Working With Integrators and Consultants By: Chris Maas, President, Potomac Consulting Group

Many legal administrators and their technology staff rely on external resources to provide supplemental services especially for major projects like technology rollouts or other interim needs.  Some firms look to a single source for all technical services whether it involves assessing their current technology, implementing a network, or integrating a new customer relationship management system.  Other firms adopt a different approach and draw upon multiple resources depending on each resource’s role.  The most common labels affixed to external resources are consultants and integrators and some administrators use these terms interchangeably.  However, there is usually a different between the two and this article describes the differences between consultants and integrators, their definition, circumstances when you might consider using them and their selection.

A Litmus Test

For those who believe integrators and consultants are the same, we propose the following litmus test. 

Think back to your last technology project where you relied upon external resources for advice and implementation services.  Did the vendor providing the recommendations offer the names of two or three other companies to perform the work or did they perform the work?  If the company who provided the advice did not perform or ask for the work, that company was a pure consulting company.  If the company who provided the recommendations also performed the work, that company is an integrator. 

If you’ve ever purchased a car you might understand there being a possible conflict of interest between what you need and what you’re offered.  Like any sales transaction, the auto representative attempts to convince you that they have your best interests at heart while the salesperson attempts to determine features that will sell their product as quick as possible.  Few auto salespeople will try and determine all of your requirements and no salesperson will say to not buy any car or no Ford salesperson will recommend that you might be better off with a Dodge and provide directions to the Dodge dealer.  Automobile sales, as well as most transactions, are driven by revenue and this is readily accepted by most.  If the Ford salesperson doesn’t convince you that his models are superior and close a sale, they do not eat.

Why is purchasing technology different?

Unlike buying a car, purchasing your firm’s technology affects the Firm’s ability to provide service to clients. Technology purchases should be handled carefully to ensure solutions meet the firm’s requirements, not the needs and wallets of the provider.  Who can you trust to provide unbiased advice to ensure your solutions meet your requirements?

Differences Between Consultants or Integrators

Both consultants and integrators provide advice and in some instances, they appear very similar.  So what are the differences between a consultant and integrator? 

Consultants

True consultants derive revenue by providing independent advice. They represent only the interest of the firm and should be free of outside relationships with product or service vendors and should receive no compensation from other parties providing the solutions.  With no financial stake in their recommendations, no conflict of interest exists.  As long as a qualified integrator provides the recommended solution, it doesn’t matter to the consultant who does it. 

Integrators

Integrators typically focus on specific products or projects and make their money by selling hardware, software, and the services related to implementing or maintaining products.  Most likely their available services coincide with their recommendations and like the Ford salesperson, will they never encourage you to solicit proposals from another competitor.

Why You Might Need Consultants and Integrators

Your Firm’s Information Technology staff has three primary functions to support your Firm’s legal services which include:

1.       Implement the technology that best serves the needs of the Firm;

2.       Keep deployed technology up and running; and

3.       Help the user community make the best possible use of the technology.     

Your firm’s success with technology depends on building and sustaining an effective technology staff.   While every firm has its own approach to technology staffing, successful technology departments share some common elements that include:

1. Senior management sponsorship which may be a Technology Partner, a Technology Committee, the Management Committee, or any combination thereof;
2. The firm Administrator, who is charged with making sure that all resources required by the Technology Department are available and technology services are adequate;
3. A Technology Director who is directly accountable for implementing and managing technology;
4. Resources that have strong user support skills that can keep the user community up and running (The Help Desk and Training);
5. Technical skills and experience to implement technology and keep it available; and
6. Technology management skills to provide direction.

The technology sponsorship and management function (1. – 3.) should always be internal to the Firm.   For smaller firms that have no Technology Director, the firm’s technology responsibility falls on the Administrator, no matter how technically savvy he or she may be. The final three elements, (4. – 6.) are usually handled by internal technology staff but are also frequently supplemented by consultants and integrators.  Under what conditions do firms typically use consultants and integrators?

When to Use Integrators and Consultants

Consultants – Firms should use consultants only as needed.  This can be on a scheduled basis (annual assessments or reviews) or with respect to discrete engagements.  In general firms use consultants for “process and direction” and other activities which include:

·                     Technology advice;

·                     Technology and security assessments with recommendations;

·                     Strategic and operational technology planning and budgeting;

·                     Technology staffing and outsourcing recommendations ;

·                     Planning and managing large projects; and

·                     Other specific problems.

