To help firms select technology that meets ongoing needs, Today’s Conveyancer invited four experts to share their top tips on identifying and implementing the right combination of software. In the first of a three-part series, the experts explore how a fragmented decision-making process and an “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality can lead to technology that overlaps and is under-developed within law firms. Last week, our experts explored how a fragmented decision-making process and an, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality can lead to technology that overlaps and is under-developed within law firms. This week, they consider who is making decisions about technology and implementation in law firms, and asks if they are the ‘right’ people.
With thanks to contributors David Baskerville, consultant at Baskerville Drummond, Mark Garnish, COO and co-founder at Xperate, Tom Lyes, founder and CEO of Tom Lyes Consultancy, and Laura Wood, legal technology specialist at Birketts LLP.
Our experts broadly agree decision making around technology is often undertaken by a committee of senior management, procurement (if firms have a team), finance (inevitably), IT managers (again, if firms have one) and users.
There is no “consistent” model, says Laura Wood, and Tom Lyes notes decisions are rarely made by the same combination of people twice.
He adds: “What’s almost always missing is anyone whose job is to think about the stack as a whole rather than the specific purchase in front of them. That’s why duplicate tools, orphaned licences and integrations that don’t talk to each other are the norm.”
It’s a trend also observed by Mark Garnish, who says fragmented decisions making, often in silos, leads to “implementing solutions that meet individual requirements but fail to align with the broader business.”
The right combination
The challenge then, is finding the right combination of expertise and insight in the business to support decision making.
Garnish explains: “What is often missing is a unifying view of how technology supports the firm’s overall operating model, which can lead to duplication, integration challenges, and inconsistent user adoption across different parts of the business.”
There is a broad consensus amongst the experts that a “cross-functional selection process” is needed.
David Baskerville says: “Firms need senior leadership involvement to align investment with strategy, operational stakeholders who understand the realities of day-to-day workflows, and technical expertise capable of assessing integration, security and scalability.”
Wood adds: “Decisions are most effective when they are collaborative, combining legal insight, technical expertise, and strategic oversight. Increasingly firms are moving towards a product ownership model, where responsibility for specific systems sits with clearly defined individual or teams who understand both the business need and the technical landscape.”
Lyes notes: “Larger firms are starting to appoint legal operations or innovation roles; smaller firms need to either rotate the responsibility annually or bring in external help to do it properly.”
What’s your motivation?
Once the right combination of people are in place, our experts suggest tackling the motivation behind selecting the right technology – which isn’t always as obvious as it might seem.
Wood says: “Most firms are motivated by improving efficiency, increasing profitability and creating a consistent way of working and these are the right strategic drivers.
“However, sometimes they are drawn into adopting new technology without fully examining whether it addresses a genuine business need or integrates effectively into existing processes.”
This can often be the result of choosing the “safe” options, warns Lyes. “Relationships, price, and the fear of not getting fired for buying the big corporate that everyone else buys. None of those are illegitimate in isolation, relationships build trust, price discipline matters, and there’s a reason ‘safe’ choices are safe.
“But none of them are strategic. They’re risk-mitigation drivers dressed up as procurement criteria.”
Drivers of change
Looming contract renewals, end-of-life platforms, vendor acquisition or a major operational issue can sometime be the driver of change says Baskerville, which accelerates decision making and drives reactive rather than strategic thinking: “By that stage, firms are often selecting under pressure rather than through a structured evaluation process.”
Other common factors include headline cost, “impressive” product demonstrations, partner or existing vendor relationships, and recommendations from peers. The latter, according to the 2025 Legal Tech Review, drives 58% of legal technology discovery.
This is a “useful starting point”, says Baskerville, but can be “risky when decisions will shape operational efficiency, compliance and client service for the next decade”.
In 2026, firms are starting to feel under pressure to adopt AI in some form, Baskerville adds, but he warns of implementation “without a clearly defined operational objective”.
“In some cases, firms hope AI will help them process greater volumes of transactions at lower cost or demonstrate technological leadership to clients and competitors. The risk is that firms cannot clearly articulate the underlying use case and instead expect AI vendors to define the strategy for them.
“That dynamic is dangerous: it can lead to poorly scoped deployments, weak governance, unclear accountability, and solutions designed to impress in demonstrations rather than deliver measurable operational outcomes.”
Core business processes
If a “cross-functional selection process” approach to selecting the right people in the organisation to support technology selection is critical, then so is a multi-faceted approach to the selection criteria.
Garnish explains: “Firms should prioritise alignment with core business processes, ensuring that systems genuinely support how the firm operates.”
Baskerville concurs: “The right drivers should be far more strategic: alignment with the firm’s business objectives, fitness for purpose against clearly defined operational requirements, the supplier’s delivery and support track record within the legal sector, and the total cost of ownership over the life of the system.
“That means looking beyond licence fees to implementation effort, integrations, training, user adoption and ongoing operational support.”
Lyes says the questions firms should be asking are: “What specific operational or risk problem does this solve? What measurable outcome will it produce? How does it integrate with what’s already there? And what’s the total cost, including the fee earner hours absorbed by implementation?” Firms universally underestimate the latter, he warns.
At Birketts, Woods explains a “structured approach, including the use of project boards, early collaboration across stakeholders and the involvement of procurement from the outset” ensures decisions are robustly challenged, aligned with business goals and supported by a thorough procurement and due diligence process.
Asking the right questions
Given the focus of the experts on the strategic importance of technology selection, interoperability and integration are critical elements of the decision making process. Garnish adds “scalability and future flexibility, allowing the firm to adapt as its needs evolve” into the mix.
There are regulatory considerations, Lyes points out, which are often bolted on as an afterthought. He explains: “SRA expectations and future FCA expectations around AML, source of funds and client care are tightening, and tech decisions should be tested against those obligations, not retrofitted later.”
Alongside the right people, independent advice can be invaluable says Baskerville: “Software vendors are naturally skilled at presenting strengths; firms need equal rigour in identifying limitations, implementation risks, and long-term commercial implications before commitments are made.”
The final word this week goes to Garnish, who concludes the question firms should be asking themselves is not, “What system should we buy?” but “How should our business operate, and how does technology enable that?”
Next week, the experts discuss what firms should be thinking about when it comes to selecting the right technology and the role vendors and suppliers play in supporting them.
