biall annual law firm library survey...
TRANSCRIPT
BIALL ANNUAL LAW FIRM LIBRARY SURVEY
2015/16
2017 British and Irish Association of Law Librarians
2
All rights reserved by the British and Irish Association of Law Librarians. No part of this publication
may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electrical or mechanical, including
photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers. A single copy of one table would be considered permissible as fair dealing under
the terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and permission need not be sought to
make this single copy. Whilst every effort is made to ensure accuracy the publishers cannot be held
responsible for any errors or omissions.
Published by British and Irish Association of Law Librarians
Compiled on behalf of BIALL by Dr. Shona McTavish
3
Contents Pages
2. Charts 5
3. Tables 10
4. Background 12
4.1 Challenges faced 12
4.2 Firms that were surveyed 13
5. Analysis of respondents 13
5.1 Definitions 13
5.2 Survey Feedback 14
5.3 Acknowledgements 14
6. The Law Firm Respondents 15
7. Library and Knowledge Staff 21
7.1 FTE Library staff, Knowledge Management team and Professional Support
Lawyers 21
7.2 Ratio of library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland 25
7.3 Mean staffing numbers and global annual turnover 31
7.4 Do UK and Northern Ireland staff support fee-earners based outside the UK
and Ireland? 33
7.5 Employment status of FTE library staff 33
7.6 Percentage of library staff with qualifications 33
7.7 To whom does the Head of Library/Information Service report to? 40
7.8 Is the library/information service part of a specific department? 40
8. Library Services 41
8.1 Charging for staff time 41
8.2 Tasks that the library/information team are involved in 44
9. Enquiries 47
9.1 Collection of enquiry statistics and time spent on enquires 47
9.2 Types of enquiry undertaken and their frequency 55
10. Library Budget –hardcopy and online resources 69
10.1 Hardcopy and online resources 69
10.2 How the cost of major databases is charged within the firm 76
10.3 Total spend on resources other than the major databases 77
11. Hardcopy Resources 82
11.1 Hardcopy books 82
11.2 Hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions 86
11.3 Hardcopy law report subscriptions 90
11.4 Location of hardcopy resources 93
11.5 How UK and Ireland hardcopy collections have changed over the past 12 months 94
12. Electronic Resources 95
12.1 E-Books 95
12.2 Legal Research Resources and Systems 97
12.3 Enquiry Management Systems 112
12.4 Library management Systems 116
12.5 Database Access Management Systems 121
4
12.6 Current Awareness and Aggregator Products 125
12.7 Company and Business Intelligence Resources 131
12.8 Knowledge Management and Search Solutions 139
12.9 KYC / AML Services 143
12.10 Document Automation and Proof Reading Software 148
13. Training 152
13.1 To whom training is delivered 150
13.2 The format of training offered 154
13.3 Training topics 156
13.4 Steps taken to prepare for the training of new trainees 158
14. Future Challenges 161
15. Conclusion 176
5
2. Charts
Chart 6.1a Global annual turnover and percentage of respondents 15
Chart 6.1b Size of firm (fee-earners) and percentage of respondents 16
Chart 6.1c Global annual turnover and size of firm (fee-earners) 17
Chart 6.1d Global annual turnover and number of global offices 19
Chart 6.1e Global annual turnover by number of offices in the UK and Ireland 20
Chart 7.1a FTE Library staff, KM staff and PSL staff 22
Chart 7.2a Ratio of FTE library staff to fee-earners within firms with a global annual turnover of
<£20m 25
Chart 7.2b Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£20-34m global annual
turnover) 25
Chart 7.2c Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£35-49m global annual
turnover) 26
Chart 7.2d Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£50-99m global annual
turnover) 27
Chart 7.2e Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£100-149m global annual
turnover) 28
Chart 7.2f Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£150-499m global annual
turnover) 29
Chart 7.2g Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£500m+ global annual
turnover) 30
Chart 7.3a Mean FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff by global annual
turnover 31
Chart 7.3b Mean FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff by size of firm (fee-
earners) 32
Chart 7.6a Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of <£20m 34
Chart 7.6b Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £20-34m 34
Chart 7.6c Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £35-49 34
Chart 7.6d Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £50-99m 35
Chart 7.6e Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £100-149m 35
6
Chart 7.6f Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £150-499m 36
Chart 7.6g Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £500m+ 36
Chart 7.6h Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 1-199
fee-earners 37
Chart 7.6i Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 200-249
fee-earners 37
Chart 7.6j Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 250-349
fee-earners 38
Chart 7.6k Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 350-599
fee-earners 38
Chart 7.6l Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 600-99
fee-earners 39
Chart 7.6m Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 1,000+
fee-earners 39
Chart 8.1a Charging time to client matters by global annual turnover 41
