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?Litigation Support, Training