by Peter Garsden
(as published in the Delia
Venables Newsletter for Lawyers Sept/Oct 04 edition)
In my previous article in this newsletter, in May/June
2004, I described how, back in February 2003, our firm,
Abney Garsden McDonald, consisting of 2 Partners and 17 fee
earners, attempted to migrate to the paperless office. I explained
in the article that the centre of operations must be an efficient
computer network with shared folders, efficient fast scanning
machines and an administrative system which enables documents
to be found easily.
I described the hardware and software one needed, how to organise
items on the network and the administrative systems that we
had introduced to make sure that there were sufficient back-ups
on paper and electronically of all documentation in case anything
went wrong, and how we delivered post electronically in the
morning.
At the end of the article, I explained that our attempt to
go paperless had only been a partial success due to the fact
that most of the fee-earners were unhappy to completely embrace
the concept. The culture change was too sudden and alarming.
I include in this article more detail on what we did and the
problems encountered and describe where we are up to now. I
finish by giving you my forecast for the future as well as my
concept of what the paperless office could be like.
Where did we go wrong?
Before we introduced the paperless office, the subject was mentioned
at numerous meetings. We also held 3 or 4 user group meetings
to which all staff, from senior fee earners to administrative
operatives, were invited. We discussed possible pitfalls and
how the new system would work.
A great deal of time was spent devising a postal delivery system
which was simple and straightforward. The post is scanned in,
saved to a back up folder divided into years, months and fee
earners and then emailed to the relevant fee earner. Additionally,
the paper post is delivered. We ensure that the process is completed
by mid morning.
From October 2002 until the end of January 2003, we operated
the 2 systems side by side. In other words, the paper was not
only put on the individual files, but also distributed electronically
so that it could be saved in the electronic folders. The purpose
of this was to get the fee earners accustomed to the new system.
Although "D Day" was set as 1st February 2003, the
message was not properly communicated to all fee earners, who
were not aware that from the above date, all paper folders would
no long be updated. The idea was that we would only have a paper
file up to the end of January 2003. All new files would only
be opened on computer and there would be no cardboard equivalent.
Unfortunately the culture shock was too great for some of the
senior fee earners.
After 2 or 3 months, the fee earners called a meeting and complained
that they did not know where they were up to with their files.
It was taking them much longer to work out what had happened
on the file. They were feeling lost, frustrated and were starting
to panic. Why was this?
* The fee earners were not universally as adept at using the
computer as I had imagined. They could not find their way round
the various folders and programmes as quickly and efficiently
as I had anticipated. They were becoming frustrated when things
went wrong.
* Taking away the paper file was conceptually too sudden and
was creating a feeling of insecurity.
* To save time, the fee earners were delegating the job of
saving their post to secretaries. Unfortunately an insufficient
description of the file was being used. This meant that one
could not look at the history of post and see immediately what
had happened. ie. A file description such as "04.07.23LET
(To Client)" rather than "04.07.23LET (Client re.
Medical Reports Sent)".
* The fee earners found it much easier to flick backwards and
forwards through a correspondence clip to see what had happened
than to open and close, sequentially, files on the computer.
Unfortunately, Windows is not yet powerful enough to emulate
flicking through a correspondence file quickly. It is still
necessary, for certain purposes, to print off documents, say,
for an incoming fee earner who wants to read into an existing
case.
* We use a "Case Monitor Sheet" to highlight the
major steps in a case such as the issue of Proceedings, service
of Pleadings, obtaining of records etc. to use the example of
Claimant Personal Injury work. Unfortunately, the Case Monitor
Sheets were not being routinely and regularly filled in. It
is fundamental that the Case Monitor Sheet be completed with
the major steps in the case. Anyone taking over the file or
a paralegal who is asked to assist, can immediately get an overview
of where the case is up to. Our "Case Monitor Sheet"
is a replacement for the "Case History" that one usually
sees in Case Management Systems.
Where are We Up to
Now?
Following the rebellion by the fee earners, it was agreed that
I would not force them to go paperless if they were against
it. Contrary to my wishes, therefore, the fee earners decided
to go back to paper files. Thus, we now have a duplicated system
therefore, whereby all the paper is saved on the network/scanned
in, as well as printed off and filed by the secretaries. Unfortunately
this duplication of effort does not assist in the efficiency
goal we originally set ourselves. The fee earners, however,
are happier.
We still run the Group Actions completely paperless. Income
and outgoing documents are scanned and saved on the computer
network. It is much easier and quicker to find a document electronically
in a file, which might run to over 100 lever arch files on paper.
