I read an interesting blog post by Kevin O’Keefe, attorney and legal blogging expert: Do lawyers try to kill good uses of technology?
Good question, and I’ve certainly seen my share of panic-induced reactions against technology, but I think this is a deeper issue than attorneys with Luddite-tendencies. It also touches on a firm’s culture and the value-proposition attached to a given technology. If IT invests the resources in a given application, say a wiki, will it get used? Will a given technical approach help make more money? (Let’s face it folks, it IS about billable hours) Does collaboration or efficiency offer any additional value?
Organizations that are forced into change, due to market or personnel changes, are able to answer this question fairly easily. There is a tremendous amount of potential for smaller, boutique firms to better utilize technology. Over the long run, it’s the responsibility of experts and support executives to help the Luddites understand the value of technology. There’s no value in debating risk with attorneys.
Good point, it is a value proposition at heart. And I’ve called it an end run — getting to the point that blogs make us money and they do not cost much in time nor expense — that end runs the risk/liability walls that stood in front of moving ahead.
Sure risks/liability should be looked at. As law firms and businesses we need to be smart. But it’s amazing how fast a well crafted blog policy shows up when the value is demonstrated.