only in the realm of myth (as far as we know), the fact that automation was already being pondered in the 8th century BC is amazing in itself.

Pushing forward many centuries we find more solid evidence of real automation which laid the groundwork for modern business process automation and our process automation platform, Apptitude. In the 12th century AD, Ismail Al-Jazari created his famous Castle Clock. This clock was renowned in its day for its magnificence and accuracy in telling time, but its foreshadowing of automation is undeniable. Replicas of this clock can be found throughout the world today, including the United States. Through trial and error, Al-Jazari used gears, chains, wood, metal, a float chamber, flow regulator, and water to make the huge clock work. Every hour, doors would open automatically to reveal a figurine, and two gold falcon automata would drop balls into vases waiting below. Automata were a highlight of this wonder. Three times a day, five robotic, mechanical musicians would automatically perform musical pieces when activated by a water-driven camshaft. They would be activated by a system of pulleys, water trough and a water-powered “scoop” wheel. The clock also featured several displays, including the lunar and solar orbits and the zodiac. A crescent moon-shaped disc would move across the frieze indicating minutes.

Al-Jazari’s Castle Clock
Al-Jazari’s Castle Clock

In 1804 an inventor in France had developed several types of looms; including one with a treadle for power and another for weaving fishing nets. But Joseph Jacquard’s most famous invention was an automatic mechanical loom that used pasteboard cards with punched holes to control the process of weaving complex patterns. Prior to this invention, weaving intricate, figured designs was a slow and very laborious process. It required two operators: the skilled weaver and the draw boy to operate the loom. Jacquard felt there had to be a way to simplify the process for weaving complex patterns, and that a mechanism could be developed to make this happen. After much experimentation and trial and error, Jacquard succeeded in making the first programmable loom. Many hundreds or even thousands of these cards would be strung together, each card representing one row of the woven design. Jacquard’s invention was a landmark in computing history and not a fly-by-night fad by any means, since punched cards for computing were in use until the 1980s.


Jacquard’s Loom, showing coded punched cards

Onit would like to pay homage to these and all inventors whose ideas were guiding lights and blazed the path to the modern process automation. Every business process automation platform, including Apptitude, truly has a deep heritage going back many centuries.

Onit Secures $200 Million Strategic Investment from K1 Investment Management to Accelerate Global Growth

Posted on January 8, 2019 by - Business Process Management, Company News and Events, Enterprise Legal Management

Onit is thrilled to announce that K1 Investment Management has made a $200 million strategic investment in our company. With the investment, Onit will scale operations to meet the increasing demand for innovative, market-leading process automation technology and enhance its back-end infrastructure to increase its scalable platform to meet continued growing client demand. Additionally, the investment will help fund go-to-market strategies, accelerate new product development and increase functionality of existing product offerings.

Onit’s CEO Eric M. Elfman is especially thrilled about this investment – “We are very excited to partner with K1 and their significant investment in our company further demonstrates the continued growth trajectory for Onit. We believe that we are clearly proving that our approach to streamlining business process – creating better workflows and not better databases – fundamentally sets us apart in the industry and is driving growth. We have the only end-to-end platform that solves workflow and process challenges across the enterprise. In fact, we have configured and deployed more than 200+ solutions and are instrumental in driving the transformation with some of the most innovative global companies in the world. As we scale to meet increasing demand, we are excited to also accelerate our investment in product development, resources and operations.”

Likewise, K1’s Managing Partner Neil Malik shares enthusiasm about this deal – “Onit’s platform has raised the bar on what users expect from software that extends beyond legal across the enterprise. We’ve seen the company more than triple its customer base and revenue in two years and we have tremendous confidence in the management team’s long–term vision. It’s exciting to partner with a team that pioneered the legal software space nearly 20 years ago and to now see how their innovative solutions are transforming the way Fortune 500 companies and legal departments operate.”

Onit’s client Anna-Lisa Corrales of Jaguar Land Rover North America offered her excitement on hearing the news – “We are on a legal transformation journey at Jaguar Land Rover toward greater efficiency and effectiveness, and the partnership between our law department and Onit has been instrumental in accelerating this process. We had to rethink the use of our internal and external resources and knew that we wanted to build partnerships with technology experts to help drive this revolution. We found that commitment from Onit and its management team. Rooted in an innovative system architecture that supports our needs for process automation, workflow and collaboration, Onit’s platform can enable best-in-class solutions for our growth today and in the future.”

