As we wave goodbye to another year of change and success here at Insight Legal, it’s important to look back and remind ourselves of how it all started.
Our Director and Head of Training and Support Services, Deborah Edwards does just that in The Parliamentary Review’s Technology Report 2018, reflecting on the foundations we are built on, why we are different to other Law Firms and our plans for continued success in the future.
Looking ahead to 2019, we reflect on Deborah’s telling insights about our journey from grassroots level and what makes us who we are.
What we do
In short, we produce software for law firms. Our system enables firms to manage the finances of their business and the legal accounts of their client files, alongside producing letters and documents, completing legal forms, recording their time and managing their compliance.
In deciding to launch a new product in the industry, we had to appreciate that in operating a business-to-business sales model, our potential customers were likely considering the same financial uncertainties that we were. Well aware that encouraging firms to invest in new technologies was likely to be a challenge, we knew that our offering and pricing model had to be innovative.
Doing things differently
As a start-up business, we inevitably had costs. The software needed a long period of research, design, development and testing before we launched and the usual business expenses of equipment, licences, staff costs, marketing and office space.
It was traditional in the legal software market at that time to charge an upfront purchase fee for software and then a smaller ongoing monthly or annual fee for software updates and support. It would have been tempting for us to do the same to recover our costs, but we knew a different approach was needed.
Law is not only a profession; it’s also a business. Despite the somewhat staid reputation that some solicitors’ practices may have, there can be no doubt that in recent years there has been a significant increase in firms embracing change and wanting to increase their operational efficiencies. Encouraging firms to look at taking on our software therefore became not just about explaining the cost, but demonstrating the value.
Starting Insight Legal was an investment in our futures. We built our business model around recurring revenue on a SaaS (Software as a Service) basis. We made it easy for firms to afford the software by eliminating any upfront cost and instead paying a monthly fee only. This meant that they could consider changing software systems without the prospect of taking out a finance agreement or making a large capital outlay.
We also ensured that we priced extremely competitively and offered incentives for firms to try us out. Upon first launch, we offered firms full use of the software, free of charge, for three months. To do so much work for no immediate financial return must have seemed ridiculous at first. However, we firmly believe that we have demonstrated our commitment to our business and to our customers.
Continuing our success
We appreciate that the time may not be right for some firms and, for others, it may not be quite the right solution – which brings us to one of our key values: honesty. If we feel our software is not right for a firm, we will be the first to tell them.
We continue to innovate with our product, making sure that we stay up-to-date with any regulations in both law and finance. The development of our mobile app has enabled us to provide our customers with solutions to meet their business challenges, and to ultimately enable growth.
Our support staff are trained in finance and often come from legal backgrounds, meaning that we truly understand what our customers do and want to achieve. We’re a technology company at heart, but we are also real people with a passion to deliver the service that we’d want to receive ourselves. So instead of the usual call centre assistance or online live chat, we provide instant telephone-based support to assist our customers when they need help.
Check out the full article on Page 9 of The Parliamentary Review here