Litigation Support Staffing : The Cowen Group : Ediscovery Recruiters, Candidate Search, Practice Support, Position Placement

We’re instilled with the belief early on that we can accomplish anything as long as we work hard, work long, and work to deadline. However, in this more service-oriented work environment, understanding and incorporating the thought processes of those above you is just as important to the future of your career your own production.

If you are one of our clients or candidates you have heard this from us on an ongoing basis. Relationships are the fuel powering every day transactions. Developing alliances throughout your firm, not just your direct departmental contacts, will provide you the support you need to learn and master the political climate that you’ll navigate. But the most powerful and influential compatriot to have on your side is your boss. By understanding your boss’s point of view, as well as assimilating it into your style, you are signaling to them that you’re ready for advancement. What will come across is that you have the ability to think and strategize beyond your current position.

This is the process of Managing Up.   

Here are some helpful questions you can ask yourself to assist yourself into isolating what exactly is imperative to your boss:

• What details does your boss pay attention to first and foremost?
• What is expected from the people in positions you want to move into?
• What questions do they ask of their direct reports and why?
• What is their leadership style and how do they make decisions?
• By which methods do they prefer to be informed of status updates (email, phone, in-person, etc.)?
• How does your boss’ management style differ from yours? And what can you utilize in your own dealings?

The last query is the most critical. The real test to pass for the promotion you desire is if you are flexible and perceptive enough to adapt to your boss’ needs. What is important here is to remember that it is your job to develop a relationship with your boss, not the other way around, while demonstrating to them that you have the ability to function at a higher level...

…their level!  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

With only 5 full months of 2008 on the books, the list of casualties from the slowing economy is growing.  The Department of Labor released statistics Friday revealing that the legal sector lost 1,100 jobs in the month of May.  These figures, when added to the 1,900 losses from April, indicate a volatile job market.

Despite this sharp reduction in workforce, I continue to see solid growth and demand in e-discovery and litigation support across the AmLaw 200. 

 The Cowen Group conducted a quick poll on Monday of litigation support/e-discovery hiring trends among 20 global law firms.  Our poll revealed the following:

•            65% are aggressively hiring litigation support staff.
•            20% are on plan and will continue to staff.
•            15% are cautious and/or scaling back.

These results are precisely what I saw last year at this time. Indicating healthy hiring activity in the litigation support space despite the sluggish economy.

Although several clients acknowledged a decline in business and case loads, they were quick to point out that the increase in size, scope and complexity of cases were keeping their headcounts high.

Several of the firms polled responded that they were adding services and staff to their litigation support practices this year. 

There’s nothing like the DOJ, SEC, FBI and a sub-prime meltdown to give one a sense of job security. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

You don't have to be an expert to know that the economy has hit a serious bump in the road.

Meanwhile, the jitters have spread throughout law firms everywhere. Budgets are being trimmed, headcount is being carefully controlled, and nothing is moving on the fast track.

So what does this all mean for key staffing? The good news is that litigation support hiring remains steady as she goes. Most of my clients are being asked to do more in-house work. This means maintaining current litigation-support staffing levels--or even adding meaningful key team members--is the play of the day.

That's good news in a downward market. What's your firm's power plan? Let me know

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

IP continues to grow at double digits and so does the demand for Litigation Support talent required to perform such work.

As law firms continue to add talent and clients to their IP practices, Litigation Support professionals will see a dramatic increase in workflow and new client demands.

And I do not mean scanning and coding. IP clients are highly sophisticated and demand more.
This means meeting your firm's clients.

The client's CIO will demand to meet you and the rest of your firm to be sure that you can handle the case. This includes your knowledge of various strategies, data collection options, online tool selection, server space, backup solutions, EXPERIENCE with similar matters and the firm wide talent to handle the case.

The lawyers have the easy role here. Try spending 2 hours being grilled by a Biotech CIO in Indianapolis. It’s 5 o’clock somewhere.

The King & Spalding link below is just example of this war for talent. The hidden story is how the role of Litigation Support will change and become more critical to winning the assignment (top line revenue) and ultimately the case.

Yes, the case. IP clients don’t tend to blink. They go to court and litigate.