Read the press release.

Corporate Counsel Best of 2019 Survey: A Great Opportunity for Onit Customers

Posted on December 21, 2018 by - Company News and Events, Enterprise Legal Management

It’s that time of year for the 4th annual Best of Corporate Counsel reader choice survey! Today is your chance to let your voice be heard: Who are the top law firms and legal service providers serving the nation’s legal industry? As a valued Onit customer, we wanted to pass along an opportunity to participate in Corporate Counsel’s Best of Corporate Counsel 2019 survey. We at Onit are hoping that you’ve been happy with our services, and if so, we encourage you to vote.

It’s time to recognize and celebrate your trusted business partners’ products, services and expertise in the 2019 Best of Corporate Counsel – a survey of the top solution providers servicing the legal industry. Whether it’s the best service, best product, best value – now is your opportunity to shower them with praise. Vote today!

Voting is open through 11:59 pm ET January 4, 2019. While voters do not need to cast their opinion in every category, we do encourage you to answer as many as possible! Finalists in each category will be determined by the popular vote, so we encourage you to forward this survey across your network — best of luck, and congratulations to all of our 2019 nominees!

There are a lot of categories in the survey, so here’s a shortcut to finding Onit. We’re in category #30, “Who offers the nation’s best matter management software?”

Click here to take the survey.

Enterprise Legal Management and Process Problems: Take Ultimate Ownership of Your Process Management

Posted on December 10, 2018 by - Business Process Management, Enterprise Legal Management

“Most people have a very strong sense of organizational ownership, but I think what people have to own is an innovation agenda.”

-Satya Nadella, CEO Microsoft

Have you been looking at your department’s process management in terms of data problems? Join the crowd – we’ve all be guilty of that. But 2019 is right around the corner and we should be ringing in the New Year by thinking in terms of process problems and a workflow-based approach. Traditional data-centric enterprise legal management (ELM) is a thing of the past and we need to move on. A solution-based approach to legal operations management by breaking up ELM into individual task-based solutions and processes is not some passing high-tech fad, but the way of the future – and challenges the older data-focused matter management model.

A system that allows its users to create and incorporate the discrete capabilities and components of a broader enterprise system “as they need them” is the way to go. Core matter management and e-billing functionality that can be augmented through a collection of solutions designed to address discrete operational activities allows users to scale the system in an appropriate manner consistent with operational goals.

Again, we should be looking at the elements of ELM as process problems instead of data problems. When we do this, we’re clearly taking more ownership in business process management, even though we may not immediately realize it. And in order for corporate legal to be a true corporate citizen, it needs to have a deeper stake in business processes.

Learn more about Onit’s enterprise legal management solution.

How Can Legal Departments Add Value to Law Firms During Onboarding?

Posted on December 3, 2018 by - Enterprise Legal Management

Getting your law firms onboarded as efficiently and painlessly as possible is a key factor in the overall success of a legal e-billing project.

Although e-billing vendors now have considerable experience in supporting legal departments through the implementation, there needs to be more emphasis placed on the problems and issues law firms face. While the technical aspects of the e-billing solution may be well documented, it is often the overlooked non-technical issues that cause law firms the most significant problems.

These issues can include: How should the law firm be organized to implement e-billing – should it be a centralized function or not? What additional processes must the firm implement to ensure that billing data is accurate and timely? What additional resources and IT system changes will be needed to meet the requirements of e-billing?

While most law firms can overcome these major issues, either on their own or with some external consultancy, there are detailed aspects that can be unique to your project. When you start onboarding, you can expect to receive a list of questions from your firm that cover these specific areas. These questions include:

  • What is the scope of the implementation, i.e., which law firm offices, which of your entities, and what matter types are in scope?
  • Will you require UTBMS codes, i.e., which Task/Activity/Expense codes are mandatory?
  • What are the recognized timekeeper classifications?
  • Which LEDES file formats are accepted, or how else can law firms submit billing data?
  • Do you require Work in Progress (WIP) information to be submitted?
  • Are there any special billing requirements, and how should fixed fee work be billed?
  • How will the firms be instructed on new matters?
  • How are charging rates managed and validated?
  • What are the payment processes for valid invoices?
  • What validation rules apply, e.g., what expenses will you reject, and which timekeeper types cannot get a charge?
  • It helps to be proactive and think about these questions from the start of the project.

