The major existing legal software programs are now about 15-20 years old. They were launched in the period 1988-1993: Worldox, Time Matters, PCLaw, Amicus, Tabs, etc. Then for a long time there were very few major new products. The existing products matured, developed more features, etc. But the overall choices available remained pretty stable.
However, in the past couple of years this has changed, as Seth Rowland noted in a recent blog, a series of Internet-based (“SaaS”) products have appeared in various areas: Document Mmanagement, Practice Management, Time & Billing, etc. These programs are still mainly fairly immature, lacking features and functionality that users of the PC-based programs have become accustomed to. However, in the next few years these programs will mature: they are already doing so at a rapid pace.
One thing that is needed is for the US Internet infrastructure to catch up with European countries, which typically offer 4-5 times the speed that is generally available in the US.
Another is features. Ross Kodner notes that if Salesforce can be a major force, smaller companies will eventually work out questions of logistics and security, primarily local backup and use when the “cloud” is unavailable.
With so many startups, it is inevitable that some of them will fold. The only thing I can see that would put a serious dent in the progress of SaaS programs is that if one of them were to fail spectacularly, with clients losing all their data. This happened a number of times during the first go-round of SaaS nearly 10 years ago (then known as ASP).
That’s all very well and good, you may say, but I have some decisions to make TODAY. What should I do?
As far as I can see, the firms asking this question fall into roughly three categories.
First, firms that are well entrenched with an existing program such as Time Matters or Amicus, but are very unhappy for one reason or another (bugs, price) and looking around for options. There are two major obstacles to these firms switching. First, it will be extremely difficult and expensive to convert their existing data. Conversion utilities are likely to improve in the next several years as the need becomes more prevalent. Second, they are likely to be unhappy with the lack of familiar features in the SaaS programs. They should look very carefully at how they currently work, what customization has been made, and check that the SaaS program has the features they need. Most likely, the best choice for these firms is to stay put for a year or two. By that time conversion may be easier and the SaaS programs more full-featured.
Second, the small firm just starting out. Their main choice is whether or not to go with a SaaS program and “tough it out” waiting for new features to arrive. If a given program does not offer critical elements they need, does not offer local backup and does not offer some degree of customization, I would look elsewhere. The other option is to go with a “tried and true” program and risk that in a couple of years they will be in the same bind others are feeling today.
The third category is the “in-betweens.” To a large extent what they should do depends on firm culture, how risk-averse they are, whether they are sufficiently frustrated to “start over,” and so on. A general rule of thumb in this situation is to sit down and make three lists: “What are the 5 (or 10) features I most like/need in my current program,” “What are the 5 (or 10) features I hate most about my current programs” and “What are the 5 features I wish my current software could do that it can’t.” Use these lists as check lists when evaluating new software.
However, in the past couple of years this has changed, as Seth Rowland noted in a recent blog, a series of Internet-based (“SaaS”) products have appeared in various areas: Document Mmanagement, Practice Management, Time & Billing, etc. These programs are still mainly fairly immature, lacking features and functionality that users of the PC-based programs have become accustomed to. However, in the next few years these programs will mature: they are already doing so at a rapid pace.
One thing that is needed is for the US Internet infrastructure to catch up with European countries, which typically offer 4-5 times the speed that is generally available in the US.
Another is features. Ross Kodner notes that if Salesforce can be a major force, smaller companies will eventually work out questions of logistics and security, primarily local backup and use when the “cloud” is unavailable.
With so many startups, it is inevitable that some of them will fold. The only thing I can see that would put a serious dent in the progress of SaaS programs is that if one of them were to fail spectacularly, with clients losing all their data. This happened a number of times during the first go-round of SaaS nearly 10 years ago (then known as ASP).
That’s all very well and good, you may say, but I have some decisions to make TODAY. What should I do?
As far as I can see, the firms asking this question fall into roughly three categories.
First, firms that are well entrenched with an existing program such as Time Matters or Amicus, but are very unhappy for one reason or another (bugs, price) and looking around for options. There are two major obstacles to these firms switching. First, it will be extremely difficult and expensive to convert their existing data. Conversion utilities are likely to improve in the next several years as the need becomes more prevalent. Second, they are likely to be unhappy with the lack of familiar features in the SaaS programs. They should look very carefully at how they currently work, what customization has been made, and check that the SaaS program has the features they need. Most likely, the best choice for these firms is to stay put for a year or two. By that time conversion may be easier and the SaaS programs more full-featured.
Second, the small firm just starting out. Their main choice is whether or not to go with a SaaS program and “tough it out” waiting for new features to arrive. If a given program does not offer critical elements they need, does not offer local backup and does not offer some degree of customization, I would look elsewhere. The other option is to go with a “tried and true” program and risk that in a couple of years they will be in the same bind others are feeling today.
The third category is the “in-betweens.” To a large extent what they should do depends on firm culture, how risk-averse they are, whether they are sufficiently frustrated to “start over,” and so on. A general rule of thumb in this situation is to sit down and make three lists: “What are the 5 (or 10) features I most like/need in my current program,” “What are the 5 (or 10) features I hate most about my current programs” and “What are the 5 features I wish my current software could do that it can’t.” Use these lists as check lists when evaluating new software.