Successfully applying formal project management methodology to practice management initiatives is not only beneficial, it is critical for larger projects with very tight deadlines.  This methodology played a significant role in the creation of a new technology offering for our practice management department.  Our practice technology support (PTS) team was to create a technology package that could be customized for each trial.  We wanted a menu approach that would allow the trial technology team to design the appropriate level of support for a large, multi-party trial (with an immediate trial in sight) as well as for smaller cases.  Like many practice management requests, this project was high-profile, cross-departmental and required a high level of quality.

The PTS team works in such a different manner than the rest of IT, there was doubt that PM techniques could be applied.  They have fires to put out every day, so we needed to equip our PTS "firefighters" with tools and procedures.  We wanted to arm them with a trial kit so they would be ready for standard requests and, at the same time, create a state of readiness within the department so the nonstandard requests could be managed too.  We followed the basics of PMI’s project management methodology:  initiation, planning, execution, monitoring and closure.  Here are some of the steps we took in each phase:

Initiation.  This was a crucial phase for the project.  There were many different points of view about what we could accomplish and what the trial team needed.  We had a meeting with all of our stakeholders to establish and document our basic mandate.  Everyone agreed this could change during the course of the project, and a change control process would be applied to allow the project the flexibility to accept a new requirement.  All of the key stakeholders (from IT) signed this charter, and so our planning began.

Planning.  We talked about each of the requirements in granular detail.  We conducted planning meetings to identify all of the risks, mitigation strategies and probabilities of occurrence.  We formalized our communication plan and designated one point of contact with our trial team.  We identified all of the work that needed to be done and broke it down into reasonable tasks.  We assigned team members to individual tasks for execution and continually assessed our plans keeping a close eye on schedule, scope, quality and our target completion date.

Execution/Control.  After all planning had been completed, the team was eager to begin, but this was the first time we had ever done a project like this.  It was a challenge to keep our minds on the kit as well as the trial in front of us (with a set trial date).  There was a lot of brainstorming in the meetings to come up with the best solution to every requested requirement.  We also had to cover the financials of the project, and we decided to rent equipment which could be allocated on a monthly basis.  Much of the project control was applied in this phase, from timeline control, scope control and cost control.

Closure.  Once the trial began, we conducted a short lessons-learned meeting with the PTS team on site at the trial as well as the home office technicians who had created the kit.  We discussed open issues as well as closed issues and tried to identify what we needed to change for the next trial.  The result of this PMO effort was the creation of the "Trial Support Bible," a document that now serves as a reference for trials of all size and location, and which enables the trial team (regardless of their participation in its creation) to support trials at any point in the future. 

About our author :: :: ::

George Rudoy is Director of Global Practice Technology and Information Services at Shearman & Sterling LLP, where he is responsible for development, implementation and overall administration of practice-specific technology solutions and services worldwide.  In addition to his current position, George has held legal support management positions at a number of AmLaw 100 law firms.  He is the Vice President of ILTA’s Practice Management Peer Group and serves on the Advisory Board of Advanced E-Discovery Institute at Georgetown Law Center as well as American Lawyer Media’s LegalTech Educational Board, Law Technology News Editorial Advisory Board and Law.com Legal Technology Editorial Advisory Board.  He can be reached at george.rudoy@shearman.com.