You must also provide a Billing Guidelines document containing rules and processes for the firms to follow. We recommend a dedicated law firm success resource to help ensure the project addresses these questions and removes frustration for firms.

Onit’s European legal spend management solution BusyLamp eBilling.Space provides this for every project in the form of Bryan King, who has over 15 years of e-billing onboarding experience, initially at Clifford Chance. While indirectly working for the legal department, this person assists all law firms with onboarding and implementation and provides a single liaison point between vendors, firms, and the legal department. Many law firms are familiar with e-billing now. Still, those less experienced firms welcome the opportunity to have the assistance of an individual who understands the issues often faced by the law firm.

These two quotes show how valuable this is for firms; the first is from the e-billing Manager of a large international City firm, and the second is from the Finance Director of a smaller regional UK firm.

“I have been involved with e-billing for around ten years at various major UK law firms. As it evolves, the challenges are increasing. Clients often have dramatically different approaches and requirements. What is undoubtedly critical to the successful implementation of e-billing is an effective onboarding process. I firmly believe that BusyLamp appointing Bryan King as a lead was an excellent business decision. With his law firm insight and expertise, he has been able to play a vital role of considerable value by assisting both the client and BusyLamp with law firm questions and confirming when those firms have raised pertinent questions or made observations of merit. This drives a more effective onboarding process which focusses on key areas of challenge which historically have been overlooked until post-implementation, which typically manifest in a backlog of rejected e-bills.”

“This is the first time that we have seen someone like Bryan working for an e-billing vendor. Usually, the vendor sends us a letter about a client requiring Billing, and we are left to get on with it (…) so useful having someone to answer our questions and who understands our concerns and issues.”

HOW CAN LEGAL DEPARTMENTS HELP THEIR FIRMS WITH E-BILLING?

Every e-billing implementation will benefit from a clear set of rules documenting working practices and expectations around the client billing function. Your e-billing vendor will advise you on what to include. Download this handy guide for some examples. Providing these clear rules will mean your firms will be ready and able to use the solution and provide successful e-billing.

  • Go above and beyond ‘help desk’ level support for your firms by appointing someone (or selecting a vendor who provides someone) who understands law firm issues and works collaboratively with them through their onboarding process.
  • Work with your vendor to answer a list of questions in anticipation of receiving them from your firms and be prepared to work with the law firm success manager to answer further queries as they arise.
  • Make sure you have selected a solution that prioritizes the law firm experience in the interface through training and onboarding and using the latest technology to reduce the administrative burden for outside counsel.

E-billing offers great opportunities for you and your law firms to work collaboratively on a non-legal project with common goals. The aim should be to reduce billing errors, enhance the quality of billing information and improve decision-making processes. Implementing e-billing software is also a chance to work more effectively and efficiently with your outside counsel in a win-win partnership.

Request a demo of BusyLamp eBilling.Space today.

WIE RECHTSABTEILUNGEN KANZLEIEN WÄHREND DES ONBOARDINGS HELFEN 

Posted on December 3, 2018 by - Enterprise Legal Management

Ein Schlüsselfaktor für den Gesamterfolg eines e-Billing-Projekts im Rechtswesen ist es, die Kanzleien so effizient und reibungslos wie möglich an Bord zu holen. 

Obwohl die Legal e-Billing Anbieter inzwischen über beträchtliche Erfahrung bei der Unterstützung von Rechtsabteilungen während der Einführung verfügen, wird weniger Wert auf die Herausforderungen und Fragen gelegt, mit denen Anwaltskanzleien konfrontiert sind. Während die technischen Aspekte der Legal e-Billing Lösung gut dokumentiert sein mögen, sind es oft die nicht-technischen Aspekte, die Anwaltskanzleien die größten Probleme bereiten, und diese werden übersehen. 

Zu diesen Herausforderungen und aufkommenden Fragestellungen können gehören: Wie sollte die Anwaltskanzlei organisiert sein, um die elektronische Rechnungsstellung einzuführen – sollte sie zentralisiert werden oder nicht? Welche zusätzlichen Prozesse muss die Kanzlei einführen, um sicherzustellen, dass die Rechnungsdaten korrekt sind? Welche zusätzlichen Ressourcen und IT-Systemänderungen sind erforderlich, um die Anforderungen von Legal e-Billing zu erfüllen? 