Integrators - Integrators are used to address large scale projects when the firm’s doesn’t have enough resources to adequately complete the project in-house and also for technical backup functions.  For large projects an integrator might be retained to plan and implement a new mail system which might include implementing the pilot, new desktop application, integration with voicemail and document management, implementation, and training.  For backup functions, the integrator might be the main source for technology troubleshooting and emergency technical support.  Though rare for larger firms, sometimes an integrator can completely support a law firm’s basic network and telecommunications operation on a continuing out-sourced basis.  Not every firm will use an integrator for all of these activities, but for many firms, their integrator is an on-going, daily part of their technology support model.  These activities imply a regular, sustained engagement with the firm. 

As a rule of thumb, for:

·                     Technology solutions (hardware, software and telecommunications) – use an integrator

·                     Knotty technical problems – use the integrator

·                     Advice and guidance – use the consultant

·                     User community issues – use the consultant

·                     Overall large project management – use the consultant

Many factors influence how much law firms spend on consultants versus integrators.  One rule of thumb, based on empirical evidence, is that larger firms typically spend approximately $7 - $10 on integrators for every $1 they spend on consultants.

Examples of Consultant and Integrator Use as it Relates to the Technology Department’s Primary Functions

The three primary functions of a technology staff were listed as implementing technology that best serves the needs of the firm,  keep technology up and running, and ensure users make the best possible use of the technology.  This section provides a glimpse as to where consultants and integrators might fit when supporting these primary functions.

Implementing Technology that Best Serves Firm Needs

There are two parts to implementing the right technology.  The first is identifying requirements, evaluating possible solutions, and the selection of the right solution.   The second is the implementation of the solution.  

Consultants can help a firm with the first part by identifying requirements, evaluating options, and assisting with the selection process.  To determine requirements consultants are used to assess the firm’s technology and services. The result is an independent analysis, recommendations, and requirements which can be used to develop technology plans and request for proposals (rfp) to solicit proposals from integrators.

Integrators are contracted to assist with the second part by designing and implementing the selected technology solution.  In some cases consultants participate with implementing the solution by performing project management on behalf of the firm. 

Keeping the Technology Available

Consultants are usually not the right resource to use when maintaining existing technology because while consultants provide analysis and advice, they typically don’t offer reactive technical services to resolve technical issues.  These services are usually left to integrators with network support services.  Integrators assist firms with keeping technology available by functioning as a backup technical resource to resolve issues that the firm’s staff cannot solve.  Integrators can be invaluable to assist with troubleshooting an email or router issue and can fill the void left by poor manufacturer support.

For small firms, integrators can also function as the sole technology resource, coming on-site daily or periodically to resolve issues.  For larger firms, integrators can staff technical positions during times of vacation or attrition.

Helping the User Community with the Best Use of the Technology

When you consider supporting users, a consultant would be used to assess the firm’s user training and support services, develop training requirements based on user job functions and proficiency standards, develop request for proposals and assist in the vendor selection process, develop training plans, evaluate training project effectiveness, manage floor support, establish help desks, review training materials, draft procedures, and provide ongoing advice regarding the training and support programs.  The consulting company would not be used to perform remediation to address identified issues or perform the recommended training.

Providing user training and support is typically performed in house except by smaller firms who have no training and support staff and by large firms during large technology rollouts when resources are stretched thin.  A training company is an integrator with respect to how they provide training recommendations and then bid on the recommended services.  Firms hire the training and support companies to conduct training, help desk staffing, and in the cases of major rollouts, floor support assistance.

What Should You Look for in a Consultant?

A legal technology consultant should have broad, management level expertise with technology and its application in the legal environment.  It is reasonable to expect a consultant to have:

·                     Minimal or no direct business relationships with specific hardware and software vendors;

·                     No direct financial interest in your selecting and using specific products.  In fact, one analytical option that every good consultant should offer is for a client to “do nothing”;

·                     Experience with many other law firms who have implemented a variety of similar products from different vendors and different integrators.  Consultants should not always recommend that a specific vendor or integrator provide services;

·                     Consultants are not always vendor-trained or certified for specific products.  To the extent that consultants are vendor-certified, this is to become familiarized with products so they can offer better-educated advice.  (Document management and back-office accounting systems, for example, are two areas where consultants may seek training);

·                     Awareness of new and emerging trends in legal technology products and services.  Legal technology consultants sell their familiarity with a wide variety of products and their relative market position; 

·                     They should be investing time in keeping their knowledge current;

·                     Provide practical advice for revising existing business process to create efficient workflow when a new product is introduced to a law firm; and

·                     Good consultants build on an integrator’s project plan to develop an overall project deployment plan.  A consultant’s job is to make sure that the users are up and running with new technology.  

