Last time we looked at the annoying tendency of law firm partners to buy new IT systems but then abdicate all responsibility for their subsequent implementation and leave it to their overworked, underpaid and frequently under-appreciated staff - the little people - to sort out the mess. As I mentioned in an earlier column: leadership must come from the top - you cannot push string; nor can you expect staff to resolve major IT issues without some commitment from senior management.


However, when an IT implementation project does run into problems so serious that even the most ostrich-minded partners cannot continue to ignore them any longer (for example, where a firm has become bogged down trying to organise a new accounts and practice management system - and I know of a couple currently running about 18 months behind schedule on this type of project) then the inevitable reaction is over-reaction. From doing nothing, it is suddenly all hands to the pumps, send in the cavalry and generally, a good impression of a headless chicken.



Charles Christian: cutting corners is a false economy
Unfortunately, it is at this point you risk running into a phenomenon that is known in computing circles as Brooks' Law (named after Fred Brooks, a US software engineer). This states: 'It is a false assumption that adding manpower simply adds to productivity - adding manpower to a late software project only makes it later.' This is not least because time will be wasted bringing those new people up to speed on the history and progress of the project.



If you bring in external resources, such as your software supplier's staff or a third-party consultancy, you will also have to spend time explaining your business to them and why you took the decision you did. And, partners being partners, once they become involved, they will inevitably spend their valuable fee-earning time holding post-mortems into what went wrong and who to blame rather than focusing on trying to fix the problem.


The message is simple: if you devote the correct management and staff resources to an IT project from the outset, you will complete it far quicker and cheaper (leaving aside all other factors, if it takes you 18 months rather than six months to replace an accounts system, that is another year of software licence fees and maintenance charges you will have to pay your old supplier) than if you first try to cut corners and then have to pick up the pieces. Next time: more reasons why IT projects can go bad.



Charles Christian is an independent adviser to the Law Society's Software Solutions Guide