Die meisten Anwaltskanzleien sind zwar in der Lage, diese Hauptprobleme entweder selbst oder mit Hilfe externer Beratung zu lösen, doch gibt es auch Detailaspekte, die für Ihr Projekt einzigartig sein können. Wenn Sie mit dem Onboarding beginnen, können Sie davon ausgehen, dass Sie von Ihrer Kanzlei eine Liste von Fragen erhalten, die diese spezifischen Bereiche abdecken. Zu diesen Fragen gehören: 

  • Welchen Umfang hat die Implementierung, d. h. welche Kanzleien, welche Ihrer Standorte und welche Arten von Rechtsangelegenheiten sind davon betroffen? 
  • Werden Sie UTBMS-Codes benötigen, d. h. welche Aufgaben-/Tätigkeits-/Ausgabencodes sind obligatorisch? 
  • Welches sind die anerkannten Klassifizierungen der Timekeeper? 
  • Welche LEDES-Dateiformate werden akzeptiert oder wie können Anwaltskanzleien sonst noch Rechnungsdaten einreichen? 
  • Müssen Informationen über laufende Arbeiten (WIP) eingereicht werden? 
  • Gibt es besondere Anforderungen an die Rechnungsstellung und wie sollen Festhonorare abgerechnet werden? 
  • Wie werden die Kanzleien in neue Rechtsangelegenheiten eingewiesen? 
  • Wie werden die Abrechnungssätze verwaltet und validiert? 
  • Wie sehen die Zahlungsverfahren für gültige Rechnungen aus? 
  • Welche Validierungsregeln gelten, z. B. welche Auslagen werden abgelehnt und welche Arten von Zeitnehmern können nicht berechnet werden? 

Es ist hilfreich, proaktiv zu sein und diese Fragen schon zu Beginn des Projekts zu bedenken. Außerdem müssen Sie ein Dokument mit Abrechnungsrichtlinien (Billing Guidelines) bereitstellen, das Regeln und Verfahren enthält, die von den Kanzleien zu befolgen sind. (Weitere Informationen und praktische Beispiele für Billing Guidelines finden Sie in unserem kostenlosen Leitfaden). 

Um sicherzustellen, dass das Projekt diese Fragen angeht und die Frustration der Anwaltskanzleien beseitigt, stellt Onit für die Legal Spend Management-Lösung BusyLamp eBilling.Space für jedes Projekt einen Speziallisten zur Seite. Bryan King hat mehr als 15 Jahre Erfahrung mit dem Onboarding von Legal e-Billing, zunächst bei Clifford Chance. Er arbeitet auch indirekt für die Rechtsabteilung, indem er alle Anwaltskanzleien beim Onboarding und der Implementierung unterstützt und eine zentrale Verbindungsstelle zwischen dem Anbieter, den Anwaltskanzleien und der Rechtsabteilung bildet. Viele Anwaltskanzleien sind inzwischen mit der elektronischen Rechnungsstellung vertraut, aber die weniger erfahrenen Kanzleien begrüßen die Möglichkeit, von einem Experten unterstützt zu werden, der die Herausforderungen kennt, mit denen die Kanzleien häufig konfrontiert sind. 

Die beiden folgenden Zitate zeigen, wie wertvoll dies für die Unternehmen ist. Das erste Zitat stammt von einem e-Billing Manager eines großen internationalen Unternehmens, das zweite vom Finanzdirektor eines kleineren regionalen britischen Unternehmens. 

„Ich bin seit etwa zehn Jahren in verschiedenen großen britischen Anwaltskanzleien mit der elektronischen Rechnungsstellung befasst. Mit der Weiterentwicklung wachsen auch die Herausforderungen. Die Kunden haben oft sehr unterschiedliche Ansätze und Anforderungen. Entscheidend für die erfolgreiche Einführung von e-Billing ist zweifelsohne ein effektiver Einführungsprozess. Ich bin fest davon überzeugt, dass die Ernennung von Bryan King zum Leiter von BusyLamp eine ausgezeichnete Geschäftsentscheidung war. Mit seinen Kenntnissen über Anwaltskanzleien und seinem Fachwissen konnte er eine wichtige und wertvolle Rolle spielen, indem er sowohl den Kunden als auch BusyLamp bei Fragen der Anwaltskanzleien unterstützte und bestätigte, wenn diese Kanzleien sachdienliche Fragen gestellt oder wichtige Anmerkungen gemacht hatten. Dies führt zu einem effektiveren Onboarding-Prozess, der sich auf die wichtigsten Problembereiche konzentriert, die in der Vergangenheit bis nach der Implementierung übersehen wurden, was sich in der Regel in einem Rückstau von abgelehnten eBills manifestiert.“ 