Chart 8.1b Charging time to client matters by size of firm (fee-earners) 42
Chart 8.2a Tasks undertaken by global annual turnover 45
Chart 8.2b Tasks undertaken by firms by size of firm (fee-earners) 46
Chart 9.1a Number of enquires received in an average week by global annual turnover 47
Chart 9.1b Number of enquires received in an average week by size of firm (fee-earners) 48
Chart 9.1c Percentage of enquiries received from offices outside of the UK and Ireland by global
annual turnover 50
Chart 9.1d Percentage of enquiries received from offices outside of the UK and Ireland and size of
firm (fee-earners) 50
Chart 9.1e Hours spent on enquires in an average week by global annual turnover 52
Chart 9.1f Hours spent on enquires in an average week by size of firm (fee-earners) 53
Chart 9.2a Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with <£20m global annual
turnover 56
Chart 9.2b Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £20-34m global annual
turnover 57
Chart 9.2c Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £35-49m global annual
turnover 58
7
Chart 9.2d Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £50-99m global annual
turnover 59
Chart 9.2e Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £100-149m global annual
turnover 60
Chart 9.2f Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £150-499m global annual
turnover 61
Chart 9.2g Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £500m+ global annual
turnover 62
Chart 9.2h Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 1-199 fee-earners 63
Chart 9.2i Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 200-249 fee-earners 64
Chart 9.2j Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 250-349 fee-earners 65
Chart 9.2k Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 350-599 fee-earners 66
Chart 9.2l Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 600-999 fee-earners 67
Chart 9.2m Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 1,000+ fee-earners 68
Chart 10.1a Library budget for hardcopy and online resources as a % of the firm’s annual global
turnover 69
Chart 10.1b Hardcopy and online budget as a % of global annual turnover and by global annual
turnover 70
Chart 10.1c Hardcopy and online budget as a % of global annual turnover and by size of firm (fee-
earners) 71
Chart 10.1d Percentage spend on the major databases of Lawtel, Lexis, Lexis PSL, Practical Law and
Westlaw by global annual turnover 73
Chart 10.1e Percentage spend on the major databases of Lawtel, Lexis, Lexis PSL, Practical Law and
Westlaw by size of firm (fee-earners) 74
Chart 10.2a How the cost of major database usage is charged within the firm 76
Chart 10.3a Percentage budget spend on databases other than the major legal databases 77
Chart 10.3b Percentage of budget spent on databases other than the major databases and by global
annual turnover 79
Chart 10.3c Percentage of budget spent on databases other than the major databases and by fee-
earner size of firm 80
Chart 11.1a Total number of hardcopy books held in UK and Ireland collection 82
Chart 11.1b Hardcopy books held by global annual turnover 83
Chart 11.1c Hardcopy books held by size of firm (fee-earners) 84
8
Chart 11.2a Hardcopy Loose-leaf subscriptions held by firms in the UK and Ireland 86
Chart11.2b Hardcopy Loose-leaf subscriptions by global annual turnover 87
Chart 11.2c Hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions by size of firm (fee-earners) 88
Chart 11.3aHardcopy Law Report subscriptions 90
Chart 11.3b Hardcopy law report subscriptions by global annual turnover 91
Chart 11.3c Hardcopy law report subscriptions held by size of firm (fee-earners) 91
Chart 11.4a Location of hardcopy resources 93
Chart 11.5b Reasons for changes in hardcopy collections 94
Chart 12.1a E-books held by global annual turnover 95
Chart 12.1b E-books held by size of firm (fee-earners) 96
Chart 12.2a Legal electronic resource subscriptions (all respondents) 97
Chart 12.2b Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£<20m 99
Chart 12.2c Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of £20-
34m 100
Chart 12.2d Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£35-49m 101
Chart 12.2e Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£50-99m 102
Chart 12.2f Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£100-149m 103
Chart 12.2g Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£150-499m 104
Chart 12.2h Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£500m+ 105
Chart 12.2i Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 1-199 fee-earners 106
Chart 12.2j Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 200-249 fee-earners 107
Chart 12.2k Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 250-349 fee-earners 108
Chart 12.2l Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 350-599 fee-earners 109
Chart 12.2m Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 600-999 fee-earners 110
Chart 12.2n Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 1,000+ fee-earners 111
Chart 12.3a Enquiry Management Systems in use or being considered 112
9
Chart 12.3b Enquiry management systems in ‘use’ by global annual turnover 113
Chart 12.3c Enquiry management systems in ‘use’ by size of firm (fee-earners) 114
Chart 12.4a Library Management Systems in use or being considered 116
Chart 12.4b Library Management Systems ‘in use’ by global annual turnover 118
Chart 12.4c Library Management Systems ‘in use’ by size of firm (fee-earners) 119
Chart 12.5a Database Access management systems in use or being considered 121