Personally, I continue to run my individual files paperless
without any difficulty. I find it difficult to understand the
difficulty the fee earners find with a paperless system. Undoubtedly
the administrative work required when a file is opened is somewhat
alarming when one considers how many checks and balances have
to be carried out, namely the money laundering personal identification
system, conflict checking, paper file opening, accounts data
inputting etc. The paperless system does away with a lot of
this wasteful administrative work.
The support staff and paralegals were very supportive of the
paperless system. It means that when a paralegal was asked to
work on a file, he/she did not have to climb 3 flights of stairs
to retrieve it. He could immediately ascertain what was going
on on screen. The secretaries found it much easier to refer
to previous documents and correspondence on screen than to find
paper in a file that may not be with her tape. Support staff
enthusiasm may be related to the their level of IT and computer
skills. Not all senior staff were brought up with keyboards
and computers.
The difficulty sparked off an intensive computer training programme
for fee earners - "Tips and Tricks". This helped give
them more confidence with the computer and speeded up their
operative skills. We covered such matters as efficient organisation
of incoming emails, the use of internet favourites, links, toolbars,
keyboard shortcuts etc. It is somewhat ironic that some solicitors
firms, which use Case Management Systems, do not even provide
any secretarial support and expect the fee earners to do most
of their own typing.
We have recently changed our old analogue tape machines for
new digital dictation equipment, which will hopefully speed
up the processing of correspondence and save time. The use of
digital equipment with sound files means that the monitoring
of work is easier. Dictating off-site becomes much more efficient.
We already use computerised time recording and accounts software.
We are about to install, for some work types, the Eclipse Legal
Proclaim Case Management System. The fee earners have said that
when we have Case Management, the migration to the paperless
office will be far easier. The plan is to attempt to go completely
paperless once the case management system is installed. There
is no doubt that the Case Management screen gives a much better
overall view of the file and core details than our present Microsoft
Word and folder system. The name, address, telephone number
and core facts about the case are presented to the fee earner
immediately on screen. There is also a better Case History window
with more space for a description of each item to be inserted.
The Case History window can be sorted into different types of
document. One can thus see, for example, all the medical reports
in chronological date order without having to go in and out
of different folders. It seems that, conceptually, the Case
Management System is a lot closer to the paper file than our
present Microsoft folder and sub folder system.
Costs Assessment
When our files are ready for billing, we copy onto a CD ROM
all incoming and outgoing post and send it to our Cost Draftsman's
firm, who are located in High Wycombe. This is a lot cheaper
than sending large boxes of paper through the DX system. The
worry of paper going missing can be alleviated. If we lose a
CD ROM, we can easily replace it. The same thing is not true
of paper.
Initially our Cost Draftsman attempted to use 2 computer screens
to view the various letters. Eventually, however, they abandoned
this system. What they now do – and the same applies to Counsel
as far as I can ascertain – is to print off the entire file
and cost it in the old fashioned way. It seems that should one
of our cases go to detailed assessment, we will have to provide
the Court with a dummy paper file rather than a CD ROM. Counsel,
who have been sent a CD ROM, do not like it generally and prefer
a paper brief.
Paperless Trial
There is no doubt that in a case where disclosable documentation
is extremely large, efforts should be made to use a paperless
electronic system. Where there are many parties to a case, it
is much quicker to create a bundle of documents on CD ROM using
a database in the background than to prepare several large paper
bundles, which can be seen being delivered to the Royal Courts
of Justice on trolleys. It is much easier to send a CD ROM to
each of the parties through the post than a large bundle of
documents. Counsel finds it much easier to transport electronic
discs to Court than large bundles of paper. The cost of discovery
is much less. One can fit 650 megabytes of data onto a CD ROM
and 4.7 gigabytes onto a DVD. This is the equivalent of thousands
of pages of A4. If one compares the cost of paper at between
10p and 20p per page, the cost savings are obvious.
There is not space in this article to explain how it is possible
to conduct an entire civil trial electronically on screen rather
than paper. Special software, however, is available using light
pens and touch screen technology. Both Judges and Counsel must
be trained to use this system. In one of our largest Group Actions
we contemplated running the trial on screen. We engaged the
services of Kroll Ontrack, Cardinal Tower, 12 Farringdon Road,
London, EC1M 3HS. Tel: 0207 549 9600, who scanned in and databased
our entire document population onto CD ROM with optical character
recognition text to enable us to carry out word searches. Undoubtedly,
this system saved us an enormous amount of time when conducting
evidential research.
