In a world where LegalTech innovation is reshaping how legal teams operate, Michael Thompson offers a unique perspective: embrace “anyway tech” – leveraging existing enterprise software to develop in-house solutions. This DIY approach, as Michael explains, not only builds skills within legal teams but also enhances collaboration across departments and boosts the legal team’s reputation as an enabler of business success.
In this interview, he discusses the benefits, challenges, and future of building versus buying LegalTech solutions, highlighting when it’s worth relying on third-party vendors and when it’s best to roll up your sleeves and innovate from within.
The views expressed in this interview are those of the author, which represent his personal and professional experience. Its contents do not necessarily reflect the opinion of his employer.
Merlin Beyts: Where do you sit on the “build vs buy” debate?
Michael Thompson: I definitely favor the “do it yourself” approach, when it comes to implementing LegalTech in-house. Because there are so many software solutions already being used in most companies, that it is neither necessary nor (economically) reasonable to reinvent the wheel every time your Legal Department needs a piece of LegalTech. You are paying those licensing fees anyway and the software is already there anyway. So I’ll just call it “anyway tech” from now on.
Merlin Beyts: Given that you find yourself building tech rather than buying them, what do you think are the major benefits you find from that situation?
Michael Thompson: There are some more and some less obvious benefits when taking the “DIY” approach. But I also won’t conceal the downsides. I’ll start with the (probably) less obvious benefits:
1st: Using anyway tech builds skills within your own team. No matter if we’re talking about a Legal Department or Legal Ops team, implementing LegalTech yourself with anyway tech skyrockets the learning curve and development opportunities of your team. You won’t be able to create an easier win-win situation with any other approach.
2nd: The “DIY” approach leverages the standing of the Legal Department from the “Department of ‘No!'” to the “Department of ‘Hell yeah!'” Though that might be hard because, typically, that place is already taken by the Legal Ops team. Just kidding. Not! It shows the business that you’re able to think outside the box, create opportunities instead of just pointing out problems, and, thus, enable business instead of hindering it.
3rd: If you work with already existing software, you will build relations with your IT department and other involved stakeholders “owning” said software, that will prove invaluable for any future project. Speaking the language of (this part of) the business simply helps you to understand each other’s demands and requirements better. It builds trust and improves collaboration.
4th: To sum up the (maybe) more obvious benefits of using anyway tech: it can (not “will”) be cheaper, faster, easier, and more flexible than implementing third-party software.
Cheaper
Licensing fees are already being paid for with anyway tech. Downside: you need to consider if and how your use of anyway tech affects the amount of fees being paid in the future.
Faster
You are not dependent on internal (IT) or external (software provider) resources or budgets. If you choose an “MVP approach,” creating a “Minimum Viable Product,” and developing it further in iterations, you’ll be able to go live with an MVP really quickly. Plus: no data protection or IT security issues because anyway tech has already been checked and approved in that regard. Downside: you’ll need to provide the resources (people & skills) yourself.
Easier
As long as you use software that is meant to be used by citizen developers (and we all know a pretty big software company starting with “M” that provides that kind of enterprise software, for example), it is comparatively easy, requires no prior knowledge or coding-skills but only the willingness and ability to familiarize yourself with this new area of activity.
Flexibility
It definitely gives you more flexibility when using and re-iterating the software because if you’re able to “do it yourself,” you are not relying on internal (IT) or external (software provider) resources, budgets, or project plans. Downside: the more solutions you create on your own, the more resources you need to develop them further, support, and maintain them (time to feel some of the pain of your IT colleagues there).
Merlin Beyts: Looking to the future, do you think there are any technologies that you’d prefer to get from 3rd party vendors rather than build them in-house?
Michael Thompson: Yes. But I cannot go into detail about what kind of solutions that might be. Obviously, there will be solutions that are too complex to develop, test, and implement them yourself. There are solutions that need to fulfill certain criteria or requirements, which cannot be met with any tech. And maybe (probably) you don’t want to be the one owning any business-critical solutions, so I’d rather refrain from doing business-critical stuff with “DIY” LegalTech. One example for all of the above-mentioned impediments is software that enables your company to fulfil the ever-growing complexity of regulations coming from the (European) legislator. Be it “Artificial Intelligence,” “Cyber Security,” or “ESG”-related topics. Those are all examples where I’d probably rather bet on a third-party vendor solution rather than some self-developed piece of LegalTech, which my team and I are responsible for.
Read the full LegalTech Diaries Volume 6: https://www.legaltech-talk.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/LegalTech-Diaries-Volume-6.pdf