Chart 12.5b Database Access management systems in use and global annual turnover 123
Chart 12.5c Database Access management systems in use by size of firm (fee-earners) 123
Chart 12.6a Current Awareness and Aggregator Products in use or being considered 125
Chart 12.6b Current Awareness and Aggregator products in use by global annual turnover 127
Chart 12.6c Current Awareness and Aggregator products in use by size of firm (fee-earners) 128
Chart 12.7a Company and Business Intelligence resources in use or being considered 131
Chart 12.7b Company and Business Intelligence resources in use by global annual turnover 134
Chart 12.7c Company and Business Intelligence resources in use by size of firm (fee-earners) 135
Chart 12.8a Knowledge management and Search Solutions in use or being considered 139
Chart 12.8b Knowledge management and Search Solutions in use by global annual turnover 140
Chart 12.8c Knowledge management and Search Solutions in use by size of firm (fee-earners) 141
Chart 12.9a KYC/AML Services in use or being considered 143
Chart 12.9b KYC/AML Services in use by global annual turnover 145
Chart 12.9c KYC/AML Services in use by size of firm (fee-earners) 146
Chart 12.10a Document Automation and Proof Reading Software in use or being considered 148
Chart 12.10b Document Automation and Proof Reading Software in use by global annual
turnover 149
Chart 12.10c Document Automation and Proof Reading Software in use by size of firm
(fee-earners) 150
Chart 13.1a To whom training is offered by global annual turnover 152
Chart 13.1b To whom training is offered by size of firm (fee-earners) 153
Chart 13.2a Format of training by global annual turnover 154
Chart 13.2b Format of training by size of firm (fee-earners) 155
10
Chart 13.3a Training offered by global annual turnover 156
Chart 13.3b Training offered by size of firm (fee-earners) 157
Chart 13.4a Preparation for the training of new trainees 158
Chart 13.4b Preparation for the training of new trainees by global annual turnover 159
Chart 13.4c Preparation for the training of new trainees by size of firm (fee-earners) 160
Chart 14.1a Challenges facing firms with <£20m global annual turnover 163
Chart 14.1b Challenges facing firms with £20-34m global annual turnover 164
Chart 14.1c Challenges facing firms with £35-49m global annual turnover 165
Chart 14.1d Challenges facing firms with £50-99m global annual turnover 166
Chart 14.1e Challenges facing firms with £100-149m global annual turnover 167
Chart 14.1f Challenges facing firms with £150-499m global annual turnover 168
Chart 14.1g Challenges facing firms with £500m+ global annual turnover 169
Chart 14.1h Challenges facing firms with 1-199 fee-earners 170
Chart 14.1i Challenges facing firms with 200-249 fee-earners 171
Chart 14.1j Challenges facing firms with 250-349 fee-earners 172
Chart 14.1k Challenges facing firms with 350-599 fee-earners 173
Chart 14.1l Challenges facing firms with 600-999 fee-earners 174
Chart 14.1m Challenges facing firms with 1,000+ fee-earners 175
3. Tables
Table 6.1 Breakdown of the number of offices in the UK and Ireland and globally 19
Table 7.1a FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff 22
Table 7.3a Mean FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff by global annual
turnover 32
Table 7.3b Mean FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff by size of firm (fee-
earners) 33
Table 8.1 Do the library staffs in the UK and Ireland charge their time to client matters? 41
Table 8.2 Tasks that the library/information team are involved in 44
Table 9.1a Does your library service collect enquiry statistics and if yes how many do you receive in
an average week? 47
11
Table 9.1b Percentage of enquiries received from people based in offices outside of the UK and
Ireland 49
Table 9.1c Time spent by library services in firms in the UK and Ireland answering enquiries in an
average week 52
Table 9.2a Time spent on specific types of enquires over the course of a year 55
Table 10.1 2015/16 spend on the major databases of ‘Lawtel’, Lexis Library’, ‘Lexis PSL’, ‘Practical
law’ and ‘Westlaw’ as a percentage of the UK and Ireland library budget 72
Table 10.3a Percentage budget spend on resources other than the major databases previously
outlined. 78
Table 11.5a How UK and Ireland hardcopy collections have changed over the last 12 months 94
Table 12.2a Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions (all respondents) 98
Table 12.3a Enquiry Management Systems in use or being considered 112
Table 12.4a Library Management Systems in Use or being considered 117
12.4b Where there is a Library Management System is it used by offices outside of the UK and
Ireland? 120
Table 12.4c Is your Library Management System hosted externally? 121
Table 12.5a Database Access Management Systems in use or being considered 122
Table 12.6a Current Awareness and Aggregator products in use or being considered 126
Table 12.7a Company and Business Intelligence Resources in use or being considered 132
Table 12.8a Knowledge Management and Search Solutions in use or being considered 139
Table 12.9a KYC / AML Services in use or being considered 144
Table 12.10a Document Automation and Proof Reading Software 148
Table 14.1 Key issues facing law firms 2016/17 161
12
4. Background
In February 2015, a request was emailed to the BIALL JISCmail list asking if any members would be
interested in helping to create an annual law firm library survey. Seven volunteers came together to
form a Working Group from a range of large to medium sized firms and from an outsourcing
company.
