Collaboration Systems – an Essential Tool for Knowledge Workers? - IT Panel Article 2003

In an increasingly connected and therefore shrinking world where working “in partnership” is becoming “de rigeur” a computer application that allows easy collaboration over the production of documents by people in different geographical locations is fast becoming an essential IT tool. The true benefit of working on disk rather than on paper is the ability for a number of people in a team to see each other’s work, as well as their own private notes or annotations.

The first step to collaborative working is, for some, the sharing of ideas by email or the forwarding of MS Word drafts as attachments. The use of ‘Track Changes’ allows various people to suggest amendments to an original document, but experience shows that one of the parties must retain full ‘editorial control’ where drafts are being prepared by a number of people.

Although collaborative working systems allowing controlled access to groups have been available for some time, take-up of this form of working has been slow in the Legal profession. At present such systems are rarely used in general practice, but are the province of a handful of City firms engaged in ‘big ticket’ litigation, often involving fee earners in remote locations. However, as the use of technology becomes widespread in general practice, the advantages of such team working will no doubt increase dramatically.

Such software packages offer:

On-screen displays that are obvious and easy to use
Easy to set-up and administer shared workspace
Version control
Integration of the collaboration application with a range of different authoring applications
Robust security for documents and messaging
Reductions in travel and meetings

A growing number of solutions have appeared and continue to appear – all of which address some of the requirements but few, if any, of which yet address all of them.

Some need every partner or user to invest in their own software licences; some are available as managed services; some allow licence holders to assign licences to temporary partners.
Some demand that every collaborator holds their own copy of a common document. This makes keeping all the documents in synch for all the collaborators extremely difficult and time consuming.
Some are very compartmentalised and complex to use if the same documents and people are involved in multiple collaborations – but cannot move easily between them.
Some are more people centred allowing multiple projects to be viewed and managed.
Some provide flexibility for comprehensive automation of the flow of work between the collaborators and the capability to automate the alerting of other people that, for example, it is their turn to carry out the next task.

Choosing the right application for your specific circumstances is sometimes made difficult by marketing hype and claims for functionality that is only actually available through expensive bespoke development.

There is only one essential step that everyone should take. Before talking to any vendor define for yourself precisely what collaboration means for you in practical terms. If you have any doubts of your ability to carry out this analysis engage the services of an independent adviser. Then set some measurable deliverables that your system must deliver.

Only when you have completed this stage, contact vendors and demand that they demonstrate that they can achieve your chosen measures by means, say, of a pilot or prototype.

By then you will know what makes sense for you to sign up for!

Nigel Phelps, MD Catalysts Ltd.
Jeremy Barnett, St Pauls Chambers.

(Published in the Bar News supplement to Counsel November 2003)