Need more budget for staff, tools and training? Here is your business case:

King & Spalding Raids Rival for IP Talent [From The Daily Report Online, registration required]

King & Spalding, looking to beef up its intellectual property and biotechnology practices, hired three attorneys from cross-town rival Kilpatrick Stockton and may be scoping out more hires in those areas.

King & Spalding wants to grow its IP practice group within three years to about 150 members from the current 100 lawyers and patent agents, said King & Spalding partner Courtland L. Reichman, head of the firm's IP group.

Lead, Follow, or Get Bought.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

However you want to say it, paralegal or legal assistant, these guys/gals are “IT” as far as litigation support goes. They are the future. And they are “It” without being IT professionals, first and foremost.  How so?

As with any position, you have to find the right person regardless of background. There is a window of opportunity here to create a career path that fosters industry-specific technical growth and expertise for paralegals so the right ones can move into the ever-changing and complex world of Litigation Support. In doing so, even the ones who won’t go in the more technical direction of Litigation Support will only be that much better at what they do.

Let’s face it, only a very specific type of IT professional can potentially excel in the world of Litigation Support. Will that person ever truly understand why electronic data discovery is being done and what these vast document productions are all about? Will that person have the ear of the lead attorney and associates on the case? Will that person be accepted as a biller by the client? Bottom line, is that IT professional connected enough to the business process that determines the technical process for case management?

Paralegals manage cases. For decades, they’ve managed obscene volumes of paper. So, as the world has become digitized, it’s only natural that they adapt to the medium that contains the potential ‘smoking gun’. Not only is it natural, but it’s essential. Ask any litigator and he/she will tell you that their assigned paralegal must understand the issues of the case, must be connected to the discovery process, and the reasons behind it. In order to manage it, they now have to be able to understand the technology involved—the ways of harnessing vast amounts of electronic data, the complexities of email data, and chain of custody. In addition, they have to know how to handle hybrid cases of electronic data and traditional paper documents that predate electronic storage and are too fragile to be scanned. The ones that are ready to take that understanding to the next level make the most natural litigation support specialists. These are the ones who can leverage their experience in running a case and make the best decisions about electronic data discovery. EDD is so much more than the technical processes behind the computer forensics and data management.

It’s all about the details

Whether you go the route of IT professionals or paralegals to staff your Litigation Support department, you better have individuals who extremely precise, detail-oriented, thorough, and who operate with a sense of urgency with the ability to remain poised under pressure. And don’t forget the value of their interpersonal skills.

Remember, just like with a reprographics center, you can always hire the technical talent to do the underlying work - just as you would for copying and scanning. Only this time, you’re calling in people with higher technical credentials to link databases with images or to use an ASP to turn out vast amounts of email for review.

Finally, many paralegals don’t want to go to law school and don’t want to be a lawyer.

Imagine if there was a forward thinking firm that could offer a career track to these highly talented employees.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Complex litigation cases have become so large and complicated that they require an extra set of teams, both legal and litigation support. We now see major to mid-sized law firms and corporations beginning to add head-count, with additional layers at leadership levels.

In litigation support we're seeing a trend toward augmenting the in-house arsenal of talent with supervisors, coordinators and managers -- thereby elevating the current Manager to Director -- which is worth $125k - $250k.

The Cowen Group's ongoing informal salary survey suggests that litigation support directors are now being valued on par with nonequity partners -- and billed accordingly. Not to put too fine a point on it, IT leadership positions now have reached approximate parity with first, second and third year associates.

This is new. And it's happening now because no matter how critical the latest information technology may be, it will never get the job done all by itself. IT is the gateway to successful forensics and e-data management. But it is just the gateway -- through which your talented people pass. So litigation support hiring is more and more about people skills, and leadership that can spark collaborative process, in addition to the familiar technology component.

Make no mistake. It's your people who drive the process -- not legal technology. Litigation support people with deep knowledge and expertise in the use of technology, and litigation support leadership, experienced in the interpersonal process of lawyer-client relations. Together with technology, litigation support people can help accomplish your firm's revenue objective.

And that's what makes litigation support billable -- big time.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

So, why are Litigation Support salaries so far out of whack? Well...

First year associates' salaries are moving up to $145,000. And spikes in associates' salaries are driving numerous other key salaries. Because this trend is not about inflation. It is about supply and demand. In other words, we get what we pay for.