„Dies ist das erste Mal, dass wir jemanden wie Bryan für einen E-Billing-Anbieter arbeiten sehen. Normalerweise schickt uns der Anbieter ein Schreiben, in dem er uns mitteilt, dass ein Kunde elektronische Rechnungen benötigt, und wir werden damit allein gelassen (…) es ist also sehr nützlich, jemanden zu haben, der unsere Fragen beantwortet und unsere Bedenken und Probleme versteht.“ 

  • Jede e-Billing-Implementierung profitiert von einem klaren Regelwerk, das die Arbeitspraktiken und Erwartungen in Bezug auf die Kundenabrechnungsfunktion dokumentiert. Ihr e-Billing-Anbieter wird Sie beraten, was Sie aufnehmen sollten. Laden Sie diesen praktischen Leitfaden mit einigen Beispielen herunter. Wenn Sie diese klaren Regeln aufstellen, sind Ihre Unternehmen bereit und in der Lage, die Lösung zu nutzen und erfolgreich e-Billing anzubieten.  
  • Stellen Sie jemanden ein (oder wählen Sie einen Anbieter aus, der jemanden zur Verfügung stellt), der die Probleme von Anwaltskanzleien versteht und mit ihnen während des Onboarding-Prozesses zusammenarbeitet. 
  • Arbeiten Sie mit Ihrem Legal e-Billing Anbieter zusammen, um den Fragenkatalog, den Sie von Ihren Anwaltskanzleien erhalten werden, zu beantworten. Seien Sie darüber hinaus darauf vorbereitet, mit dem Projektmanager der Anwaltskanzlei zusammenzuarbeiten, um weitere Fragen zu beantworten, die während des Prozesses auftauchen können. 
  • Vergewissern Sie sich, dass Sie eine Lösung gewählt haben, bei der auch die Erfahrung der Anwaltskanzlei im Vordergrund steht. Sei es bei der Schnittstelle, bei der Schulung, beim Onboarding und durch den Einsatz modernster Technologie zur Verringerung des Verwaltungsaufwands für externe Anwälte. 

Die elektronische Rechnungsstellung bietet Ihnen und Ihren Anwaltskanzleien großartige Möglichkeiten, gemeinsam an einem nicht-juristischen Projekt und mit einer Reihe gemeinsamer Ziele zu arbeiten. Das Ziel sollte darin bestehen, Rechnungsfehler zu reduzieren, die Qualität der Rechnungsdaten zu verbessern und die Entscheidungsprozesse zu optimieren. Die Einführung von E-Billing-Software ist auch eine Chance für eine effektivere und effizientere Zusammenarbeit mit Ihren externen Anwälten in einer Win-Win-Partnerschaft. 

The Hidden Costs of Legal Spend Management Software

Posted on October 25, 2018 by - Enterprise Legal Management

Legal spend management technology generates savings for in-house teams in many ways. We wrote a blog on six of these ways. The most obvious is cost savings, whether through a greater ability to ensure firms adhere to billing guidelines, have spend visibility, or use data to make future budgeting decisions. Time savings also come through the automation of laborious tasks like invoice review and reporting, which get calculated into monetary amounts.

Using these savings areas, different eBilling software providers will estimate savings from $46,000 to $800,000 per year for a “typical” legal department. However, to truly know the financial impact, consider the investment cost; this is typically less publicized!

Below are some cost considerations to consider when planning your legal spend management project and selecting a vendor.

