1 December 2012PatentsChris Vigars

IP management software—a customer's story

The large, established firm

At Haseltine Lake, one of the larger firms of patent and trademark attorneys in the UK, I was the partner responsible for IT matters from 2000 to 2008. When I took over this responsibility, the firm used an established system that had been developed in-house. The individuals most closely associated with the soft ware had recently retired or were just about to retire, so the expertise that the firm had held for a long period was dissipating.

I therefore embarked on a programme to evaluate and then implement replacement docketing and accounting systems from third party vendors.

The start-up attorney firm

In early 2008, I left the partnership of Haseltine Lake in order to set up a new venture— ElementOne IP. This would be a very different organisation from the one I had left, both in terms of scale and concept. However, my first decision was to implement the same IP management system that had proved so successful at my previous firm, albeit in a different way.

The business case, or ‘why do we need to change?’

Firms of all sizes need to make a clear case for implementing a new IT system. Such systems are profoundly important in supporting the core business of the firm and, therefore, decisions need to be taken carefully and with suitable consideration.

Confidence underpins the relationship that a private practice firm has with its clients, and this confidence starts with the professional quality of the attorneys and the advice they dispense. However, in an administration-heavy field such as patent and trademark prosecution, the quality of the case management systems and processes is an equally important aspect of a firm’s ability to gain the confidence of its clients.

In the situation in which I found myself in 2000, the unsupported nature of the docketing system was the single biggest risk to the firm at that time. Losing cases due to technological failures was simply not an option. Client confidence would have evaporated quickly and would have been virtually impossible to recover. Building the case for replacement was, therefore, relatively straightforward.

In support of this main point, the operational advantages offered by implementing a flexible, tailored case management system were numerous. It is difficult to quantify efficiency improvements, the ability to off er new and improved services and the like, but these all contribute to building the case for change.

When it came to my start-up firm, my underlying aim was the same—minimise risk and build confidence. The implementation of a full case management package from day one has contributed to achieving this aim.

Selecting the system and the vendor

The selection of the correct system is driven by different factors. There are objective factors including costs, likely implementation time, resources needed for implementation, and availability of resources at the firm and vendor.

Then there are subjective factors including the standing of the vendor, the client base of the vendor, the ability/need for customisation, how the vendor approaches case management (that is, from an IP or an IT perspective), and how well do I/we work with the vendor’s team.

For Haseltine Lake, I carried out a broad information-gathering exercise to determine what products were available and what the headline capabilities of those products were. This exercise resulted in a final shortlist of two possible systems.

In order to choose between the shortlisted systems, a day-long assessment was held with each vendor. The firm’s team for the assessment included personnel from various departments and offices across the firm, so that we could have a wide range of views at this important early stage.

During the evaluation day, extensive discussions were held with the vendor’s team on various conceptual and implementation matters. We then moved on to a detailed demonstration of the products themselves in an ‘out of the box’ form, based on specific case studies provided to the vendors in advance.

“The purpose of the detailed demonstration was three-fold: firstly, to provide us with an indication as to how the product handled certain situations; secondly, to demonstrate how the vendor dealt with important issues; and thirdly, to show how much customisation was possible, desirable or necessary.”

The purpose of the detailed demonstration was three-fold: first, to provide us with an indication as to how the product handled certain situations; second, to demonstrate how the vendor dealt with important issues; and third, to show how much customisation was possible, desirable or necessary.

An additional, but very important, result of the evaluation day was to understand how my team would work with the vendor’s team. The result of this process was the selection of the Patricia system from Patrix Intellectual Property Helpware, with offices in the US and Europe.

At ElementOne, the decision-making process was somewhat more straightforward. In my view, implementation of case management software is essential. I decided that it was necessary to have a solution that would work without customisation, since I no longer had the resources available, but that could be customised over time. As the solution that I had previously implemented provided both of these aspects extremely well, I opted once again for the Patricia system.

Implementation, customisation and development

Having selected a suitable base product, it is tempting to want to customise that product in such a way that it reflects existing systems and work patterns. However, the change of system presents an excellent opportunity to review and improve existing work practices.

In order to achieve a successful implementation of the system that provided Haseltine Lake with tangible benefits from day one, I assembled a dedicated implementation team from all parts of the business: professional, administration, accounts, secretarial and management areas were all represented in the team.

In my view, there is no substitute for in-depth and detailed understanding of the product, so I spent many hours understanding the concepts and underlying operation of the product as delivered, so that any customisation could be made in a suitably long-term manner.

‘Long-term’ is the important phrase in that last sentence—spending time and effort in the early stages of implementation pays handsome dividends later on.

Organisation is vital to successful implementation of a new system—both beforehand in the customisation phase and on the big day itself. In our case, we made the transition over a long weekend: running and testing a data conversion, performing some data cleaning, testing case data files and system processes, while rolling out and testing client applications. Following the switch-over to the new system, we had helpdesk and support functions in place to help with initial user queries.

I instigated a process whereby user requests for changes were logged, but not implemented for at least one month after switch-over. We did this so that changes were not made just because of users’ unfamiliarity with the new system. Essential fixes were, of course, made during this time.

Following implementation, a continual development programme was put in place in order to maximise benefit from the new system. A development team consisting of many members of the implementation team was formed to consider and recommend enhancements to the system, and to oversee implementation of those enhancements.

Integration with other software products

Particularly for larger organisations, integrating with existing applications is a significant issue that also needs careful consideration. Since accounting and customer relationship management systems may be in use, it is important that the IP case management system can integrate into the existing technologies.

Personnel issues

The impact on the users of the new system should not be underestimated. It is often the case that users have great experience of the existing systems, and so it is important to recognise this and provide training in advance of implementation, as well as follow-up support. At the large firm, I established a training regime for all staff several months in advance of the switch-over date. For selected members of each team, in-depth training was given so that teams were able to support themselves in the first instance.

Choosing, developing and implementing an IP case management system constitutes a large undertaking that needs careful consideration and planning. In my experience, the areas requiring most thought are selecting the vendor and dealing with personnel issues. The vendor must have a team in place with whom you and your team can work effectively and productively. In my experience, I know that my choice of the Patricia system and Patrix as a partner was the right one.

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk


More on this story

Copyright
28 November 2019   A trademark lawyer met some IT specialists, and they created a company aiming to put the entire world’s IP decisions at lawyers’ fingertips. Tom Phillips met Evrard van Zuylen of Darts-ip to find out more.
Trademarks
25 November 2021   SMEs can benefit from a sophisticated integrated document management system designed specifically for them, explains Ovidiu Dulacioiu of Dennemeyer.