Last year 79 AmLaw 100 firms embarked upon the NYC adventure -- taking a page from the Latham & Watkins playbook. KPMG, Navigant and Ernst &Young busied themselves tallying figures and projecting projections. But old-fashioned accounting will never get Navigant out front in EDD. Because electronic data discovery is nothing like accounting. What's more, clients are beginning to understand that. Clients (i.e., the Fortune 500 -- aka America’s serial litigants) are not getting what they need. They're tired of big bills, missed deadlines, and poor results. And they're making themselves heard, demanding competent litigation support from their law firm relationships -- or they are going shopping.

See my blog: The Fortune 500 Go Shopping

Salaries are rising because demand for elite litigation support is raging, from top firms and clients alike. The supply pool is growing, and will continue to grow to meet demand throughout 2006, as deadlines near for the implementing of new federal regulations in the industry. But truly exceptional talent is still a premium.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

First year salaries at top firms across the board are now up to $145,000, writes Anthony Lin, in an article posted at Law.com. Salaries spiked after last week's lead by Sullivan & Cromwell, and not just at New York firms, as expected. Manhattan firms Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; and Cahill, Gordon & Reindel; were joined by the New York offices of Washington, D.C.'s Covington & Burling and Miami's Greenberg Traurig, suggesting that most non-New York firms will follow suit.

Consultants Towers Perrin, Mercer, et al, calculate 3% as the right amount for any salary increase pegged to inflation. But these salaries represent a whopping 10% jump. So what accounts for the disconnect between HR projections and the game on the ground? And why now?

Towers Perrin, Mercer, and their like, produce impressive surveys of salaries in static space. Space that does not move and change. But the world of litigation support and electronic data discovery is dynamic space, volatile and intensely demanding. Salaries move as fast as a New York minute. So the traditonal numbers make old news in the War for Talent.

The War for Talent is pushing up salaries and raising the stakes on proactive, real-world solutions. In this climate it's more important than ever for firms to be able to attract – and retain – the right people, right now.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Steven C. Bennett of Jones Day in New York is speaking truth to power in his recent National Law Journal article posted at Law.com about "Teaching Tech Skills to Lawyers". Lawyers can no longer avoid committing both resources and attention to the specific purpose of becoming "tech savvy". For even among a new generation of lawyers who have been technology end-users all their lives, the range of typical technological understanding is pretty much exhausted by email, cell phones, ipods, and online shopping.

 And why not? "Essentially," writes Bennett, "what law students learn about technology during law school they learn on their own." And veteran lawyers have precious little to choose from in the way of technology skills training sponsored by bar associations, law firms and CLE providers.

There's a reason why interviews with policy makers are staged before a bank of West and Shepards systems, and why law students in 2006 pass DVD's of 1974's Oscar-winnning The Paper Chase from hand to hand. In traditional law firms, and in most law schools, the paper document is still stubbornly regarded as coin of the realm. But its time is already passed.

Relentlessly ongoing technological developments have the potential to increase lawyer productivity significantly. LexisNexis, for example, has just launched its new Toolbar for Attorneys. IT folks and lowly non-legals welcome this customization of a common browser peripheral. And it's just one of hundreds of litigation support technologies that will automate and facilitate the 21st century practise of law. But many senior partners will be flummoxed. That must change, says Bennett, or once venerable firms will find themselves at unrecoverable competitive disadvantage.

Both the corporate community and the courts are out ahead of the legal profession at large on this issue. Law firms are finding -- sometimes the hard way -- that courts and regulatory agencies already expect law firms to be able to file and retrieve information electronically. And electronic communication inside and outside of the firm runs smack into crucial privacy implications of modern data management. So clients increasingly demand diverse technological services and compatibilities from their law firms to maintain compliance.

Lawyers must finally accept the essential value of networking and sharing, even embracing soft-sided principles of knowledge management, in order to remain viable in the current market. Electronic data rooms and shared editing of deal documents must be coordinated to online discovery document repositories. Massive volumes of case information must be captured and sorted, and many a tech-savvy legal assistant or litigation support manager has watched a case crash and burn, only because a senior lawyer mismanaged meta-data and/or discovery documents.

Make no mistake: technology will still be handled by IT and litigation support, but it is no longer acceptable for partners not to understand -- and endorse -- what they are up to -- however much retooling that may require.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Law firms are making nice with clients, as usual, but some clients are saying ¡hasta la vista! anyway. What's changed here?