What Should You Look for in an Integrator?

A legal integrator should have in-depth, law firm-specific experience and also have expertise with the hardware, software, and other technology that is or will be installed and supported.  It is reasonable to expect an integrator to have:

·                     A business relationship with the applicable hardware and software vendors, i.e., the integrator makes money from selling that vendor’s hardware or software products.  The product vendor, in turn, provides product for resale and enhanced technical support to the integrator’s staff;

·                     Ready access to the product for immediate resale; 

·                     Spare hardware and replacement parts on-hand or quickly available;

·                     One of more members of the integrator’s staff trained and certified on the products offered by the integrator;.

·                     Prior law firm installations of the product and active support of the product;

·                     A direct financial interest in a client selecting and using the specific products that an integrator recommends and offers.  Integrators have invested considerable time and effort into building specific product relationships, and are seeking return on that investment; and

·                     Experience in organizing project plans and deployment schedules.  An integrator’s job is to get the technology up and running, regardless of the solution that the client ultimately chooses. 

Hiring Consultants

A consultant’s knowledge and industry experience should be the primary criteria when selecting a consultant.  True legal consulting firms are relatively rare so some firms may have to look nationwide for the right consultant.   Because consultants are typically retained for limited engagements, the consultant’s geographical location is less important.  In evaluating potential legal technology consultants, a firm should also look for: 

·                     A good “fit” between the consultant and the relevant need or issue;

·                     Good legal industry references with firms of similar size and engagements; and

·                     An ability to be objective and tell a client what it needs to hear, not just what it wants to hear.  This can usually be ascertained from references or interviews with the consulting firm.

Hiring Integrators

As with any professional service, the most important criteria include implementation knowledge and experience with the selected technology solution.  Although secondary, integrators will likely require considerable on-site time. Because of the need for quick response and to keep costs low, the best integrator should have a local presence or otherwise have an established mechanism for responding in-person within a contractually-set response time.  However, some cities do not have a good legal specific integrator and considering integrators from outside the local area should not be ruled out.  If you retain an integrator from outside your metropolitan area, ensure your expense budget reflects the additional travel costs.  A good integrator has:

·                     Legal industry expertise and experience;

·                     A good “fit” to the firm’s technology.  This means that an integrator’s staff is trained or certified to support a wide range of the firm’s hardware and software they will be responsible for.  In addition, a good integrator interested in establishing a long-term relationship should be willing to “come up to speed” on unfamiliar technology that they are not familiar with;

·                     A good “fit” with the firm’s technology staff.  A good integrator will comfortably within the technology staff’s schedules, organization ,work habits and will have skill sets that complement—not replace—existing technology staff.  An integrator does not have to be the “best friend” of the technology staff, but they should have professional social skills and be able to work well together;

·                     Good legal industry references that include firms of similar size, and with similar technology; and

·                     Good financial strength.  A relationship with a good integrator can last for years.  It’s important to know that the integrator is unlikely to close its doors in the near future.

Conclusion:  “Ethical Walls”

 There are some ethical boundaries that you should expect from your consultants and integrators and we offer them here.

1.       Companies that “do the work” should not help the firm decide on whether to do it or who should do it.  For new projects, integrators should never draft requests for proposals on which they expect to bid;

2.       Consultants that are hired to give advice should not do the work.  Consultants should never bid on proposals that they prepare and manage;

3.       Unless they are disclosed, in advance, consultants should never take fees for an engagement from anyone other than their clients.  This includes “referral fees” and sales commissions from product and services provided by others;

4.       Technology and security audits should not be done by an Integrator;

5.       If the consultant recommends replacing an integrator (or internal staff), the consultant should never be the replacement; and

6.       Integrators and consultants can “fill-in” for technology staff, but they should not replace them.

Select your consultants and integrators with care by defining the role you wish each to play, know your selection criteria, and ensure they know your expectations before the engagement contract is executed and the work begins and you’ll increase your project’s success.

------------------------------

Chris Maas is president of Potomac Consulting Group and can be reached at chris.maas@potomac.com or 703.527.1260 x250

Editor: Todd A. Wiggins (twiggins@cpmas.com) (This publication is the property of the Atlanta Association of Legal Administrators. Reproduction or reprint without prior permission is strictly prohibited. Click here to request reprint permission.)

Designed/Distributed By