Previous Page

The 1998 Law Firm Technology Survey

Word vs. WordPerfect

Given the word-intensive nature of law practice, it's no surprise the survey found that word processing again far outranks other software applications used by attorneys. (See Figure 3.) As for the word processing software of choice, WordPerfect® tops the list, with Windows® or DOS versions used by 60 percent of firms surveyed. (See Figure 4.) However, Microsoft Word® use in law firms keeps gradually climbing ­ up from 12 percent in 1996, to 22 percent in 1997, to 28 percent in 1998. One-fourth of the firms said they plan to switch or upgrade their word processing software in 1999. Of those, slightly more say they'll opt for Word rather than WordPerfect (31 percent versus 27 percent).

The most common reason lawyers cite for switching to Word is to be compatible with their clients. But behind that decision, Kodner argues, is the misconception that compatibility with the rest of the business world comes by "merely waving one's magical Microsoft wand," he says. "It's a much more complicated issue than just having the same software."

For instance, older Word programs can't read documents generated by newer versions of Word. Even trading documents that both were created by the same version can prove tricky. If someone sends a document in which layout is critical, such as a trial brief with footnote and page references, to someone with a different default printer, the document will come out with different pagination.

"My view is that in future surveys, smart firms will answer that they have both Word and WordPerfect," Kodner predicts. Bob Hagness is among the lawyers who already have opted for that solution. He owns Microsoft Word as well as Windows and DOS versions of WordPerfect. Each has its strengths and weaknesses in creating certain types of legal documents. "Do you know any mechanic who just uses one wrench?" Hagness asks. "Isn't the whole idea to use the tool that works best for what you need?"

Another future solution to this quandary may be the adoption of XML standards in document formats. Both Corel and Microsoft have stated they will include XML in their products' new versions due out this year. If that really happens, "the issue of proprietary document formats will become moot," Kodner points out, "and it won't make any difference what program you use. The document will come out the same regardless."

Buying trends

Those using older systems should be looking at their Year 2000 risks, advises Muth. "A significant minority of firms (33 percent use DOS, 22 percent use Windows 3.x) still are using older operating systems," Muth points out. "And a substantial number still have 386 and 486 computers. It's those older systems that are more likely to have Year 2000 problems."

Looking ahead, surveyed lawyers say the top three tasks they plan to computerize in their offices in 1999 are optical character recognition (9 percent), Internet access (8 percent), and voice recognition (8 percent). (See Figure 7.) Pennow predicts that voice recognition will be the next big leap in technology adoption among lawyers, perhaps replacing once and for all the magnetic tape-based dictating machine many lawyers still use.

"One thing the survey didn't ask is how many lawyers type their own documents, as opposed to dictating them," Pennow says. "I would guess 80 percent still dictate. They are the target market for voice recognition. Even for those of us who type, if we were presented with a logical, reasonable, workable alternative in terms of voice recognition, I think most of us would gravitate toward it." Voice recognition allows direct input of speech into the computer; what you say is entered directly into the computer and appears on the screen in typewritten form. Until about a year ago, voice recognition programs required the speaker to use discrete speech ­ that is, to ... talk ... like ... this, cumbersome for the user to say the least. Now the software has advanced to be able to handle continuous speech, and it does a fairly decent job of recognizing homonyms in real time (such as to, too, two).

Accompanying any trend toward voice recognition would be a push toward buying the newest Pentium-based machines, Pennow says, because voice recognition technology requires a lot of electronic muscle. "You're going to see people buying more high-powered Pentiums," Pennow says, "especially, ironically, among the older lawyers, because they'll want to go to voice recognition."

"If some of the pundits are correct," Pennow adds, "this will become the tail wagging the dog. Everybody will want a new computer so they can handle voice recognition the way a lawyer would expect it to be handled, that is, permitting seamless speech at whatever rate the lawyer chooses and being essentially error-free."

Another technological tool increasingly making its way into law offices is the laptop or notebook computer. Of survey respondents, one-fifth say they own a portable computer, and 8 percent say they plan to buy one in the coming year. One of those considering such a move is Bob Hagness. "I think there will be a shift toward more and more lawyers making a portable computer their only computer," he says. "You don't have any hassle about whether you have the right things with you all the time. You don't have to waste time copying things here and there."

Perhaps just as importantly, portables can help lawyers overcome what they say is their chief barrier to learning to use new technology: lack of time. "When lawyers say they don't have time," Hagness points out, "what they're really saying is that they have no desire to spend all their time at the office." When he owned a portable before, "I found that some nights I would just choose to fool around and learn more about how to use a program," he says. "I only did it because it was there. I wouldn't have walked one block to go to the office to do it."

What can the Bar do?

The survey asked respondents what the Bar could do to assist them in adopting technology. Fifty-six percent said they would like hands-on training in computer and software skills, even if it came with no CLE credit, while 27 percent wanted such training only if it earned them CLE credit. The Bar plans to offer hands-on technology training in its new computer training room following its move to new headquarters in summer 1999.

A question new to this year's survey was whether lawyers would be interested in the Bar investigating and recommending software packages and hardware vendors. About half the respondents indicated they would like the Bar to offer such a service, while the remaining half said they get such help elsewhere or don't need it.

The assorted information derived from the survey will help the Bar fashion its member services. "We do the survey so we can better understand the technology needs of members," says Art Saffran, the Bar's computer services director. "That helps us in planning for the kinds of products we offer through WisBar, for example. It allows us to keep tabs on the rate of adoption of technology by our membership, because we are expecting, over the next 10 years or so, to see a shift toward lawyers wanting to get a lot of information from the Bar electronically. Also, by asking questions about training, we get a sense of where member interests lie."

Dianne Molvig operates Access Information Service, a Madison research, writing, and editing service. She is a frequent contributor to area publications.