An excellent series of short articles here (parts 1, 2 and 3 in a 4 part series) from Nikhil Lala,Gail Blauer, and Michael Caplan – all from Deloitte, published in Inside Counsel; well worth reading if you head up an in-house legal team or are working with them:
“As organizations have evolved and become more complex, so too have their service delivery needs for functional and business support processes. Generally speaking, service delivery transformation (SDT) seeks to help organizations in their efforts to create a flexible, scalable and efficient service delivery model — one that can enhance enterprise value by enabling cost-effective growth, supporting strong internal controls and compliance, and providing consistent global service delivery. Through SDT, organizations can evaluate the range of service delivery options — insource vs. outsource, onshore vs. offshore — to develop and execute a tailored strategy that addresses long term organizational needs.
Corporate legal departments are no exception to the SDT paradigm and, in fact, have a significant opportunity to implement such improvements to their modes of service delivery. “
If you want to discuss your plans to restructure your delivery of legal services, check us out at www.inpractice.co.uk and call Allan Carton on +44 (0)161 929 8355 to find out more about what our approach might be in your particular circumstances.
Interesting to see that Addleshaws have taken up this challenge in Manchester, which demonstrates how – just a few, so far – law firms have begun to adapt how legal service is delivered to focus on process, aiming to ensure that clients value what they get. An area where an understanding of “lean thinking” is needed to introduce radical improvements; all of which is needed in developing business in a law firm now.
Here is a useful concise summary from Professor Dominic Regan on the challenges that litgation lawyers currently have to deal with, where – because of the uncertainties in intepretation and inconsistencies in practice – your dispute resolution team need an agreed view and approach on how to deal with them. Otherwise, the lack of procedural clarity will slow progress down and increase risks.
“The disclosure report, a sound idea, is in practice harder to complete than a Chinese crossword. It should be ripped up and rewritten from scratch … Everyone accepts that the Damages Based Agreement Regulations are useless … no one, not even Lord Justice Jackson, knows how the new proportionality test works … Leading counsel has been asked to advise upon whether the qualified one way costs shifting (QOCS) regulations are inherently unlawful … Budgeting is the hot topic. ”
Professor Dominic Regan is a professor at City Law School and columnist for the New Law Journal. He has assisted Lord Justice Jackson & HH Judge Simon Brown QC with costs reform and writes the blog Professor Dominic Regan. This article was first published in the New Law Journal on 8 January 2014.