PRICE OF LEGAL SPEND MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE

This is usually a fixed subscription fee per annum and may or may not include hosting, training, and maintenance costs, so look out for these in the proposal. The first year may be higher than subsequent years due to initial set-up costs. Subscription fees may come from a few factors: legal spend, number of users, volume of matters, and number of law firms. Consider the best pricing model for you now but also bear in mind your department might grow; how long is your subscription price fixed for, if at all? If you grow, how does the price increase? Also, consider the cost of additional features not included in standard packages.

LEGAL SPEND MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION FEES

Unlike ongoing subscription fees, these are one-off costs payable to the software vendor and/or consultants you may have involved, usually in the first year, but you may have requirements further down the line that add a cost. These fees cover onboarding internal users and law firms, integrations, and customizations such as reports, data migrations and add-ons outside the basic package. Be sure to find out the charges for these.

INTERNAL COSTS

Most modern solutions are now cloud/SaaS based. Security concerns were the main reason for housing software on-premises when e-billing first launched, but cloud security is far more robust these days. If this is a concern, ensure your vendor has the appropriate certifications, like Onit’s European legal spend management solution BusyLamp eBilling.Space, such as ISO/IEC 27001:2013. SaaS solutions carry a much lower internal IT cost than on-premises solutions. However, you may still have to factor in contractor or project team costs.

TRAINING AND SUPPORT COSTS

A user-friendly, familiar, and easy-to-learn legal spend management interface reduces the training required for your in-house teams and law firms, but it will still be necessary. Consider what level of support and training you need at implementation and beyond, as these range from online help only through to fully managed services and the costs vary considerably.

UPGRADE COSTS

Do you need to pay to upgrade to future versions and updates of the software, or is this included? If the upgrade cost is prohibitive, you could fall behind on the latest legal spend management features. Consider the internal costs and impacts of these upgrades, which are lower with SaaS solutions.

FUTURE COSTS

While you don’t have a crystal ball, anticipate potential integrations or features you might need and ask a) if they’re available and b) what these will cost. You want to avoid migrating to a different legal spend management solution if your current one no longer meets your needs or becomes too expensive to do so, so try your best to predict this; ask the vendor about the typical growth pathways of their other clients. A factor that affects most legal departments is cost increases as you add more users, spend and/or firms. Familiarize yourself with the pricing model to avoid surprises.

BusyLamp Legal Spend Management is cost-effective. Even with these expenditure areas, BusyLamp generates a quick return on investment. You can work out your potential savings with our Guide to Building a Business Case for Legal Spend Management or contact us directly and a team member will be in touch to help you calculate your costs and projected ROI.

DIE VERSTECKTEN KOSTEN VON LEGAL SPEND MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE 

Posted on October 25, 2018 by - Enterprise Legal Management

Eine Legal Spend Management Technologie ermöglicht verschiedenste Einsparungen für Inhouse-Teams. Darunter Kosteneinsparungen, sei es durch eine leichtere Überprüfung von Billing Guidelines, durch eine erhöhte Transparenz über Ausgaben oder durch das Ermöglichen einer datenbasierten Budgetentscheidungsfindung. Auch Zeitersparnisse, wie solche durch die Automatisierung mühsamer Aufgaben wie Rechnungsprüfung und Reporting, können in einen monetären Betrag umgerechnet werden. Durch die Einsparungspotenziale einer eBilling-Software lassen sich dabei jährlich – je nach Größe der Rechtsabteilung – geschätzt 46.000 bis 800.000 US-Dollar sparen. Um jedoch die finanziellen Auswirkungen exakt zu beurteilen, müssen auch die Investitionskosten berücksichtigt werden. Im Folgenden finden Sie deshalb sechs Kostenüberlegungen, die Sie bei der Planung Ihres Legal Spend Management-Projekts und der Auswahl eines Anbieters berücksichtigen sollten. 

Achten Sie auf die Angebotskosten. In der Regel werden Legal Spend Management Systeme über eine jährliche Abonnementgebühr abgerechnet. Diese kann bereits Hosting-, Schulungs- und Wartungskosten beinhalten. Aufgrund der anfänglichen Implementierungskosten fallen die Kosten im ersten Jahr erfahrungsgemäß höher aus als in den Folgejahren. Die Abonnementgebühren können auf verschiedensten Faktoren basieren. Einige Beispiele dafür sind: Ausgaben für Rechtsberatung, Anzahl der Benutzer, Volumen der Matter und Anzahl der Kanzleien. Überlegen Sie, welches Preismodell für Sie zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt am besten geeignet ist – berücksichtigen Sie gleichzeitig aber auch, dass Ihre Abteilung wachsen könnte und damit verbunden auch die Anforderungen an die Legal Spend Management Software. Wichtige Fragen, die es zu stellen gilt, sind: Gibt es einen Abonnementpreis und wenn ja, wie lange sind Sie an diesen gebunden? Wenn Ihre Rechtsabteilung wächst, wie erhöht sich dann der Preis? Wie hoch sind die Kosten für zusätzliche Funktionen, die nicht in den Standardpaketen enthalten sind? 

IMPLEMENTIERUNGSKOSTEN 

Im Gegensatz zu den laufenden Abonnementgebühren handelt es sich bei den Implementierungskosten um einmalige Kosten. Sie umfassen Onboarding-Kosten sowie Kosten für Integrationen und Anpassungen wie Reports, Datenmigrationen und Add-ons außerhalb des Basispakets. Bedenken Sie dabei, dass auch bei Ihren externen Rechtsberatern und Kanzleien Implementierungskosten entstehen, welche in der Regel ebenfalls von Ihnen übernommen werden müssen. Auch können sich Ihre eigenen Anforderungen an die Software im Verlauf der Implementierung verändern, was zu zusätzlichen Kosten führen kann. 

INTERNE KOSTEN 

Die meisten modernen Software-Lösungen sind heute Cloud/SaaS-basiert. Aufgrund von Sicherheitsbedenken wurden in den Anfängen der Legal Spend Management-Systeme die Software lokal verankert. Heutzutage ist die Sicherheit in der Cloud um einiges höher. Wenn sie sich für ein cloudbasiertes Hosting entscheiden, vergewissern Sie sich, dass Ihr Anbieter über die entsprechenden Zertifizierungen verfügt – BusyLamp ist ISO/IEC 27001:2013-zertifiziert. Für SaaS-Lösungen sprechen die viel geringeren internen IT-Kosten im Verglich zu On-Premise-Lösungen. Kosten für Auftragnehmer oder Projektteams müssen aber möglicherweise dennoch einkalkuliert werden. 

SCHULUNGS- UND SUPPORTKOSTEN 

Eine benutzerfreundliche und intuitive Oberfläche für das Legal Spend Management reduziert den Schulungsaufwand für Ihre internen Teams und Anwaltskanzleien zwar erheblich, wegfallen können diese dennoch nicht. Bereits vor dem Kauf der Software sollte das benötigte Maß an Support und Schulung bei der Implementierung und darüber hinaus festgelegt werden. Dieses kann von reiner Online-Hilfe bis hin zu vollständig verwalteten Dienstleistungen reichen, weshalb die Kosten erheblich variieren können.  

UPGRADE-KOSTEN 

Müssen Sie für künftige Updates und Upgrades der Software bezahlen oder sind diese Kosten bereits inbegriffen? Bei zu hohen Upgrade-Kosten laufen Sie Gefahr den Anschluss an die neuesten Funktionen für das Legal Spend Management zu verlieren. Bedenken Sie die internen Kosten und Auswirkungen dieser Upgrades – bei SaaS-Lösungen sind diese geringer. 

ZUKÜNFTIGE KOSTEN 

Handeln sie zukunftsorientiert und planen Sie jetzt schon potenzielle Integrationen oder Funktionen, die Sie in Zukunft benötigen könnten, ein. Fragen Sie bereits im Vorfeld welche zusätzlichen Kosten dabei auf Sie zukommen werden. Es gilt schließlich zu vermeiden, dass Sie zu einer anderen Legal Spend Management Lösung wechseln müssen, wenn Ihre aktuelle Lösung Ihre Anforderungen nicht mehr erfüllt oder zu teuer wird. Fragen Sie den Anbieter deshalb auch nach Erfahrungswerten über typische Wachstumswege von anderen Kunden. Häufige Faktoren sind beispielsweise Kostensteigerungen durch neue hinzuzufügende Benutzer:innen, Ausgaben und/oder Kanzleien. Machen Sie sich mit dem Preismodell vertraut, um Überraschungen zu vermeiden. 

