Fit Over Features: A Better Strategy for Law Firm Technology

Most firms aren’t held back by bad tools. They’re held back by the belief that technology should stay invisible.

I still meet firms that see IT as something that lives in the background, not something you actively use.

That mindset made sense when your world ran on on-prem servers and a shared drive. It doesn’t hold up when your entire client experience depends on speed, clarity, and consistency.

You feel the difference when technology becomes an active part of your practice and supports your core worklows.

Your team stops wrestling with manual steps that should’ve been automated years ago.

I work with firms across the entire spectrum: solo practices, mid-size teams, national players. The firms that move quickly all share the same trait. They’re willing to try new tools, test ideas, and adjust when something isn’t working.

Agility comes from leadership attitude, not headcount.

You see this play out in industry data. The Solicitors Regulation Authority found that while 99% of small UK firms are aware of core technologies, only about 14% have adopted newer capabilities like AI.

Awareness isn’t the barrier. Readiness is.

Leaders who treat technology as leverage move forward, while leaders who wait for “the right time” stay stuck.

Large firms feel this dynamic even more strongly. The outliers stand out because of their mindset.

You see this mindset at every level of the industry. Larger firms like Orrick formalize it through innovation teams and internal tech studios, but the core behavior is what matters. They experiment, pilot ideas, and adjust quickly.

Smaller firms do the same thing on a different scale, often with even more agility because decisions move faster.

Here’s how I explain the difference between agility and scale when firms evaluate technology.

When you approach technology with curiosity and a willingness to iterate, your firm becomes easier to run and far more responsive to change.

Most firms still approach legal software evaluation by comparing feature charts. It feels objective, but it leads to the same outcome every time: tools that look good on paper and create friction in practice.

Features only matter when they support the way your firm already works. Without that alignment, even excellent software adds weight instead of removing it.

Firms that choose well start with their workflows — not with platforms. They map how matters move through the firm, identify where information gets stuck, and review where time and accuracy break down. Only then do they evaluate the tools that reinforce those patterns.

This is what “fit” actually means: technology that strengthens the way you practice, instead of forcing you to change your habits to match the tool.

The biggest breakdown happens when firms try to make one system do everything. I see this most often with practice management platforms.

These systems are strong at timekeeping, billing, calendars, and tasks. They weren’t designed to replace full document management or intake. Forcing them to cover those gaps always leads to workarounds, version mistakes, and frustrated teams.

A document management system shouldn’t act like a shared drive with nicer branding. A well-fit DMS supports how lawyers actually work: fast search, reliable version control, structured matters, and email that stays organized instead of buried in individual inboxes.

Most firms eventually outgrow tools like Dropbox, OneDrive, or the storage built into their practice management platform. The tipping point usually shows up as clutter, misfiled documents, or staff constantly re-saving files because the system can’t keep up with daily legal work.

A modern legal DMS should follow a simple design principle: reinforce matter-centric workflows with strong search, clean versioning, and consistent email capture. Tools like LexWorkplace reflect that approach by providing structure that supports the realities of daily legal work—something passive storage can’t deliver.

I still meet firms who feel confident in older systems because “they’ve never given us trouble.” That confidence holds until something shifts—a Windows update, a new team member, a new workflow—and the tool can’t keep pace.

When your systems don’t integrate, your team compensates with manual steps, duplicate entry, and constant small fixes. The friction shows up in lost time, reduced accuracy, and rising stress.

Firms operating at a higher level take a different approach. They build stacks where core systems communicate cleanly. Managed IT services for law firms can help you design and maintain that stack

When your tools reinforce each other, your team works faster and your risk surface shrinks.

AI is becoming part of this picture— not as a buzzword, but as another dimension of fit. I see vendors pack products with AI features that serve marketing more than real workflows.

The most meaningful gains come from targeted use cases. A&O Shearman’s work with Harvey is a strong example. But what matters isn’t their scale — it’s their approach.

They direct AI at high-value legal tasks where reasoning and context shape the outcome. Smaller firms can use the same mindset by applying AI to the moments where judgment matters most, not to every task a vendor decides to automate.

When your technology fits the way your firm actually works, everything feels lighter. Work moves cleanly, communication sharpens, and your team stops losing time to preventable friction.

This shift doesn’t require dramatic change. It starts with leaders who are willing to examine how the firm functions and make intentional decisions about what supports that work. With the right mindset, your technology becomes a clear advantage—one your team relies on and your clients notice.