|

Ralph Losey Says Firms Should Get Out of Lit Support Business

Over the weekend Ralph posted a video on his blog, and had some rather strong opinions about what his firm is doing, and what firms should be doing in general.

I no longer have to supervise a litigation support department. Instead I manage a relationship with a vendor. It is much more pleasant, believe me. When not working on projects and serving clients, I focus my internal e-discovery firm management time on the training and education of my firm’s lawyers and paralegals. IMO this is the way it should be. Law firms should stick to their core competency, practicing law and teaching law, and should not try to run little vendor corps in their midst.

Now I don’t work in a law firm, and haven’t for a couple of years now, so I’m not the best person to comment on what Ralph has to say here. The one thing I will say, is this. Ralph’s experience with his firm and the lawyers therein, should not be taken as representative of what other firms would experience. After all, simply by having Ralph as the partner in charge of eDiscovery, they alter the reality of their situation in a way that no other firm could.

So for those of you who do work in firms or work for vendors who work directly with firms. what do you have to say about this? Should law firms focus on their core competency and get away from having in house litigation support? What about other areas, IT, Marketing, HR, etc.? Should those all be outsourced too?

Similar Posts

  • | |

    Linked: Bad news: The cybersecurity skills crisis is about to get even worse

    Now, the shortage of people leading to overworked stressed, and burned-out workers is the headline, but if you look at the reasons given in the article below, it’s not “just” that. It’s where that situation leads. When you’re short-staffed and constantly putting out fires, you don’t really take the time to think about showing appreciation, helping employees grow their skills and careers, or creating a diverse workplace.

    Yet those are the exact things that employees are looking for elsewhere.

    Appreciating and growing your employees is not something that is “nice to have” anymore. It’s a requirement.

  • Some Employers Have Not Figured Out The Job Market Changed

    Sadly, I’ve seen and heard many stories like this too. I’ve seen some of those job listings myself. You know the ones, where they want to pay entry-level wages but also require 5 years experience or the list of requirements sound like you’re really looking for multiple people, but only paying for one. In my industry, it’s usually the laundry list of experience and certifications that give it away. Really, you are going to require multiple certifications on half a dozen different platforms and tools, as well as years of recent experience? Who even has access to that many different tools at the same time? 

    Also, if you’re hiring process involves multiple interviews and weeks of delays, you’re going to see a lot of your candidates swept up with an offer before you even get through the process.

    You need to be better. If you’re not, someone else will be.

  • |

    Linked – Turnover 2019: Why Employees Leave [survey results]

    Some interesting results, and thoughts, shared by Sharlyn Lauby here. I’m particularly interested in what appears to be a sharp increase in the number of people simply looking for more money/benefits. Granted, it’s a relatively small sample size, but I think the increase from last year could signify that employees are figuring out that the…

  • | |

    Linked: Should employers provide mental health training for management?

    The one that gives me pause is the last bullet, but not because leaders shouldn’t have that knowledge, but more because human nature tells me that is the one most likely to be misused and create really uncomfortable situations. There’s a very fine line between being aware of signs of someone struggling and diagnosis. I absolutely do not want anyone in the workplace diagnosing people. Watch out for signs of stress and ways you can support the folks who work for you proactively? Sure. Decide for yourself that they have depression, or should be referred to an Employee Assistance Program? Not so much.

    But, here’s the thing I will fully admit when saying this. Avoiding this type of behavior is absolutely something that solid mental health training should be a part of. I’ve heard far too many instances lately where organizations are reading a lot about mental health, and burnout, in the workplace and then dispatch their managers to have conversations with their teams about it, and zero training.

    Those conversations are dangerous. You have to enable your leaders to go into those conversations with some education and expertise on the subject Just telling them to go and have the conversations without getting them up to speed on how to do so, creates a situation that is likely to end up with some very alienated employees.

  • |

    Linked: Half of workers say they will only apply for hybrid or working from home jobs

    I think that makes sense, and it might fit for a lot of US workers too. I know in the eDiscovery industry we are seeing more desire for flexibility, and salaries going up pretty significantly. Though we aren’t seeing the same level of disinterest in looking for a new role. Does that suggest that fewer workers in our industry have found what they are looking for in terms of flexibility and money? Or do they see the reality of changing jobs for a 15-25% pay increase versus what they’d get by staying?

    That’s an interesting thing to think about. Do you know how your employees feel about that? Do you know what they want to stay? What will entice them to leave?

  • |

    Linked: Ways to end the taboo of employee departures

    Sometimes, things happen. Circumstances change, what we want from our careers changes, and what the current employer can offer us changes. There’s no shame in it, and there shouldn’t be any hard, or awkward feelings about it.

    I’d love to see companies get on board with that, but that’s going to require we see our people as people first, and labor inputs second. I’m not so sure some managers are capable of that.

One Comment

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Your post must include a link to this post.

How does this work?
Write a response on your own website and include a link to this post. Then submit your response’s URL here. Your response may appear here after moderation. To update or remove it, edit or delete your original post and submit the same URL again. Learn more about Webmentions.