We're now seeing a significant trend, just in the comings and goings of top litigation support managers and directors. Lit support top guns are spending more and more time out of the office. They're visiting clients, in clients' own offices. Because clients are becoming harder to please. Law firms are under ever-greater pressure to prove their capabilities in managing ever-more complex litigation and discovery matters -- which are ever-more technological. So firms are sending top lit support professionals into the field.

More importantly, lit support can smooth out the dialogue -- when there is any -- between lawyer and client. Back at the firm, lit support hears lawyers complain that the client just doesn’t get it: "We know what we're doing. Documents! Briefs! We've been doing it this way for a century!" In the field, clients tell lit support that the law firm just doesn't get it: "I'm on a budget here! Why can't they handle the discovery electronically? Why can't they coordinate with our IT system? What am I paying for?!"

The ability to speak a language that is understood by both lawyers and the clients they serve is increasingly unique to litigation support. So more and more lit support directors are pulling Kumbayah duty -- bridging the gap with expert hand-holding.

Meanwhile, back at the firm, there's a draft whistling through the vacancy created by frequently offsite senior lit support personnel. Staff toils away diligently as usual, but with no one at the helm -- no one to manage the care and feeding of their ever-increasing numbers. This trend is creating the need for a second tier of lit support management. At the same time it is driving up billables for litigation support directors -- up to the level of senior associates, and even into partner range.

The demand for qualified lit support professionals has never been greater. At The Cowen Group we expect the current explosion of new media information technology only to intensify that demand throughout 2006, heating up the "war for talent", and the pressure for fluent communication between lawyers and their clients.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Reporting recently on Fulbright & Jaworski's annual survey of litigation trends, Legal Times revealed that EXPERTISE is the top factor corporate counsel looks for in their outside litigators.

Technology can be bought, but it won't work at all without technological expertise. And top firms understand it's really all about something more than mere expertise. It's talent. Talent, as any Fortune 500 CEO will testify, is more crucial than any technology. With the right talent -- i.e. the right people -- you'll be able to implement and stay current with whatever technology is right for your firm. Because what's really right for your firm is more than either the technology or the expertise to implement it. It's the talented people who understand not just leading edge technology, but also, what unique and time-tested cogs and wheels make the firm tick like a well-oiled clock.

Talent can also be bought, of course, but, again, we're talking about people here -- that elusive recipe of secret ingredients that may or may not meet even the most meticulous Myers-Briggs prognostications. And here's the thing: no amount of money or incentive will purchase the right people if you can't FIND them.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

"...Absolutely nothin! Say it, say it, say it again, now..." (Apologies to the late great Edwin Starr)

About this time last year the blogosphere lit up with natterings about an uptic in lateral hiring. How would law firms hang onto their poachable associates? In an unfortunate imitation of the worst of twentieth-century geopolitics, some of the most venerable firms opted to wall in their talent, limiting the contact information about associates provided on their web sites, or scaling back information in law firm directories. Latham & Watkins' web site, e.g., provided direct numbers for partners but only general numbers for associates, and no associate bios or practise particulars.

By June, LawFirm, Inc. was reporting an improvement, or at least a promise of improvement, "within the context of data protection and data privacy protocols," among the AmLaw 100's top 10. And top blawgers acknowledge a movement toward greater transparency throughout 2005.

But as yet another fiscal year turns over, Law.com still headlines with "Cloaking...", the cyber-term for playing hide-and-seek with key information. One signal that the term and practise is standard and persists, is that everyone knows the code. That is, any firm that resorts to cloaking pretty much sends an engraved invitation to recruiters - like carrion to buzzards in the desert. It's true that efforts have been made. At the Latham & Watkins' site there's more associate 411 now - but you still can't find it without a map.

That's a waste of any firm's investment in its own future. Lateral hiring is a serious concern, certainly, and the consequences can be far-reaching. But outside counsel is a boon only when and if in-house resources have been fully advantaged, and when imported talent fills practise area gaps and meshes with a firm's existing dynamic. The costs of attrition are too high not to go deep for talent, before going wide. And the more that partner-worthy associates are put to work on high-visibility matters for core clients, the less "poachable" they will be.

Besides, didn't you know? "Something there is that doesn't love a wall (thanks again, Robert Frost)..."

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks