2012 Staffing Survey

ILTAs 2012 IT Staffing Survey
FEBRUARY 2013
General Information
About ILTA
Providing technology solutions to law firms and law departments gets more complex every day. Connecting with your peers to exchange ideas with those who have been there, done that has never been more valuable. For over three decades, the International Legal Technology Association has led the way in sharing knowledge and experience for those faced with challenges in their firms and legal departments. ILTA members come from firms and law departments of all sizes and all areas of practice, all sharing a common need to have access to the latest information about products and support services that impact the legal profession.
Disclaimer
This report is designed for use as a general guide and is not intended to serve as a recommendation or to replace the advice of experienced professionals. If expert assistance is desired, the services of a competent professional should be sought. Neither ILTA nor any author or contributor shall have liability for any persons reliance on the content of or any errors or omissions in this publication.
Copyright Notice
Copyright ILTA 2013. All rights reserved. Published in the United States of America. No part of this report may be reproduced in any manner or medium whatsoever without the prior written permission of ILTA. Published by ILTA. c/o Editor 9701 Brodie Lane, Suite 200 Austin, TX 78748
2012 Staffing Survey
35:1
LDP
fn
Navigation Tips
Were pleased to present this years Staffing Survey in a format that is optimized for digital use. quickly navigate to the different sections Use the Acrobat tools to search for keywords and print specific pages. Weve included icons in the footer to
35:1
LDP
fn
Functional Responsibilities
Demographics
IT Staffing Ratios
Law Department Profiles
Successful Recruitment Practices
Aggregate Survey Results
Responses by Firm Size
35:1
LDP
fn
Intelliteach is the service desk resource that can save you precious understands the demands of your business. And no one else provides or Complete Service Desk Outsourcing. To learn more about how Intelliteach can help your rm cut costs 866-698-7837 or 404-591-7700, or visit www.intelliteach.com.
Reliable, aordable legal-specic service desk support.
866.698.7837 | 404.591.7700 | www.intelliteach.com Now open in London! | +44 20 3051 6273 | www.intelliteach.co.uk
Demographics
ILTAS 2012 IT STAFFING SURVEY
The responses for our 2012 IT staffing survey were gathered in late 2012. The basic format of the survey is similar to that of prior years, although we continue to strive to simplify our respondents work to describe staffing levels in various categories of functional responsibilities, as well as to improve our ability to report the results effectively. This year, we made some improvements to the survey analysis we hope you will find helpful. We included some comparisons between AmLaw 200 firms and all other responding firms. We have shown where personnel with technical responsibilities are members of departments other than IT. We also sought data to help answer the age-old question of the appropriate ratio of IT staff to end users and related contributing factors more about the surprising results of that analysis below.
THanKs tO Our RespOndents!

We received responses from 326 law firms this year, up from 293 in 2011 and 212 in 2010.
Firm Size
Small Medium Large Very Large
Number of Users
150 or Less 151-250 251-500 501 or More
2012 Rate of Responses

45.1% 18.1% 13.2% 23.6%
2011 Rate of Response

46.1% 17.1% 21.5% 15.4%
2010 Rate of Response

47.6% 16.5% 20.3% 14.2%

* 2012: Included 331 usable responses from the survey, five firms provided number of lawyers but incorrectly included 0 for other counts, therefore not included in law firm size
We know surveys take valuable time, and responding to this one is particularly complex. We are grateful for our respondents generosity in providing information to help their peers understand legal IT staffing trends. Thank you!
35:1
LDP
fn
Demographics
OVERALL TRENDS
We took note of the buzz around our LegalSECTM initiative and the high priority law firms are giving to security. For the first time, we included a question about staffing for security job duties. In future years, we will be able to see trends in how law firms staff for security. Economic conditions remain a concern, with more than oneInadequately staffed (doing more with less) Adequately staffed (just getting by) 58% 48% 43%
staffed (have some wiggle room). More firms consider themselves Adequately staffed (just getting by) than last year, while fewer are Inadequately staffed (doing more with less).
third of respondents predicting the effects of the downturn will continue through the current year.
I believe the effects of the downturn will continue through the coming year 37.2%
26% 38% 43%
Comfortably staffed (have some wiggle room)
17% 14% 13% 0% 20% 40% 60%
2012 2011 2010
I believe economic conditions have changed permanently
26.5%
I believe we have already returned to pre-2008 conditions
18.2%
There was a significant uptick 11%, up from a whopping 0
of firms responding that the number of IT staff increased in 2012,

18.2% 2012 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
I am optimistic that we will return to pre-2008 conditions
returning to 2007 (pre-recession) levels. As the economic recovery continues, we note that fewer firms are reporting staff decreases. We leave it to you to draw your own conclusions as you scrutinize the data presented in the following pages, but perhaps we have grounds for being cautiously optimistic while continuing to make sure our belts are tight and we are operating efficiently.
However, other responses indicate things may be looking up. We see a small increase in firms that consider themselves Comfortably
35:1
LDP
fn
Demographics
Stayed the same
WHAT ABOUT THOSE RATIOS? 75%

The following chart shows analysis overall and by firm size of
67% 11% 0% 9% 12% 5% 21% 0% 20% 40% 60%
Increased, returning to 2007 levels
average ratios of users to IT staff for the past three years. As you can see, there is not a large variation by firm size or over time. We know this benchmark is controversial; many hold that
Decreased
it is an invalid basis for decisions about staffing levels because of the significant differences in complexity of firms technology 2012 2011 environments. 80% This year, we sought a way to better inform our members about the effects of complexity on staffing levels by including this question: While ILTA members always have a strong interest in the ratio of IT personnel to total number of lawyers or firm members, that ratio is often considered too simple of a measurement as a basis for staffing decisions, because the complexity of the technology environment has an important influence on staffing requirements. We have asked you several questions about your environment. In the following chart, please indicate your opinion of how much each factor increases complexity of the technology environment, with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest. The factors listed as contributing
2012
Increased, but not to 2007 levels
With all the talk of alternative fee arrangements over the
past few years, we were somewhat surprised by the response to the question (asked for the first time this year) Have you changed your firms or your IT Departments staffing structure or skill set as a result of client demand for alternative fee arrangements?
No, we have not changed staffing to support these efforts Yes, we have added firm (but not IT) staff to support these efforts Yes, we have provided IT staff with the skills to support these efforts Yes, we have added staff in IT to support these efforts 0% 5.2% 3.7% 1.2%
89.9%
to the complexity of the technology environment were as follows:
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
35:1
LDP
fn
Demographics
Multiple offices International offices Frequent use of contract attorneys Tech facilities centralized in main office Tech facilities centralized in branch office Tech facilities centralized in off-site data center Tech facilities distributed among multiple offices IT adoption profile of firm is leading edge IT adoption profile of firm is main stream IT adoption profile of firm is conservative IT adoption profile of firm is rarely if ever IT adoption profile of firm is only when firm is doing very well IT professionals work only in main office IT professionals work in branch offices Offices with no IT staff IT Department provides support for end users home computing needs IT Department staff provide support after-hours and on weekends IT Department does not have administrative support IT Department supports consumer technologies IT Department uses consultants Other Please describe
Average Ratio Users to IT Staff (very large firms) Average IT Staff (very large firms) Average Total Users (very large firms) 31.6 52.0 1330.0 30.4 64.6 1408.9 26.1 43.0 1044.0 Average Ratio Users to IT Staff (large firms) Average IT Staff (large firms) Average Total Users (large firms) 33.0 11.0 330.0 37.2 13.3 344.1 33.2 11.0 331.9 Average Ratio Users to IT Staff (medium firms) Average IT Staff (medium firms) Average Total Users (medium firms) 38.6 6.0 198.3 38.0 6.1 201.8 39.0 6.2 209.6 Average Ratio Users to IT Staff (overall) Average IT Staff (overall) Average Total Users (overall)
2012
35.3 16.0 425.5
2011
36.4 15.0 360.5
2010
35.1 10.6 289.7
Average Ratio Users to IT Staff (small firms) Average IT Staff (small firms) Average Total Users (small firms)
36.6 2.5 73.1
37.5 2.5 77.4
37.2 2.5 75.5
35:1
LDP
fn
Demographics
In our analysis, we calculated a score for each complexity factor. Each firms response to the listed factors was recorded on a 4-point scale:
International offices IT adoption profile of firm is leading edge 2.00 1.96 2.17 2.12 1.90 1.73 1.81 1.73 1.51 1.62 1.29 1.41 1.48 1.56 1.24 1.26 1.46 1.52 1.23 1.22 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Very Large Large Tech facilities distributed among multiple offices Medium Small
Critically complex: 3 Very complex: 2 Somewhat complex: 1 No difference: 0 Not applicable: Removed from analysis
Multiple offices
IT Department supports consumer technologies
We then calculated averages for each category by firm size. The top five ranked factors for contributing to the complexity of the technology environment were the same across all firm sizes. While different sizes of firms ranked these factors in a different order, the consensus for the top five was the same. Many of the responding firms have environments that include the top five complexity factors, so we therefore attempted an analysis of the correlation between IT staff ratios and highest levels of complexity. There was no evidence of a correlation.
This outcome surprised us, and we stirred the pot a bit on
the e-groups to get your comments. We posted these results, suggesting (with tongue somewhat in cheek) the only conclusion to be drawn is that an across-the-board standard ratio is a valid measure upon which to base IT staffing decisions. We invited readers to disagree and discuss. While we still cannot explain why the survey results show such similarity in ratios across the
35:1
LDP
fn
Demographics
board or why there was no correlation between ratios and the complexity factors upon which respondents agreed, we are pleased to share the insightful comments offered by several of our members in response to our e-group post: From the CTO of a very large firm: Strict adherence to those ratios to determine staffing adequacy is not appropriate, in my opinion. Our ratios have tended to be on the low end (i.e., closer to 25:1 than 35:1), which would tend to make you think were well-staffed. In fact, I consider us to be understaffed in some areas due to all those top five complexity factors, plus a huge backlog of projects engendered by a desire on the part of our management to keep us ahead of the curve. Of course, theres only so much you can get done with a given level of staffing, so we have to employ more outside consulting assistance (and therefore spend more) than we might otherwise. Conclusion: staffing decisions have to be based on all those complexity factors, plus other factors unique to ones own organization, and, in the end, it still comes down to what managements philosophies are regarding headcount. Further, how one counts outsourced functions also could significantly skew those ratios when comparing oneself to our peers. What I think we all have in common is that we are equal when we generalize. Greater specificity is very difficult to achieve with accuracy as there are too many inherently unique variables to The Director of Infrastructure and Administrative Systems from a very large firm had these comments: I agree based upon the response that no clear correlation exists between firm size and staffing ratios. We all work in worlds that are kind of similar but also unique and we do the best we can with the headcount we are allocated and the comparative talent of our teams, focus of our firm, and competing priorities. However, I feel quite comfortable with a generalization for ILTA to which I can compare my numbers. The Director of Technology from a smaller firm suggested that there are issues that affect appropriate IT staffing levels besides the complexity factors we listed, including secretarial staff ratios, custom vs. canned accounting reports, using and supporting other custom programming, self-sufficiency and technical skill of end-users, and most especially whether IT staff are well-trained, cross-trained, and able to perform at high levels.
35:1
LDP
fn
Demographics
consider when we compare our firms. If ILTA reported that firms of the size of mine had a total headcount to IT ratio of 200:1, I might find that interesting if my number was greater than 200:1 and possibly use that as an aide to provide greater service to my firm.
The Dream Team Delivers!

Ive said it before, Ill say it again ... surveys of this scope and complexity are challenging; it truly takes a village to work through the many details from ideation of concepts to final publication. Our staffing survey dream team, a great group of volunteers and ILTA staff, are to be
I find less value in comparing how many engineers I have to other peoples numbers as that descriptor covers many different roles and the apples to apples comparison quickly evaporates.
applauded for their efforts. Is that a standing ovation I hear?
Team lead, Shirley Crow, Chief Information Officer at Farella Braun + Martel LLP, has led this team for several years; and I commend her continued dedication, her keen eye and her focus on achieving the teams mission and vision to deliver data analysis to support IT staffing decisions. Teammates included Sandy Mikita of Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC, Catherine Monte of Fox Rothschild LLP and ILTA staffer Deb Himsel. As a team, these good folks reviewed, dissected, assembled, re-dissected, reassembled, honed and polished the questionnaire; and each was instrumental in reviewing our final product that youre enjoying. A small team of ILTA staffers provided the final wind beneath the wings of this herculean effort. Its been my pleasure to assist this stellar team in providing information that we hope informs and supports your staffing models. Randi Mayes Executive Director
Finally, the Systems Manager at a small firm said: I am currently at a 65:1 ratio. I think the main contributing factors which help maintain that ratio are the following: (1) We moved to virtual desktops, which reduced system maintenance and administration; (2) we use an outside consultant for guidance and special projects; and (3) we have only one office location.
35:1
LDP
fn
Struggling to nd Struggling nd RIGHTto talent? the RIGHT talent? Letthe us do the heavy lifting for you!
CIOs Directors Senior Managers Let us do the heavy lifting for you! Application, Web, Database, SharePoint Developers Infrastructure Administrators andEngineers Support and Training CIOs Directors Senior Managers Litigation / Practice Support andSharePoint KnowledgeDevelopers Management Application, Web, Database, Infrastructure Administrators and Engineers Support and Training Litigation / Practice Support and Knowledge Management
Call FRIEDMAN WILLIAMS Your Partners for Direct Hire and Contract Legal IT Stafng Call FRIEDMAN WILLIAMS
Your Partners for Direct Hire and Contract Legal IT Stafng
www.FriedmanWilliams.com www.FriedmanWilliams.com
855-FW-Hires 855-FW-Hires
Law Department Staffing Profiles

A few of our law department members were kind enough to share information about their staffing models:
Profile 1
I am part of what we call the Discovery Management Organization, which is within the legal department. It includes legal support staff, project managers and operational staff. There are 30 of us in the group, and we support 10 litigation attorneys. Beyond that, each practice area has a support team specific to their needs. Our IT security team performs forensic collections. There are 5-6 people on the team, and theyre part of the information security and risk management department. Our IT legal team is in charge of software upgrades, databases, etc. We identify a need and together we determine which solution to use or to build a solution internally.
35:1
LDP
fn
Law Department Staffing Profile 2

Our litigation support team is placed within the legal department. Its both legal and technical. My team is made up of one paralegal and two IT people, and we can bring in consultants to work with us on an ad hoc or temporary basis to solve short-term spikes in resource requirements. We can also have paralegals and attorneys come from firms seconded here when theres a lot of work that needs to be done. These are firms weve worked with for many years, so they understand our business. When theyre onsite, theyre treated as any other associate would be. We try to budget for these projects ahead of time. We support 25+ attorneys in transactional and litigation. We support transactional attorneys on document comparison, contract templates, matter management and anything else they need. There are five full-time IS people who support us, and my legal team supports all of our North American offices and some affiliates. The IS team is responsible for maintaining the litigation management system, our matter management system, and they assist with preservation of data (e.g., email, email archives) and collections. Our relationship with our IS department is very important to us. Most of our new hires have a legal background and come from within our company. Any external job listings are posted on our Initially, it was the IS security group that provided technical assistance for e-discovery-related activities. The legal and IS departments performed an evaluation of the processes, and together realized we needed dedicated IS professionals who were focused on the latest e-discovery trends; who understood the business needs of a legal department; and who understood our strategy and tactics in order to protect the company and provide great customer service when workloads are high. Management agreed to create a dedicated IS team to support the legal department on all technical issues, including systems and e-discovery. Having a dedicated IS team has made a significant positive impact. recruiting website, where theres a process for the company to post all open positions.
35:1
LDP
fn
Law Department Staffing Profile 3

Our 82-person law department includes the following support professionals: One manager of administration, legal technology and records management Two technical support personnel (functions split between them hardware support, software support, litigation support, helpdesk functions and training) One records management specialist Two file room clerks One accounts payable clerk One librarian 10 paralegals Nine administrative assistants (secretaries) Our hiring process follows that of the corporation. When a position needs to be filled, a job is posted both on the corporate intranet and company internet websites. All jobs are posted on either careerbuilder.com or monster.com in addition to our company website. If any internal candidates are qualified and are available for release from their current department, they are considered along with any external candidates we wish to interview. If the job requires legal-specific experience and viable candidates are not found within a reasonable time period, we request our HR department post positions with legal-specific sources. We generally have not used outside assistance with collections unless the case warrants. Furthermore, we have not utilized contract staffing within the law department to provide support either. Our IT organization does use full-time assigned contractors in certain positions; however, none are assigned specifically to supplement support of the law department. Our litigation support team is housed within the law department and comprises one technical specialist and four paralegals. All these personnel retain other responsibilities in the department in addition to actual litigation support. Assisting them for specific purposes are the records management specialist and the manager of legal technology. The corporate IT department provides assistance to our litigation support efforts almost daily. The email administrator handles all preservation and collection requests for email. We also have a network of individuals assigned at all corporate locations that have the role of e-discovery coordinator. These people assist with the preservation of data on the network shares, databases, key custodian PCs and any other electronic location. At the appropriate time, they also handle the collection of data to be sent to the law department. The law department does not participate in the hiring process of any IT department personnel.
35:1
LDP
fn
Functional Responsibilities
For the following charts, we listed several areas of functional responsibility found in typical law firm IT departments and asked respondents to indicate which titles are filled at their firm in each applicable chart and provide a rough estimate of the percentage of time an FTE (full-time equivalent) spends in each category of duty. Some firms have multiple people who hold the same title and perform the same duties (for example, multiple Helpdesk Specialists); in such cases, we asked respondents to list the title once, and indicate a greater than 100% FTE. We requested inclusion of leased or outsourced employees who work in the firms office, but not temporary employees of any nature. We also captured FTEs who sit outside the IT department but perform duties associated with each functional area. The red columns in the charts provide those numbers. In reading the charts, the numbers represent responding firms, not staff counts. Lets examine the column headings:
A B
1%-20%
# of responses
as you move to the left. Column G simply indicates that more than one FTE is in the role. For example, in the first chart on the following page, lets examine the row labeled Manager.
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Manager
46
46 of our Small Firm respondents indicated they had full-time personnel who performed the role of manager; 3 responding firms had people devoting more than half of their time to the role; 3 responding firms had people devoting roughly half of their time to the role; 7 responding firms had people who devoted less than half their time (but more than a quarter of their time) to the role; 5 responding firms had people who devoted less than a quarter of their time to the role; and there were no firms in the Small Firm category who reported multiple individuals in the role. Youll also note that the numbers in the red columns represent people who sit outside of the IT department who are devoting some time to this role.
C
21%-40%
# of responses
D
41%-60%
# of responses
E
61%-80%
# of responses
F
81%-100%
# of responses
G
Over 100%
# of responses
Column F is the equivalent of full time employees. Everything to the left of it represents less than FTEs with decreasing time spent in each column
35:1
LDP
fn
Enterprise or Departmental Management of IT (Technology/Systems)

Includes head of IT, functional managers and supervisors, branch office IT managers, project managers, etc., where the scope of responsibility involves systems/technologies. Title should specifically reference IT (technology, IS or systems). The primary duties of the position involve the leadership and/or supervision of others; the position has responsibility for successful outcomes within the scope of the position.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Chief Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator
2 6 0 5 0 2 0
2 1 0 0 0 3 0
1 3 1 7 0 2 2
0 2 0 2 0 0 0
1 4 2 3 0 2 0
1 2 3 0 0 0 0
0 6 0 3 0 2 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0
2 29 1 46 3 13 6
5 3 1 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
2 3 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 24 0 9 1 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 2 0
1 1 0 1 0 0 0
What percent of management and supervisory functions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 5.68 4.17 2.84 2.85
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 1
1 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 1 0
2 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 4 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 2 2 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
39 31 4 18 2 15 7
1 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 8 1 17 1 5 2
0 2 0 2 0 0 0
35:1
LDP
fn
Network Services
Includes any position where the primary duties relate to developing or supporting infrastructure technologies. Positions that fall into this category would include responsibilities in the following areas: network administration, servers, LANs, WANs, data center, equipment maintenance, remote access, disaster recovery, email system administration and security. (This does NOT include application development or telecom/audio-visual services).
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator Coordinator Supervisor Architect Engineer Technician Specialist
8 0 10 1 3 2 1 1 1 5 13 3
1 0 1 0 1 0
4 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
4 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 6 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
20 2 32 3 14 4 2 3 2 4 4 3
2 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 9 0 5 0 1 2 2 9 3 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 6 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
What percent of networking services (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 19.6 4.87 11.5 7.9
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
4 0 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 3 0 5 1 0 0 0 3 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 7 0 12 0 0 2 0 5 1 3
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 1 1 0 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
1 0 0 0 0 0
4 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 2 31 5 8 3 2 5 7 10 8 3
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 8 0 11 2 1 2 3 26 12 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
35:1
LDP
fn
Security
Includes any position where the primary duties specifically relate to security strategies, development, deployment and oversight. The term security might apply to network and cyber security, physical security, or work with regulatory/compliance agencies.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Officer Senior Manager Manager Administrator Architect Engineer Analyst Specialist
9 0 1 12 7 1 7 1 2
1 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 4 2 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
2 0 1 5 1 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
21 1 2 30 9 2 4 1 3
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 4 2 0 4 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 2 1 0 3 0 1
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 4 1 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
What percent of security functions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 20.4 19 13.3 16.7
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
4 2 0 7 4 0 3 1 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 2 0 4 5 0 4 1 1
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 1 5 3 0 4 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 2 3 0 0 3 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 4 1 1 2 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 2 4 8 3 0 7 2 2
1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0
0 1 0 1 1 0 4 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
35:1
LDP
fn
Helpdesk and Desktop Support

Includes any title specifically related to helpdesk and desktop/hardware support, which can include support of applications on PCs; support for the use of laptops, handheld devices, printers, scanners, multifunction devices (including break/fix); and home support.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator Coordinator Supervisor Technician Specialist
19 0 13 0 4 0 3 2 3 2
1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
3 0 8 0 8 0 2 0 5 4
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 5 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 11 6
0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
14 1 26 3 10 4 3 2 14 5
1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 5 0 2 0 1 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 1 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 10 0 0 0 1 3 5 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 13 10
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Excluding third party coverage for week nights and weekend days/nights, what percent of helpdesk and desktop support duties (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 8.19 4.71 7.19 12.23
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
6 0 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 1 0 7 0 1 0 1 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 6 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 6 0 1 0 2 1 11 10
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 9 5
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 1 1 0 3 1 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 5 1 0 0 0 1 3 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 1 27 4 2 1 3 9 4 10
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 8 1 0 0 4 10 33 24
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
35:1
LDP
fn
End User Technology Training

Includes any title that references training. The primary duties of the position involve supporting competency management, e-learning, firm universities, skills assessment and professional leadership development.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator Coordinator Supervisor Trainer Technician Specialist Courseware/ e-Learning Developer Writer/Editor
12 0 11 0 5 0 1 0 3 6 3 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1
3 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0
3 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 3 1 1 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0
0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 2 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
9 1 21 2 3 4 2 1 8 5 2 2 1
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 1 0 0 1 1 3 1 5 2 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 3 0 0 0 3 2 18 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
What percent of end user technology training functions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 19.35 23 11 28.5
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
4 0 1 0 3 1 1 0 0 2 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 13 1 2 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 19 1 0 0 4 6 17 1 4 3 3
1 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 4 0 0 0 1
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 0
35:1
LDP
fn
Application Development
Includes any title specifically related to application development and might encompass developers, programmers, reporting/BI specialists and systems analysts for applications that are not Web-based. (This does NOT include applications used on the Web.)
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator Coordinator Supervisor Developer Programmer Analyst Technician Specialist
3 0 4 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 0 5 0 2 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
11 1 14 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 5 3 1 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 1 4 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
What percent of application development functions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 33.33 48.46 21.7 22.86
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
2 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 2 4
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 2 24 0 3 0 1 6 14 6 11 1 2
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
0 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 16 9 8 2 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
35:1
LDP
fn
Application Administration
Includes any title that relates to the administration of applications. Duties might include application deployment, configuration and testing. This functional area includes database administration; administering accounting and HR systems, email, CRM, document management systems, etc.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator Coordinator Supervisor Specialist
9 0 14 2 6 1 3 0 11
2 0 2 0 2 1 2 0 0
3 0 3 0 1 0 3 0 4
0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
6 0 5 0 4 2 1 0 4
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 1 23 1 6 2 1 2 5
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
1 0 5 0 2 0 0 1 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 6
0 0 0 0
What percent of application administration functions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL 13.97 15.36 6.67 5.59
0 0 0 0 0
MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
3 1 6 0 1 0 1 0 2
1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
2 0 1 0 4 0 0 1 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 5 0 6 1 1 0 6
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 19 1 12 0 3 6 11
0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 3 1 11 0 4 0 16
1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
35:1
LDP
fn
Telecom and Audio-Visual

Includes any title that specifically references telecom (other than LAN/WAN) or A/V. Some specific areas of responsibility might include phones, switches, VoIP, voicemail, teleconferencing and videoconferencing.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator Coordinator Engineer Technician Specialist
14 0 14 1 6 0 3 4 8 7
1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
4 0 3 1 4 2 0 2 4 2
1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1
6 0 6 1 2 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 8 0 3 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
10 2 19 2 6 4 2 1 6 2
2 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 3 0 3 2 0 3 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 3 0 1 0 2 2 5 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
What percent of telecom and audiovisual functions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 18 21.25 21.61 12.1
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
6 0 3 0 4 2 1 1 4 4
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 1 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 2 4
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 4 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 6 0 2 1 2 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 3 1 2 0 3 4 3 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 10 3 11 0 4 5 14 14
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
0 0 3 0 2 0 3 2 8 7
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
35:1
LDP
fn
Litigation and Practice Support

Includes any title specifically related to litigation or practice support. It encompasses the head of a firms practice support group, litigation support group, and all departmental or functional managers/supervisors who work in these groups.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator Coordinator Supervisor Technician Specialist Analyst
13 0 12 0 4 0 3 0 8 5 1
3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1
1 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 5 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 1
1 0 6 0 2 0 2 1 1 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 4 2
3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 14 0 1 2 2 0 2 9 0
3 1 1 1 2 1 2 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
2 0 5 0 3 0 2 0 0 4 0
3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
What percent of practice support functions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 18.2 12.12 16.21 11.49
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
5 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
2 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 4 2 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 3 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 1 14 1 2 1 4 2 4 3 5
9 1 10 0 2 1 2 0 4 4 3
0 0 5 2 1 1 3 1 5 10 9
1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 3 5 2
35:1
LDP
fn
Knowledge Management
Includes head of the firms KM department, functional managers and supervisors. The primary duties of the position involve supporting the firms KM initiatives, processes and systems. Some typical technologies related to KM might include client-facing KM tools (extranets, etc.); data mining; enterprise search; expertise location; taxonomy/folksonomy systems; legal research; and social networking.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Chief Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator KM Attorney (includes Professional Support lawyer) Coordinator Analyst Developer Researcher
2 3 0 9 0 1 2
0 1 0 0 0 1 0
0 2 0 2 0 2 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 0 5 0 4 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 3 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 6 0 11 1 0 0
2 1 1 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 3 0 1 0 0 0
0 4 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
What percent of knowledge managementfunctions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 13.29 6.32 9.21 6.06
1 4 1 0
1 0 0 2
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
4 1 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
2 0 0 1
0 0 0 1
1 0 0 1
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
2 5 0 1 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 2 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 4 0 1 0 1 1
2 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 2 0 1 0 0 0
1 3 0 1 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 2 0 0 2 0 0
1 11 1 6 0 2 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0
1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0
2 0 1 1
1 1 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 1
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0
0 2 1 2
1 2 2 3
0 2 0 1
1 1 0 2
35:1
LDP
fn
Portal/Intranet and Web Development

Includes any position with primary responsibility for the development, maintenance and support of the firms Web-based systems, including portal/ intranet system design, development and management; portal/intranet content management; and development of Web applications.
Small Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Large Firm
61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
Director Assistant Director Manager Assistant (or Junior) Manager Administrator Assistant (or Junior) Administrator Coordinator Analyst Developer Researcher Engineer
9 0 9 0 0 1 1 2 3 1 1
1 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 1
2 1 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
10 2 15 1 5 1 1 1 3 1 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 4 0 2
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 1
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
What percent of portal/ intranet and Web development functions (as described above) are outsourced to consultants? SMALL MEDIUM LARGE VERY LARGE 36.93 42.33 29.57 22.02
Medium Firm
1%-20%
# of responses
Very Large Firm

61%-80%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
1%-20%
# of responses
21%-40%
# of responses
41%-60%
# of responses
61%-80%
# of responses
81%-100%
# of responses
Over 100%
# of responses
7 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1
1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 1
0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 4 1 2 1 0 2 2 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 1
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
5 0 14 0 7 1 3 3 13 0 2
0 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 3 1 0
0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 8 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
35:1
LDP
fn
Successful Recruitment Practices

In preparing this years IT Staffing Survey, we asked you for input on hiring practices: Where and how do you find the best candidates to fill your IT positions?
The predominant responses related to personal referrals, either through friends and colleagues (ILTA and other professional associations) or agencies. When turning to the Web, popular sites included ILTAs Career Center, LinkedIn, craigslist.com, monster.com and careerbuilder.com. Both agencies and newspaper ads fell in popularity as recruiting sources compared to last year.
Do you have a successful referral program in place?

Yes No 23 25 48% 52%
In those firms that had a referral program in place, it was common for the referring employee to receive a monetary award that ranged from $500 to $2,500 (!) if the new hire was successful past the probation period, and that ranged from three to six months.
Do you use agencies?

Routinely Sometimes Rarely Never 10 24 9 7 20% 48% 18% 14%
How predominately does networking through ILTA play into your process?
Significantly Somewhat Not much Not at all 13 21 9 7 26% 42% 18% 14%
Do you still run newspaper ads to assist your recruitment efforts?

Always Sometimes Rarely Never 3 3 15 29 6% 6% 30% 58%
35:1
LDP
fn
Aggregate Survey Data

The graphs on the following pages provide aggregate data with trends across three years.
We undertook an interesting exercise this year in having our analyst compare responses from AmLaw 200 firms to all others. Our survey team chose some particularly relevant questions where firm size might have a significant effect on the responses. Youll see these AmLaw 200 comparisons called out on the following pages, and our graphic on this page provides the first example where we report aggregated responses and then show the numbers when the AmLaw 200 criterion is applied.
What is the total FTE staffing number for your IT department? (Include all offices and all functions providing technology services and considered part of or aligned with IT.)
Average 5.0 4.0 4.0 0 5 10
10.6
13.7
16.4 2012 2011 2010
Median
15
20
Average
54.5 7.5 36.0 4.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0
Comparison
AmLaw 200
Median
AmLaw 200 Non AmLaw 200
35:1
LDP
fn

Does your firm have multiple office locations? (Include international locations.)
69% 73% 68% 31% 27% 32% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Centralized in an off-site data center
Are your technology facilities (i.e., data center) centralized or distributed, off-site or on-site?
Centralized in our main office 2012 2011 2010 Distributed; we have data centers in multiple offices 17% 19% 21% 12% 10% 8% 0% 1% 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 72% 71% 70%
Yes
No
2012 2011 2010
How many offices in total does your law firm have? (Include international locations.)
5.3 Average 6.1 5.9 3.0 Median 4.0 5.0 0 2 4 6 8 2012 2011 2010
Centralized in a branch office
Centralized in our main office Distributed; we have data centers in multiple offices Centralized in an off-site data center Centralized in a branch office
39.7% 79.1% 27% 14.2% 33.3% 6.7% 0% 0% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Comparison
AmLaw 200
Average
14.2 3.3 11.0 2.0 0 5 10 15
Comparison
AmLaw 200
Median
35:1
LDP
fn

How would you characterize the IT adoption profile of your firm? (How quickly does your firm adopt new technology?)
61% 53% 50% 29% 35% 34% 7% 10% 12% 1% 2% 2% 1% 0% 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 2012 2011 2010
Please indicate the direct reporting relationship of IT within your law firm. (Select all that apply if multiple direct reports.)
Head of IT reports to Legal Administrator 23% 20% 21% 23% 21% 18% 8% 7% 8% 5% 4% 4% 5% 4% 7% 5% 4% 5% 4% 4% 3% 10% 20% 30% 2012 2011 2010 40% 27% 36% 34%
Type B - Mainstream
Type C - Conservative
Head of IT reports to COO
Type A - Leading edge
Head of IT reports to Managing Partner Head of IT reports to Technology Partner IT Management reports to Law Firm Technology Committee of firm partners only IT Management reports to Law Firm Technology Committee of firm partners and legal/administrative Other
Type D - Rarely if ever
Type E - Only when the firm is doing very well
Type B - Mainstream 17.5% 31.3% 14.3% 5.6% 1.6% 0.7% 0% 0.7%
66.7% 60.1%
Comparison
AmLaw 200
Head of IT reports to CFO 0%
Type C - Conservative
Type A - Leading edge
Type D - Rarely if ever Type E - Only when the firm is doing very well
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
35:1
LDP
fn

What is the title of the head of IT/technology services?
41% 41% 41% 26% 18% 20% 21% 19% 19% 10% 15% 13% 3% 3% 1%
How many IT professionals work primarily in a branch office?

6.9 Average 4.1 5.3
IT Director
IT Manager
1.0 Median .0 1.0 0 2 4 6 8 2012 2011 2010
Chief Information Officer
Other
In your opinion, which are the most important factors in deciding to place IT professionals in branch offices?
71% Number of users in branch office 39% 57%
Chief Technology Officer
Technology Director
2% 3% 2012
Needy or demanding users in branch office
13% 16% 19% 6% 4% 14% 5%
Technology Manager
1% 1% 0% 20% 40% 60%
2011 2010
Data center facility located in branch office
Other 4% Distance from main office/time zone differences
12%
4% 7% 16% 2% 3% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 2012 2011 2010
Lack of available consulting assistance in branch office location
35:1
LDP
fn

In addition to the traditional functions associated with an IT department, please identify any additional functions for which the top ranking IT executive (CIO/CTO/Director) assumes responsibility in your organization.
AmLaw 200
Project Management (IT and/or Special Projects) Litigation/Practice Support Knowledge Management Records Copy Center Docketing/Calendaring Legal Project Management Word Processing Facilities Library Conflict Checking Other Marketing Mail Room Alternative Fee Arrangements Reception Building Security Project Management Office (PMO)
6% 10% 8% 7% 6% 8% 6% 5% 8% 9% 5% 8% 7% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% 6% 3% 4% 4% 3% 6% 5% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 10% 11% 9% 10% 5%
25% 16% 24% 24%
Comparison
Project Management (IT and/or Special Projects) Litigation/Practice Support Knowledge Management Records Copy Center Docketing/Calendaring Legal Project Management Word Processing Facilities Library Conflict Checking Other Marketing Mail Room Alternative Fee Arrangements 2012 2011 2010 Reception 17.8% 15.3% 14.1% 9.4% 9.8% 5.3% 1.8% 6.5%
27.0% 24.9%
4.3% 5.7% 2.5% 5.4% 3.1% 5.2% 5.8% 10.4% 3.3% 4.3% 3.1% 4.3% 2.8% 0.6% 3.0% 2.5% 1.0% 0.9% AmLaw 200 Non AmLaw 200
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
35:1
LDP
fn

What types of duties are performed by branch office IT staff?
Helpdesk and Desktop Support End User Technology Training Telecom/Audio-Visual Network Services Other Application Administration IT Management Litigation and Practice Support Project Management (IT and/or Special Projects) Application Development Security Services Portal/Intranet & Web Development Word Processing Facilities Legal Project Management Library Records Knowledge Management Docketing/Calendaring Copy Center Mail Room Marketing Reception Application Deployment Web Development 0%
1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 8% 7% 2% 14% 13% 14% 14% 14% 12% 9% 11% 10% 8% 8% 5% 8% 4% 5% 5% 6% 7% 5% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 12% 11% 21% 22% 22%
How do you provide support to users in offices with no IT staff? (Select all that apply)
We use remote control tools to assist with so<ware ques>ons and problems User support services are centralized in our main oce Members of the IT sta regularly travel to branch oces with no IT sta We outsource as needed tasks that must be done on site, such as printer repairs, PC moves, etc. We send someone from a nearby oce when on-site assistance is required We send someone from a nearby oce when on-site assistance is required A member of branch oce administra>on is trained to handle basic user support services Facili>es sta handle many hands-on tasks involving technology equipment and support 1% 2012 Other 0% 0% 3% 1% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 2011 2010 6% 7% 8% 6% 6% 7% 26% 24% 23% 22% 24% 19% 15% 14% 17% 14% 13% 14% 10% 10% 12% 10%
Not Applicable 2012 2011 2010 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
35:1
LDP
fn

What percentage of your IT departments time is spent on firm-wide activities as compared to local office activities?
70.5% 72.2% 66.0% 80.0% 80.0% 75.0% 30.6% 39.3% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 2012 2011 2010 No, but we provide referrals to home PC consultants 0%
Does your IT department provide support for end users home computing needs?
Yes, but only to the extent of helping them with access to our remote access systems Yes, we require the user to bring the PC to the office
15% 15% 42% 42%
38%
Firmwide Average %
11%
Yes, we provide telephone support
12% 12% 11% 10% 10% 8% 8% 6% 7% 7% 6% 6% 6%
Firmwide Median%
Yes, we make house calls No, but some of our employees moonlight to earn extra money by providing home computing support No, we do not provide home PC support
15%
Local Average %
12%
2012 2011 2010 20% 30% 40% 50%
Local Median %
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
10%
35:1
LDP
fn

Indicate who provides helpdesk support during week days, week nights and weekend days. (Select all that apply.)
Week Days
On-Site Employees On Call/Pager Employees Third-party with escalation to employee Third-Party 6% 10% 10% 6% 5% 4% 5% 9% 0% 0% 1% 30% 60% 2012 2011 2010 90% 84% 80% 80% On Call/Pager Employees
Week Nights
58% 60% 66% 19% 20% 16% 13% 10% 6% 6% 12% 4% 4% 6% 30% 60% 90% 2012 2011 2010 On Call/Pager Employees
Weekend Days
60% 62% 65% 17% 18% 18% 12% 10% 6% 7% 11% 5% 4% 6% 30% 60% 90% 2012 2011 2010
On-Site Employees Third-party with escalation to employee Third-Party
On-Site Employees Third-party with escalation to employee Not Covered
Not Covered
Not Covered 0%
Third-Party 0%
0%
Comparison
76.4% 86.3% 4.2% 6.8% 12.5% 4.0% 6.9% 2.9% 0.0% 0.0% 30% 60% AmLaw 200 Non AmLaw 200 90% Third-Party 6.2% 5.4% 0.0% 5.7% 30% Third-party with escalation to employee On-Site Employees On Call/Pager Employees
AmLaw 200
37.0% 63.9% 29.6% 16.4% 27.2% 8.6%
Comparison
43.2% On Call/Pager Employees 24.3% 15.2% 25.7% 8.5% 6.8% 6.0% 0.0% 6.0% 30% 60% 64.2%
AmLaw 200
Comparison
AmLaw 200
On-Site Employees
On Call/Pager Employees Third-party with escalation to employee
On-Site Employees
Third-party with escalation to employee
Third-Party
Not Covered
Not Covered
Not Covered
AmLaw 200 Non AmLaw 200 60% 90%
Third-Party
AmLaw 200 Non AmLaw 200 90%
0%
0%
0%
35:1
LDP
fn

Indicate who provides helpdesk support during weekend nights and holidays. (Select all that apply.)
Weekend Nights
On Call/Pager Employees 14% 14% 15% 13% 11% 8% 6% 7% 6% 7% 11% 30% 60% 90% 2012 2011 2010 Third-Party 59% 62% 67% On Call/Pager Employees
Holidays
57% 60% 62% 16% 16% 16% 12% 10% 9% 7% 10% 6% 7% 12% 30% 60% 90% 2012 2011 2010
Third-Party 0%
0%
Comparison
On Call/Pager Employees 13.9% 13.7% 30.6% 8.6% 0.0% 10.1% 6.0% 5.4% 0% 30% 60% AmLaw 200 Non AmLaw 200 90% 48.6% 62.2% On Call/Pager Employees 49.4% 58.9% 15.6% 15.8% 28.6% 8.1% 0.0% 11.6% 6.5% 5.6% 0% 30% 60%
AmLaw 200
Comparison
AmLaw 200
On-Site Employees
On-Site Employees
Not Covered
Not Covered
Third-Party
Third-Party
AmLaw 200 Non AmLaw 200 90%
35:1
LDP
fn

How does your firm compensate IT employees for after-hours coverage? (Select all that apply)
AmLaw 200
On call, with no extra compensation - part of the job On call, paid based on actual time spent on call Trips to the office paid based on actual time spent On call, paid based on fixed stipend (paid even if no calls) Trips to the office not compensated - part of the job On call, compensatory time Not applicable - do not provide after-hours coverage Trips to the office paid based on guaranteed minimum Trips to the office paid on fixed stipend 14% 15% 13% 14% 12% 12% 10% 10% 10% 5% 5% 7% 3% 3% 4% 3% 3% 5% 1% 1% 1%
25% 27% 29% 25% 24% 21% On call, with no extra compensation - part of the job On call, paid based on actual time spent on call Trips to the office paid based on actual time spent On call, paid based on fixed stipend (paid even if no calls) Trips to the office not compensated - part of the job On call, compensatory time Not applicable - do not provide after-hours coverage Trips to the office paid based on guaranteed minimum Trips to the office paid on fixed stipend 14.4% 14.4% 18.2% 13.3% 9.8% 10.1% 3.8% 5.8% 1.5% 3.4% 3.0% 2.5% 0.8% 0.9% AmLaw 200 20.5% 26.1% 28.0% 23.6%
Comparison
2012 2011 2010
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Non AmLaw 200
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
35:1
LDP
fn

Do you have dedicated administrative support for such items as purchasing, license and contract tracking and accounting functions within your IT department? Do you maintain either a project management department or a dedicated project manager in the IT department?
19% 25% Yes 19% 16% 81% 75% No 81% 84% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 2012 2011 2010 No 88% 86% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2012 2011 2010 Yes 12% 14%
100%
Have you changed your staffing structure or skill set as a result of end-user demand to use consumer technologies for firm business?
Yes 33% 37% No No 68% 63% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 2012 2011 10.8%
Comparison
AmLaw 200
52.4%
Yes
47.6% 88.8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
35:1
LDP
fn

Have you changed your firms or your IT departments staffing structure or skill set as a result of client demand for alternative fee arrangements?
No, we have not changed staffing to support these efforts Yes, we have added firm (but not IT) staff to support these efforts Yes, we have provided IT staff with the skills to support these efforts Yes, we have added staff in IT to support these efforts 0%
If you have made staffing changes as a result of end-user demand to use consumer technologies for firm business, please select all that apply:
We have purchased the relevant consumer technologies for IT department so staff can properly support We have increased the amount of staff time spent on supporting consumer technologies for firm business We have added staff training to support various consumer technologies We have added staff to support various consumer technologies 0% 9% 9% 10% 20% 30% 29% 30% 23% 24% 2012 2011 40% 50% 39% 37%
89.9%
5.2%
3.7%
1.2%
2012
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Comparison
AmLaw 200
No, we have not changed staffing to support these efforts Yes, we have added firm (but not IT) staff to support these efforts Yes, we have provided IT staff with the skills to support these efforts Yes, we have added staff in IT to support these efforts 14.3% 3% 7.9% 2.6% 0% 1.5% 0% 20% 40% 60%
76.2% 92.2%
We have purchased the relevant consumer technologies for IT department so staff can properly support We have increased the amount of staff time spent on supporting consumer technologies for firm business We have added staff training to support various consumer technologies 29.3% 28.6%
Comparison
AmLaw 200
39.0% 39.3%
24.4% 22.9%
We have added staff to support various consumer technologies 0.0%
7.3% 9.3%
AmLaw Non AmLaw
10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0%
35:1
LDP
fn

Comparing this year to 2007, the year prior to the economic downturn, has the number of IT personnel at your firm increased, decreased, or stayed the same? Comparing this year to last year, has the number of IT personnel at your firm increased, decreased, or stayed the same?
Stayed the same Stayed the same 49% 49% 53% 30% 24% 2012 2011 2010 60% 0% Increased, but not to 2007 levels 5% 21% 20% 40% 60% 11% 0% 9% 12%
75% 67%
Increased
15%
Decreased
Decreased
21% 27% 31% 20% 40%
2012 2011 80%
0%
If the total FTE staffing of your IT department has changed since 2007, has the attorney headcount changed roughly proportionately?
52% Yes 37% 33% 48% No 63% 67% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 2012 2011 2010
Comparison
AmLaw 200
Stayed the same 23.8% 7.5% 11.1% 7.8% 11.1% 3.7% 0% 20% 40%
52.4% 78.7%
Decreased
Increased, but not to 2007 levels
35:1
LDP
fn

How would you describe your current staffing environment/ condition?
58% 48% 43% 26% 38% 43% 17% 14% 13% 0% 20% 40% 60% 2012 2011 2010
Under what circumstances do you engage consultants? (Select all that apply.)
Special skills/ knowledge Emerging/new technology Staff augmentation Staff backfill 3% 2% 7% 10% 20% 30% 40% 12% 10% 11% 8% 8% 7% 2012 2011 2010 50% 33% 32% 30% 44% 47% 45%
Adequately staffed (just getting by)
Inadequately staffed (doing more with less)
Comfortably staffed (have some wiggle room)
Other
Comparison
AmLaw 200
0%
Adequately staffed (just getting by)
60.3% 56%
What are your options for managing staff workloads? (Select all that apply.)
Re-prioritize work
43% 42% 44% 33% 32% 30% 14% 15% 11% 7% 8% 8% 4% 3% 7%
Inadequately staffed (doing more with less) Comfortably staffed (have some wiggle room)
28.6% 24.3%
11.1% 17.9%
AmLaw Non AmLaw
Pay overtime Hire temporary staff Request help from other departments Other 0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
2012 2011 2010 40% 60%
20%
35:1
LDP
fn

Are you reducing staff through attrition?
5% 8% 7%
What is your outlook for IT staff over the coming years?

73%
Yes
Our firms IT staffing levels have not changed much since the economic downturn I dont think well see a return to prior levels 95%
14% 28% 6% 18% 25% 34%
53%
45%
No
67% 67%
I am optimistic that well return to prior levels of staffing I am optimistic that well return to prior levels in the future but not next year I think well continue to reduce staff next year 0%
5%
We look carefully for alternatives before replacing staff who leave the firm
25% 26% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
2012 2011 2010
43%
2% 3% 4%
2012 2011 2010 20% 40% 60% 80%
What is your outlook for economic conditions in the coming year?

I believe the effects of the downturn will continue through the coming year I believe economic conditions have changed permanently I believe we have already returned to pre-2008 conditions I am optimistic that we will return to pre-2008 conditions 0% 10% 18.2% 18.2% 20% 30% 40% 2012 26.5%
Our firms IT staffing levels have not changed much since the economic downturn I dont think well see a return to prior levels I am optimistic that well return to prior levels of staffing I am optimistic that well return to prior levels in the future but not next year I think well continue to reduce staff next year 0% 17.5% 13.1% 12.7% 4.5% 7.9% 4.1% 4.8% 1.1% 20% 40% 55.6%
Comparison
AmLaw 200
37.2%
76.1%
AmLaw Non AmLaw 60% 80%
35:1
LDP
fn

On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 indicating the most important and 5 the least important criteria, please rate the following considerations when hiring a new IT staff person.
Prior experience in legal profession
1 - Most important 2 3 4 21% 18% 17% 12% 8% 8% 3% 5% 1% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 25% 30% 30% 39% 39% 44%
Logical/analytical skills
1- Most Important 2 3 4 2012 2011 2010 5- Least Important 7% 6% 11% 1% 4% 2% 1% 4% 2% 49% 48% 47% 42% 39% 39%
Formal Education (Degree)

1 - Most important 2 3 4 5 - Least important 0%
9% 8% 8% 15% 15% 17% 4% 4% 7% 26% 29% 26% 46% 45% 43%
5 - Least important 0%
2012 2011 2010
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Prior experience in technology discipline

1 - Most important 2 2012 2011 2010 3 4 5 - Least important 8% 7% 7% 2% 4% 2% 0% 4% 1% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 35% 31% 31% 54% 55% 60%
Strong communication skills

1- Most Important 2 3 4 2012 2011 2010 5- Least Important 7% 7% 7% 1% 3% 1% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 53% 46% 47% 39% 40% 44%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
2012 2011 2010
Training or certification in specific tech

1 - Most important 2 3 4 5 - Least important 0% 11% 12% 8% 2% 3% 4% 10% 20% 30% 40% 2012 2011 2010 50% 12% 10% 10% 43% 37% 46% 34% 38% 32%
Business-related background, degree or training

1- Most Important 2 3 4 5- Least Important 11% 11% 12% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 26% 24% 20% 2% 4% 1% 17% 20% 17% 44% 42% 51%
Well-rounded skillset, can pick up other duties

1- Most Important 2 3 4 5% 7% 5% 0% 4% 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 21% 15% 17% 30% 29% 29% 43% 45% 48%
2012 2011 2010
5- Least Important
2012 2011 2010
35:1
LDP
fn

Does your firm support continuing education?
Yes with both time off and reimbursement 28% 30% 25% 2.7% Yes with only reimbursement 5% 7% 8% 23% 21% 23% 2012 2011 2010 Average % 2.9% 3.2% 44% 42% 45%
For 2012, please indicate what percent of the IT budget was allocated for training and technical development of IT staff. (If the budget for this expense is the responsibility of another department, we still request that you indicate the amounts relationship to the overall IT budget.)
No
Yes with only time off
1.5% Median % 1% 2% 0% 0.5% 1% 1.5% 2% 2.5% 3% 3.5% 2012 2011 2010
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Do you require your staff to obtain/maintain certifications?

No but we do help pay or reimburse for the classes 27% 32% 28% 13% 10% 10% $372,000 Yes but we do not pay or reimburse for the classes 0 0% 1% 0% 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2012 2011 2010 Median $ $400,000 $400,000 $0 $500,000 2012 2011 2010 60% 57% 61%
What was your IT departments staff salary and overtime budget for 2012?
No and we do not pay or reimburse for the classes
$1,332,756 Average $ $1,033,926 $1,083,537
Yes and we help pay or reimburse for the classes
$1,000,000 $1,500,000
35:1
LDP
fn

What was your IT departments expense budget for 2012? What was your firms budgeted gross revenue for 2012?
$2,355,973 Average $ $1,906,117 $1,773,541 Average $ $71,686,592 $690,000 Median $ $550,000 $570,000 $0 2012 2011 2010 $43,000,000 Median $ $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $0 2012 2011 2010 $121,163,012 $100,809,458
$500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000
$25,000,000 $50,000,000 $75,000,000 $100,000,000 $125,000,000
What was your IT departments capital budget for 2012?
$1,082,890 Average $ $890,428 $798,562
$300,000 Median $ $319,500 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $500,000 2012 2011 2010 $750,000 $1,000,000 $1,250,000
35:1
LDP
fn

Number of FTE Attorneys Average Median Number of Other FTE Timekeepers Average Median Number of Non-Billable FTE Employees Average Median Total FTE Users in Law Firm Average Median Small 34.3 31.0 Medium 93.8 92.0 Large 149.9 140.0 Very Large 577.3 435.8 Number of Offices Outside US Average Median Small .3 .0 Medium .6 .0 Large .4 .0 Very Large 5.0 2.0
Small 11.2 9.0
Medium 30.0 20.0
Large 35.9 30.0
Very Large 211.2 102.0
Technology Facilities Centralized in our main office Centralized in a branch office Centralized in an off-site data center Distributed; we have data centers in multiple offices IT Adoption Profile
Small 91% 0% 2% 8%
Medium 73% 0% 14% 14%
Large 63% 0% 12% 26%
Very Large 42% 0% 29% 30%
Small 27.4 24.0
Medium 73.9 76.0
Large 143.8 132.0
Small 4% 57% 38% 1% 1%
Medium 12% 66% 22% 0% 0%
Large 5% 65% 28% 0% 2%
Very Large 13% 66% 20% 1% 0%
Small 73.1 65.5
Medium 198.3 190.5
Large 329.6 329.0
Very Large 1330.3 925.0
Type A - Leading edge Type B - Mainstream Type C - Conservative Type D - Rarely if ever Type E - Only when the firm is doing very well FTE IT Staffing For IT Dept Average
Multiple Office Locations? Yes No
Small 44% 56%
Medium 70% 31%
Large 95% 5%
Very Large 99% 1%
Small 2.5 2.0
Medium 6.0 5.0
Large 11.5 11.0
Total Number of Offices Average Median
Small 1.8 1.0
Medium 3.3 3.0
Large 5.1 4.0
Median
35:1
LDP
fn

Total IT Staffing Average Median How Does IT Report to Larger Organization? Head of IT reports to Managing Partner Head of IT reports to COO Head of IT reports to CFO Head of IT reports to Legal Administrator Head of IT reports to Technology Partner IT Management reports to Law Firm Technology Committee of firm partners only IT Management reports to Law Firm Technology Committee of firm partners and legal/ administrative mgmt Other Small 2.5 2.0 Medium 5.9 5.0 Large 11.2 11.0 Very Large 52.1 40.0 IT Executive Responsibilities Alternative Fee Arrangements Conflict Checking Small 35% 10% 5% 41% 10% Medium 15% 34% 9% 39% 12% Large 33% 35% 2% 35% 16% Very Large 23% 57% 5% 20% 3% Copy Center Docketing/Calendaring Facilities Knowledge Management Legal Project Management Library Litigation/Practice Support Mail Room 4% 14% 9% 4% Marketing Project Management Office (IT and/or "Special Projects" 10% 7% 2% 3% Reception Records 8% 3% 5% 5% Word Processing Other Title of the Head of IT Chief Information Officer Chief Technology Officer IT Director IT Manager Other Small 1% 1% 33% 47% 17% Medium 20% 2% 53% 20% 5% Large 28% 0% 65% 5% 2% Very Large 51% 9% 33% 4% 4% IT Professionals Work Primarily in Branch Office Average Median Small .2 .0 Medium 1.2 .0 Large 1.3 .0 Very Large 18.3 5.0 Small 3% 11% 25% 20% 25% 30% 22% 15% 51% 10% 16% 86% 5% 19% 19% 12% Medium 6% 17% 25% 23% 13% 40% 15% 4% 64% 8% 6% 83% 0% 9% 19% 4% Large 0% 5% 8% 15% 13% 33% 13% 8% 46% 3% 0% 77% 0% 23% 10% 10% Very Large 0% 7% 10% 12% 1% 35% 7% 26% 44% 3% 1% 77% 1% 25% 12% 12%
35:1
LDP
fn

Reporting Relationship for IT Professionals Working In Branch Offices Report to main office IT management Report to local administrator Report to both main office IT management and local administrator Other Important Factors to Place IT Professionals in Branch Offices Number of users in branch office Data center facility located in branch office Distance from main office/time zone differences Needy or demanding users in branch office Lack of available consulting assistance in branch office location Other Duties Performed by Branch Office IT Staff Alternative Fee Arrangements Application Administration Small 100% 0% 0% 0% Medium 56% 0% 44% 0% Large 70% 5% 25% 0% Very Large 49% 0% 42% 9% Application Development Conflict Checking Copy Center Docketing/Calendaring End User Training Facilities Helpdesk and Desktop Support IT Management Knowledge Management Small 57% 14% 0% 29% 0% 0% Medium 90% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% Large 42% 16% 5% 21% 11% 5% Very Large 78% 3% 4% 9% 0% 6% Legal Project Management Library Litigation and Practice Support Mail Room Marketing Network Services Portal/Intranet & Web Development Project Management Reception Records Security Services Small 0% 40% Medium 0% 40% Large 0% 30% Very Large 0% 31% Telecom/Audio-Visual Word Processing Other 20% 0% 0% 0% 40% 10% 60% 20% 10% 20% 0% 50% 0% 10% 40% 20% 20% 0% 0% 20% 50% 20% 40% 10% 0% 0% 0% 30% 0% 90% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 20% 10% 10% 10% 10% 0% 50% 10% 10% 15% 0% 0% 0% 50% 0% 95% 10% 0% 0% 0% 20% 0% 0% 60% 5% 0% 0% 0% 5% 55% 0% 0% 13% 0% 2% 3% 68% 4% 90% 31% 3% 3% 6% 15% 2% 0% 43% 13% 27% 0% 4% 16% 60% 4% 7%
35:1
LDP
fn

How Support is Provided to Users in Offices With No IT Staff User support services are centralized in our main office We use remote control tools to assist with software questions and problems We outsource as needed tasks that must be done on site, such as printer repairs, PC moves, etc. Facilities staff handle many hands-on tasks involving technology equipment and support A member of branch office administration is trained to handle basic user support services We send someone from a nearby office when onsite assistance is required Members of the IT staff regularly travel to branch offices with no IT staff Other % of IT Dept Time Spent on Firmwide Activities Average % Median % Small Medium Large Very Large % of IT Dept Time Spent on Local Office Activities Average % 76% 79% 95% 100% Median % IT Department Provide Support for End Users' Home Computing Needs Yes, we make house calls 42% 48% 70% 50% Yes, we provide telephone support Yes, we require the user to bring the PC to the office Yes, but only to the extent of helping them with access to our remote access systems No, but some of our employees moonlight to earn extra money by providing home computing support No, but we provide referrals to home PC consultants No, we do not provide home PC support Small 28.4% 10% Medium 36% 27.5% Large 32.5% 25% Very Large 29.8% 25%
92%
100%
100%
100%
Small 12% 12% 21%
Medium 12% 12% 12%
Large 5% 2% 12%
Very Large 7% 18% 8%
14%
31%
10%
50%
34%
54%
44%
48%
16%
21%
40%
38%
7%
5%
21%
7%
30%
52%
40%
13%
42% 0%
62% 3%
70% 0%
50% 0%
5% 9%
5% 0%
9% 7%
7% 7%
Small 74.7% 90%
Medium 66% 75%
Large 69% 75%
Very Large 70.2% 75%
35:1
LDP
fn

Week Days On-Site Employees On Call/Pager Employees Third-Party Third-Party with escalation to employees Not Covered Small 88% 11% 2% 4% 0% Medium 97% 3% 7% 0% 0% Large 88% 2% 0% 12% 0% Very Large 90% 3% 7% 12% 0% Weekend Nights On-Site Employees On Call/Pager Employees Third-Party Third-Party with escalation to employees Not Covered Small 20% 66% 6% 7% 10% Medium 9% 72% 7% 5% 14% Large 7% 58% 5% 23% 7% Very Large 14% 60% 7% 29% 4%
Week Nights On-Site Employees On Call/Pager Employees Third-Party Third-Party with escalation to employees Not Covered
Small 22% 66% 7% 7% 8%
Medium 9% 81% 7% 5% 5%
Large 9% 61% 5% 23% 2%
Very Large 25% 57% 7% 26% 1%
Holidays On-Site Employees On Call/Pager Employees Third-Party Third-Party with escalation to employees Not Covered
Small 23% 63% 6% 6% 11%
Medium 10% 71% 7% 5% 17%
Large 7% 54% 5% 23% 12%
Very Large 20% 65% 7% 29% 3%
Weekend Days On-Site Employees On Call/Pager Employees Third-Party Third-Party with escalation to employees Not Covered
Small 22% 69% 7% 4% 5%
Medium 10% 82% 4% 4% 6%
Large 13% 67% 6% 21% 5%
Very Large 31% 60% 11% 24% 0%
35:1
LDP
fn

After-Hours Coverage Compensation? On call, with no extra compensation On call, paid based on actual time spent on call On call, paid based on fixed stipend (paid even if no calls) On call, compensatory time Trips to the office not compensated Trips to the office paid based on actual time spent Trips to the office paid based on guaranteed minimum Trips to the office paid on fixed stipend Not applicable - do not provide after-hours coverage Dedicated Admin. Support within IT Dept? Yes No # FTE Dedicated Admin. Support within IT Dept Average Median Small 61% 34% 3% 6% 23% 21% Medium 32% 41% 27% 12% 15% 19% Large 19% 61% 44% 16% 5% 35% Very Large 34% 53% 52% 10% 17% 34% Project Management Dept or Dedicated Project Manager in IT Yes No Changed Staffing Structure As a Result of Client Demand for Alternative Fee Arrangemnts Yes, we have added staff in IT to support these efforts Yes, we have provided IT staff with the skills to support these efforts Yes, we have added firm (but not IT) staff to support these efforts No, we have not changed staffing to suppport these efforts Changed Staffing Structure As A Result Of End User Demand To Use Consumer Technology Yes No Small 1.8 1.0 Medium 1.4 1.0 Large 1.8 1.0 Very Large 1.7 1.0 Small 6% 95% Medium 7% 93% Large 9% 91% Very Large 57% 43%
Small
Medium
Large
Very Large
1%
2%
5%
0%
1%
5%
2%
9%
0% 1% 6%
10% 2% 7%
7% 2% 5%
8% 3% 3%
1%
2%
7%
15%
98%
92%
86%
76%
Small 14% 86%
Medium 14% 86%
Large 23% 77%
Very Large 56% 44%
Small 18% 82%
Medium 32% 68%
Large 42% 58%
Very Large 56% 44%
35:1
LDP
fn

Staff Changes As a Result of End User Demand to Use Consumer Technology We have added staff to support various consumer technologies We have provided staff training to support various consumer technologies We have purchased relevant consumer technologies for IT department so can staff can properly support We have Increased amount of staff time spent on supporting consumer technologies for firm business Multiple Offices Increases Complexity of the Technology Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small Medium Large Very Large International Offices Increases Complexity of the Technology Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex 25% 58% 50% 61% No difference Not Applicable Frequent Use of Contract Attorneys Increases Complexity of the Technology Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Small 3% 15% 29% 7% 46% Medium 4% 18% 49% 4% 26% Large 9% 40% 42% 7% 2% Very Large 13% 33% 47% 8% 0% Not Applicable Tech Facilities Centralized in Main Office Increases Complexity of the Technology Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small 6% 8% 3% 1% 82% Medium 5% 2% 3% 0% 90% Large 7% 9% 5% 5% 74% Very Large 15% 30% 18% 1% 36%
17%
16%
11%
23%
79%
79%
89%
84%
Small 1% 1% 14% 19% 66%
Medium 0% 2% 26% 19% 53%
Large 0% 9% 12% 33% 47%
Very Large 0% 3% 24% 51% 22%
50%
79%
50%
63%
Small 6% 3% 26% 49% 17%
Medium 3% 14% 17% 52% 14%
Large 0% 0% 64% 29% 7%
Very Large 4% 13% 34% 29% 21%
35:1
LDP
fn

Tech Facilities Centralized in Branch Office Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Tech Facilities Centralized in Off-Site Data Center Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Tech Facilities Distributed Among Multiple Offices Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small 1% 3% 15% 6% 75% Medium 0% 3% 21% 7% 69% Large 0% 10% 21% 12% 57% Very Large 3% 13% 17% 17% 51% IT Adoption Profile of Firm is Leading Edge Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable IT Adoption Profile of Firm is Mainstream Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable IT Adoption Profile of Firm is Conservative Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small 10% 13% 12% 4% 61% Medium 9% 21% 14% 2% 55% Large 17% 26% 10% 5% 43% Very Large 16% 34% 13% 1% 36%
Small 2% 5% 15% 3% 75%
Medium 2% 9% 21% 7% 62%
Large 2% 5% 28% 14% 51%
Very Large 4% 15% 19% 29% 33%
Small 1% 11% 41% 19% 27%
Medium 2% 21% 36% 14% 28%
Large 2% 23% 33% 23% 19%
Very Large 1% 20% 51% 13% 16%
Small 3% 8% 11% 4% 74%
Medium 4% 7% 21% 5% 63%
Large 14% 16% 16% 12% 42%
Very Large 7% 30% 24% 11% 29%
Small 2% 2% 22% 31% 44%
Medium 0% 7% 12% 29% 52%
Large 0% 5% 33% 30% 33%
Very Large 0% 4% 26% 25% 45%
35:1
LDP
fn

