Why Lawyers Stop Using Time Tracking Software
A common story, from administrators at firms of every size: the firm picked a timekeeping tool, the pilot group tried it, and within a few weeks usage had drifted to nothing. No one announced they were quitting - they just went back to what they did before.
It is tempting to conclude that the tool was bad and to go shopping for another. Sometimes that's right. But the cause is usually one of three things, only one of which a new vendor will fix, so it is worth working out which one you have. This applies to any automatic or AI time capture product, ours included.
Cause one: fixing the entries takes longer than writing them
This is the one we hear most: the software captured the work, and the entries were roughly right, but each one needed the matter corrected, the narrative rewritten and two fragments merged. After a week the attorney has worked out that typing a fresh entry is quicker, and that's the end of it.
How to check: sit with one attorney for their end-of-day review and count. How many entries did the tool produce for the day, how many needed an edit, and how long did the whole review take? A day that arrives as forty fragments is a different product from a day that arrives as fifteen entries, whatever the brochure says. We compare the two main capture approaches, and why they produce such different review loads, in screen capture vs. API timekeeping.
If this is your cause, a different tool may well fix it. Test the replacement on exactly this measure.
Cause two: the wrong people were in the pilot
Firms often pilot with the attorneys whose time is always late, on the theory that they need it most. They are also the people least likely to adopt anything, so the pilot stalls for reasons that have nothing to do with the software.
How to check: look at who was in the group. If it was the chronic late filers and no one else, you have not yet tested the tool. We have a separate piece on which attorneys to put in a pilot.
A new vendor won't fix this, since the same group will stall the next pilot too.
Cause three: nobody was looking after it
Any capture tool is at its worst in the first two weeks. The narratives don't sound like the attorney yet, the matter guesses are rougher, and small annoyances are at their peak. If no one from the vendor or the firm checks in during that stretch, people quit during it.
How to check: what happened in week one? Was there a kickoff, a check-in, someone answering questions the same day? Or was it a login email and silence?
This one is partly the vendor's job and partly the firm's. Ask any vendor what support during a pilot includes, and name someone internally who owns the rollout.
What to look at in the first week next time
If you are about to restart, with the same tool or a new one, three numbers in week one will tell you which way it is going:
Entries per attorney per day, and how many needed an edit.
Minutes per day spent on review.
Whether people opened it on Friday. Friday usage is the one to watch, because it's the day people skip things they find tedious.
If review time is falling across the week and Friday looks like Monday, the pilot is healthy. If review time is flat or climbing, find out why before week two. Our week-by-week pilot guide goes through what normal looks like.
FAQ
Why do attorneys stop using automatic time tracking?
Most often because correcting the drafted entries takes longer than writing entries by hand. The other common causes are a pilot group made up of people who avoid timekeeping, and no support in the first two weeks.
Is it worth trying a second timekeeping tool after the first one failed?
Only after you know why the first one failed. If the cause was editing burden, a different product can fix it. If it was the pilot group or a lack of ownership, the next tool will meet the same end.
How can we tell early that a pilot is failing?
Watch review minutes per day and Friday usage in the first week. Rising review time or a drop-off at the end of the week means something needs attention before the second week.
Does accuracy cause most failures?
In our conversations it rarely comes up as the reason. The administrators we talk to describe entries that were close enough and still too much work to finish.