Onit’s Legal Spend Management-Lösung BusyLamp eBilling.Space ist kosteneffektiv. Trotz der genannten Kosten generiert BusyLamp einen schnellen Return on Investment. Mithilfe unseres Leitfadens „Ein Business Case für Legal Spend Management“ können Sie die zu erwarteten Einsparungen Ihrer Rechtsabteilung, durch die Implementierung einer eBilling-Software, ausrechnen. Sie möchten eine kostenlose ROI-Prognose anfordern? Kontaktieren Sie uns und ein:e Mitarbeiter:in wird sich mit Ihnen in Verbindung setzen, um Ihnen bei der Berechnung Ihrer Kosten und des prognostizierten ROI zu helfen. 

3 Big Essentials to Look for in an Enterprise Solution Provider

Posted on August 8, 2018 by - Business Process Management, Contract Lifecycle Management, Enterprise Legal Management

The time inevitably comes when most legal departments need to enhance their process automation, while others may be looking for their first automation solution. There are many things to keep in mind when researching providers and doing due diligence, but we don’t want to overwhelm you with a long list right now. For the purpose of this blog, there are three critical things we wanted to share with you — three of the most basic things you should be looking for in a solution provider:

  1. Enterprise Solutions – The provider should be capitalizing on the broad applicability of workflow-based task management, and eager to expand into functional areas outside of legal and aggressively solicit customer needs to write custom applications for other corporate-wide departments. Whether it’s an off-the-shelf solution or a platform on which the client can create their own applications, a provider that is well-versed in developing solutions for both legal and non-legal applications could be the way to go.
  2. Process Automation –  A workflow-centric approach that seeks to deconstruct matter management into independent, collaborative functional lifecycles that lawyers and operations managers use on a regular basis is critical. An a la carte model can empower users to add capabilities and components as needed. The ability to scale your enterprise legal management system in a manner consistent with operational requirements is your key to success.
  3. System Architecture – The providers that are on top of their game offer a modern architecture that showcases class-leading technology and a decidedly Saas-based approach to legal business application management. It needs to be flexible and agile, and designed for rapid deployment, flexibility and agility. Last but not least, it needs to work the way your team works.

If these three things are at the top of your list when you begin your search for a solution provider you’ll be a huge step ahead of the game.

Enterprise Legal Management Insufficiencies? Don’t Be So Hasty with that RFP

Posted on August 2, 2018 by - Business Process Management, Enterprise Legal Management

Some companies struggle with their current enterprise legal management (ELM) systems that focus on just core matter and spend management. But when the day comes that they discover there are other business processes that also need automated solutions, it’s time to issue another RFP and undergo another long, expensive and drawn-out path to implementation.

But we’d like to offer another solution. We believe we should be looking at the elements of enterprise legal management as processproblems instead of data problems. When we do this, we’re clearly taking more ownership in business process management (BPM), even though we may not immediately realize it. And in order for corporate legal to be a true corporate citizen, it needs to have a deeper stake in business processes. If you already use automated process solutions, congratulations. You already have a stake since business process automation is inseparable from business process management.

Again, ELM systems that are only capable of core matter and spend management have a clear disadvantage. But on the other end of the spectrum are systems that are loaded with features that will never be used; either because the company doesn’t need them or they don’t want to use them. These solutions were likely an outsize investment to begin with, which already puts the company at a distinct disadvantage. But the situation needn’t be so bleak, and it’s not even necessary to proceed on a quest to find a happy spot somewhere on the spectrum.

The ability to scale your Enterprise Legal Management System in a manner consistent with operational requirements is your key to success.

Seems simple, but how do we do it? By breaking up enterprise legal management into discrete, individual task-based processes, it becomes clear that an “app-based” solution is the most logical way to go. With these, users have the ability to develop and incorporate these discrete process capabilities into the larger enterprise system as they are needed – a la carte. The old “ELM as monolith” approach is, for the majority of legal departments, obsolete. The resounding answer is that we should be looking at ELM as a process problem, rather than a data problem.

Smart companies are now seeking core matter management and e-billing functionality that can be augmented with other process solutions as they are needed. With such systems, scaling could not be easier. In many cases, a company will already have an existing ELM installation, and augment it with process solutions from other providers. These add-ons will be completely compatible with their existing ELM system. There are off-the-shelf, focused solutions as well as platforms on which the company can build their own custom solutions. In any case, the ability to enhance and optimize your system without going the painful RFP route is always a good thing.