E-MAIL: survey of small firms shows only younger lawyers expect to communicate using e-mail on a regular basis

The growth of e-mail and the Internet has increased pressure on solicitors and led clients to expect instant responses, a survey of small firms' attitudes to e-business has revealed.

Law Society research, based on small focus groups with representatives of 25 law firms, found that small firms have a mixed view of the virtues of technology.

The qualitative research was the second phase of a study of small firms' attitude to e-business.

A quantitative survey of 602 firms of one to ten partners published last summer found that solicitors' personal reluctance to use computers is holding back universal desktop PC access (see [2003] Gazette, 5 June, 1).

The qualitative study mirrored the findings that sole practitioners were the least likely to have adopted the new technology, and that while the overall picture was encouraging, 'in half of the firms, there were fee-earners who did not use the most basic of software'.

One focus group participant described the growth of e-mail as a 'nightmare', claiming to receive five e-mails a day from some clients, expecting immediate replies.

But solicitors were frustrated by the lack of e-mail use by the courts and Prison Service, despite the technology available to them.

Firms involved in legal aid work said their clients were less likely to make use of e-mail, while those dealing with a 'young professional' client base said their clients nearly always expected to communicate by electronic means.

While most of the focus groups saw considerable benefits in the expansion of the Internet, there were also concerns.

One solicitor said: 'I think the end result of getting work done quicker is that you're expected to be paid much less for the work you're doing.

So ultimately you have to do four times as much work to be paid what you have been paid for one hour's work before.'

Many of the solicitors questioned had implemented a formal Internet/e-mail policy, with some expressing an interest in packages that scan outgoing messages to ensure that junior members are not sending out unsupervised advice.

Some firms supervised staff closely, with all incoming and outgoing e-mails copied to a partner.

Staff reluctance to embrace new technologies was a common complaint, with older staff particularly problematic.

The extent to which partners and fee-earners used technology tended to be left to personal preference rather than any strict policy, with many partners preferring to work traditionally through dictation and secretarial support.

Some respondents said case management systems were not put to optimum use because of the reluctance of older staff to change their working practices, or difficulties in connecting the package to, for example, accounting software.

Where solicitors had moved from a firm which employed case management systems to one which did not, they felt they were missing out.

E-conveyancing proved a hot topic, with many diverse views; some respondents said there had been a lack of consultation and input from law firms on this issue.

Solicitors welcomed a speeding-up of the conveyancing process but had reservations about the security of the system.

Two-thirds of respondents maintained a Web site purely as a brochure, with only one-fifth keeping an interactive site.

One solicitor commented: 'You can spend all day long answering enquiries from people well outside your catchment area, who would have no interest in instructing you.'

The aim of the research is to inform Law Society policy on helping small firms adapt to IT.

Rachel Rothwell