IT Adoption Profile of Firm is Rarely if Ever Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable IT Adoption Profile of Firm is Only When Firm is Doing Very Well Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable IT Professionals Work Only in Main Office Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small 2% 0% 8% 18% 71% Medium 0% 0% 2% 22% 76% Large 0% 2% 9% 33% 56% Very Large 0% 5% 9% 28% 58% IT Professionals Work Only in Branch Offices Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Offices with No IT Staff Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex 2% 5% 12% 16% 66% 2% 2% 9% 18% 69% 0% 10% 24% 17% 50% 1% 7% 20% 16% 56% IT Department Provides Support for End Users Home Computing Needs Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex 3% 6% 21% 49% 20% 0% 12% 38% 38% 12% 0% 12% 50% 26% 12% 1% 13% 21% 25% 40% Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small Medium Large Very Large Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small 1% 3% 11% 11% 75% Medium 0% 10% 17% 9% 64% Large 0% 10% 36% 14% 41% Very Large 0% 12% 45% 30% 13%
Small 3% 9% 25% 11% 53%
Medium 3% 7% 40% 14% 36%
Large 2% 28% 42% 14% 14%
Very Large 8% 25% 43% 12% 13%
Small
Medium
Large
Very Large
Small
Medium
Large
Very Large
6% 14% 36% 23% 21%
5% 11% 44% 30% 11%
12% 21% 21% 16% 30%
10% 20% 40% 9% 21%
35:1
LDP
fn

IT Department Staff Provide Support AfterHours and On Weekends Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable IT Department Does Not Have Admin Support Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable IT Department Supports Consumer Technologies Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small Medium Large Very Large IT Department Uses Consultants Increases Complexity of the Techn Environment Critically complex 4.2% 14.6% 45.1% 27.8% 8.3% 3.4% 20.7% 53.4% 20.7% 1.7% 2.3% 27.9% 48.8% 11.6% 9.3% 1.3% 22.4% 55.3% 15.8% 5.3% Other Increases Complexity of the Tech Environment Critically complex Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Change in IT Personnel From 2007 to 2012 Increased Small 7.0% 20.4% 33.8% 17.6% 21.1% Medium 3.4% 25.9% 48.3% 12.1% 10.3% Large 7.0% 48.8% 20.9% 9.3% 14.0% Very Large 9.1% 35.1% 42.9% 7.8% 5.2% Decreased Stayed the same Small 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 4.7% 93.0% Medium 9.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 90.9% Large 11.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 88.9% Very Large 5.9% 5.9% 0.0% 0.0% 88.2% Very complex Somewhat complex No difference Not Applicable Small 4.2% 6.3% 38.7% 36.6% 14.1% Medium 0.0% 12.1% 36.2% 37.9% 13.8% Large 4.7% 2.3% 39.5% 41.9% 11.6% Very Large 2.6% 14.3% 44.2% 31.2% 7.8%
Small 6.3% 9.2% 23.2% 37.3% 23.9%
Medium 1.7% 13.8% 29.3% 31.0% 24.1%
Large 9.3% 16.3% 46.5% 14.0% 14.0%
Very Large 2.7% 13.3% 32.0% 17.3% 34.7%
Small 20% 12% 68%
Medium 29% 25% 46%
Large 35% 23% 42%
35:1
LDP
fn

Attorney headcount changed proportionately to IT Since 2007? Yes No Change in IT Personnel From 2011 to 2012 Increased, but not to 2007 levels Increased, returning to 2007 levels Stayed the same Decreased Small 45% 55% Medium 56% 44% Large 44% 56% Very Large 63% 37% Options For Managing Staff Workloads? Hire temporary staff Pay overtime Request help from other departments Re-prioritize work Other Reducing Staff Through Attrition? Yes No Outlook for Economic Conditions in the Coming Year I am optimistic that we will return to pre-2008 conditions I believe we have already returned to pre-2008 conditions I believe the effects of the downturn will continue through the coming year I believe economic conditions have changed permanently Small 15% 46% 20% 77% 12% Medium 10% 66% 9% 86% 9% Large 33% 77% 7% 77% 2% Very Large 49% 77% 8% 86% 1%
Small 1% 5% 7% 87%
Medium 5% 9% 9% 77%
Large 12% 14% 5% 70%
Very Large 11% 21% 15% 54%
Small 1% 99%
Medium 7% 93%
Large 2% 98%
Very Large 12% 88%
Current Staffing Condition Inadequately staffed (doing more with less) Adequately staffed (just getting by) Comfortably staffed (have some wiggle room) Circumstances Engage Consultants? Staff backfill Staff augmentation Special skills/knowledge Emerging/new technology Other
Small 21% 52% 27%
Medium 29% 60% 10%
Large 35% 58% 7%
Small
Medium
Large
Very Large
23%
12%
14%
16%
18%
22%
12%
18%
Small 11% 18% 92% 69% 8%
Medium 7% 14% 92% 66% 3%
Large 19% 26% 93% 63% 7%
Very Large 32% 50% 92% 74% 1%
36%
42%
45%
34%
24%
24%
29%
32%
35:1
LDP
fn

Outlook for IT Staffing Over the Coming Years I am optimistic that well return to prior levels of staffing I am optimistic that well return to prior levels, but not next year I dont think well ever see a return to prior levels I think well continue to reduce staff Our firms IT staffing levels have not changed since the downturn Formal Education (degree) 1 - Most Important 2 3 4 5 - Least Important Training or Certification in Specific Technology 1 - Most Important 2 3 4 5 - Least Important Small 1% Medium 10% Large 7% Very Large 12% Prior Experience in the Legal Profession 1 - Most Important 2 3 4 5 - Least Important 10% 1% 86% 15% 2% 64% 14% 0% 72% 20% 5% 55% Prior Experience in the Technology Discipline 1 - Most Important 2 3 Small 6% 23% 47% 14% 11% Medium 0% 18% 49% 23% 11% Large 2% 33% 44% 14% 7% Very Large 3% 35% 44% 10% 8% Logical/Analytical Skills 1 - Most Important 2 3 4 Small 13% 40% 33% 10% 4% Medium 11% 37% 39% 14% 0% Large 2% 47% 37% 14% 0% Very Large 13% 50% 29% 8% 0% 5 - Least Important Small 53% 38% 7% 2% 1% Medium 47% 40% 9% 2% 2% Large 44% 54% 0% 2% 0% Very Large 51% 42% 8% 0% 0% 4 5 - Least Important Small 54% 32% 12% 2% 0% Medium 56% 37% 7% 0% 0% Large 47% 47% 5% 2% 0% Very Large 58% 35% 4% 3% 0% Small 33% 35% 18% 10% 4% Medium 23% 47% 19% 11% 0% Large 21% 35% 23% 16% 5% Very Large 15% 42% 25% 17% 1%
1%
9%
7%
8%
35:1
LDP
fn

Strong Communication Skills 1 - Most Important 2 3 4 5 - Least Important Business-Related Background, Degree or Training 1 - Most Important 2 3 4 5 - Least Important Well-Rounded Skillset, Can Pick Up Other Duties 1 - Most Important 2 3 4 5 - Least Important Small 52% 39% 8% 1% 0% Medium 54% 37% 7% 2% 0% Large 52% 36% 12% 0% 0% Very Large 52% 44% 4% 0% 0% Other 1 - Most Important 2 3 4 5 - Least Important Firm Support Continuing Education? Yes with both time off and reimbursement Yes with only time off Yes with only reimbursement No Require Staff to Get/ Maintain Certifications? Yes and we help pay or reimburse for the classes Yes but we do not pay or reimburse for the classes No but we do help pay or reimburse for the classes No and we do not pay or reimburse for the classes Small 22% 9% 22% 4% 44% Medium 57% 7% 7% 0% 29% Large 71% 0% 0% 0% 29% Very Large 37% 16% 16% 0% 32%
Small 40% 4% 24% 32%
Medium 49% 0% 15% 36%
Large 44% 2% 21% 33%
Very Large 49% 10% 26% 14%
Small 3% 12% 41% 30% 14%
Medium 0% 23% 42% 25% 11%
Large 0% 21% 47% 23% 9%
Very Large 4% 21% 46% 20% 9%
Small 9% 0% 56% 35%
Medium 5% 0% 76% 19%
Large 12% 0% 57% 31%
Very Large 27% 0% 56% 17%
Small 35% 38% 20% 6% 1%
Medium 37% 40% 18% 5% 0%
Large 26% 47% 28% 0% 0%
Very Large 21% 51% 24% 4% 0%
35:1
LDP
fn

% of IT Expense Budget Allocated For Training & Tech Dev of IT Staff Mean % Median % Small 2.8% 1% Medium 3% 2% Large 3% 2% Very Large 2% 1%
IT Dept Staff Salary and OT Budget for 2012 Average $ Median $
Small $167,384 $123,500
Medium $514,162 $400,000
Large $1,019,984 $750,000
Very Large $4,201,982 $3,300,000
IT Dept Expense Budget for 2012 Average $ Median $
Small $226,203 $125,000
Medium $806,563 $645,000
Large $1,526,812 $1,200,000
Very Large $7,063,511 $5,725,000
IT Dept Capital Budget for 2012 Average $ Median $
Small $143,297 $100,000
Medium $356,120 $300,000
Large $930,381 $671,000
Very Large $2,998,615 $2,500,000
Firm's Budgeted Gross Revenue for 2012 Average $ Median $
Small $12,318,070 $10,185,510
Medium $49,269,539 $42,500,000
Large $79,627,455 $67,500,000
Very Large $347,353,459 $235,000,000
35:1
LDP
fn

2012 Staffing Survey

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

2012 Staffing Survey

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012 Staffing Survey

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ILTAs 2012 IT Staffing Survey