It is unlikely that the cases will go to trial and therefore
the paperless Court system will not be tested.
Kroll Ontrack, however, have conducted a number of large commercial
fraud trials using this system. The big enquiries such as Shipman,
Bloody Sunday and others have been carried out in this way,
with consequent time and cost savings for the Court system.
Website Technology
A lot has been written about the use of "Deal Rooms"
to negotiate settlement of cases, particularly where the parties
are on different sides of the world, using secure websites.
Keith Ross of Ross & Co. is a major proponent of this system.
We have used secure areas of our website to publish progress
on the various Group Actions we are running. It is a lot easier
and cheaper to disseminate information about the progress of
a case by using the internet than to send out a mail merge letter
which can run to thousands of pieces of paper. Obviously, one
needs to tell the various solicitors in the Group that something
has happened. One can direct them, however, to the website,
by sending everyone an email far more easily than individual
mail merge letters. Most solicitors these days are connected
to the internet and can access information quite easily. Because
the internet is not completely secure, one must be careful that
the information published on even a secure site is not extremely
sensitive.
Feedback from my last
article
Following my last article, I received quite a lot of feedback
from interested solicitors. I continued to be interested in
hearing from any firm who have attempted to go paperless in
the same way as I have. I highlight one or two queries briefly.
Postal delivery software
I explained in my last article that with most Case Management
Systems there can be purchased a scanned image postal delivery
system. Eclipse Legal supply a scanning and distribution system
which is more efficient than our present email facility. One
is presented with a Batch Scanning Screen with a large window
to view the image once it is scanned in. The idea is that first
of all one selects all documents and scans them in en masse.
One then views each document and attaches it to the appropriate
reference or fee earner. This post is automatically attached
to the case and appears in the fee earner's inbox without it
having to be delivered by email. This is better than the email
system because:
* Sending large images through the email system slows it down
and places demands on the network
* Many duplicate copies of the post appearing in email outboxes
and inboxes is avoided.
* If post is wrongly delivered it can easily be transferred
to the correct addressee without using the email system.
It is prudent to save each document separately. Large images
containing main different documents are not only difficult to
navigate but also place demands upon any computer network. The
Case Management Delivery system also creates an automatic backup
of all the scanned in post. The delivery system for the admin
staff is thus quicker and more efficient. The post will thus
be delivered.
Summary
The lessons I have learnt from the process can be summarised
as follows:
* Introduce the paperless office slowly with a pilot scheme
if possible.
* Make sure all your fee earners embrace the system and are
completely on board before making the change.
* Do not try to create a completely paperless environment.
One must retain paper documents in various different situations.
Courts still need to see original documents.
* Train all staff thoroughly.
* Be prepared to use the old-fashioned paper system willingly
when requested.
* Do not get frustrated if other people are not as enthusiastic
as you are.
The future
My vision of the future is:-
* An office with no paper, less dust, more space and a much
cleaner environment where all members of staff can access any
document they need quickly and efficiently on screen. The frustration
caused by losing a piece of paper will go away. Frustrating
hours spent searching for paper, which has gone missing, will
no longer be spent.
* Fee earners will spend much less of their time shuffling
pieces of paper from one place to another. Administrative boring
tasks will be automated and lawyers will spend more of their
time doing what they are good at, namely advising on the law
and tactical guidance.
* Secretaries will change their role from typists to legal
assistants. The role of paralegal and secretary will merge more
than at present.
* Communication systems with clients will improve through the
use of email, the internet and other systems.
* Cases will run more quickly and smoothly. Time delays caused
by slow communication systems will be reduced.
I hope I have not painted Nirvana but a reality, which is not
too far away. I appreciate that governments are committed to
introducing technology so as to improve efficiency. I think
my vision is probably 10 years away. Only time will tell.
© Peter Garsden,
Abney Garsden McDonald
Peter Garsden
is a Partner in Abney Garsden McDonald, Solicitors, 37 Station
Road, Cheadle Hulme, Cheshire SK8 5AF. Tel: 0161 482 882. Email:
peter@abneys.co.uk. Website: www.abneys.co.uk.
Abney Garsden McDonald is in the Legal 500, a member of the
Multi-Party Action Panel and has members of the firm on the
Personal Injury Panel. We specialise in Child Abuse compensation
claims and general Personal Injury work. Peter
Garsden is a founder member of ACAL (Association of Child
Abuse Lawyers www.childabuselawyers.com).
.gif){kind=small}