The intention behind the survey was not to create industry standards but to help information
professionals understand where they sit in comparison to other law firms of the same size against a
backdrop of increasing supplier costs and budgetary pressures. There were three main aims:
Comparison and benchmarking
The ability to understand standard practice across the law firm library sector and to benchmark
certain aspects of a library's service against other firms, particularly when making a business
case or presenting data to senior management. There was no mechanism which law firm
librarians could use to do this.
Identification of trends and issues
The survey would identify and analyse trends and issues within the sector which could be used
by BIALL to generate press attention or used by individual libraries to highlight themes and
issues to senior management.
Reducing the need for ad-hoc surveys
Looking at the archive for the Lis-Law mailing list there had been a number of surveys posted in
recent years that could perhaps have been covered by a BIALL benchmarking survey. Topics had
included the use of enterprise and federated search, outsourcing, electronic resource
management, EBook usage, company and business intelligence resources, collection
development policies and embedded librarians. This survey would attempt to capture all such
information in one place.
The survey was finally launched in October 2016. SurveyMonkey was used as BIALL already had a
subscription to this and a member of the working group was experienced in using it.
4.1 Challenges faced
It was decided to keep the questions fairly general so that they could be repeated each year,
although it became clear that the survey would develop organically as the profession changed.
The survey needed to be short enough for members to be willing to complete it but long enough to
capture all of the information required for benchmarking.
Most importantly, it was agreed that the results of the survey should be anonymised in order to
protect participants being directly linked with any sensitive data.
It was initially hoped that the content of the BIALL academic survey could be closely mirrored but it
became clear that many of the questions in the academic survey were not particularly relevant to
13
law firms. Drawing out comparisons between the two surveys was not as easy or useful as had first
been envisaged and a number of questions were revised before launching the final survey.
4.2 Firms that were surveyed
First and foremost, the survey was aimed at BIALL members across the UK and Ireland. The
intention was to make it applicable to as many types of commercial law library as possible – for
example, freelance librarians and firms in outsourced arrangements should all be able to participate.
The survey was restricted to a defined list of participants, the aim being to obtain a high response
rate and help to achieve consistency. This would be important for making year-on-year
comparisons. The survey was therefore sent largely only to firms included within:
The Lawyer UK Top 100
Chambers Irish Top 15
The Lawyer International Top 30
Using these categories allowed 68% of the law firms with BIALL members in the UK, Ireland or Crown
Dependencies to participate in the survey. BIALL members from the remaining 32% of firms were
invited to participate if they wished to. From the initial target list of 150 firms, only four reported
that they did not have a recognised member of staff responsible for library tasks.
5. Analysis of respondents
In all, 132 Law Firms were invited to respond to the survey. Out of these, a total of 58 respondents
completed questionnaires, a return of 44%. Out of these 58 respondents, 17 (9.86%), did not
complete all sections of the questionnaire but selected parts.
Where appropriate the number of respondents providing data is given for each Table/Chart.
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
5.1 Definitions
• The mean has been calculated by adding up all the responses and dividing by the number
of responses to get an “average”. The mean can be distorted by one or two responses which
are very large or very small.
• The median is the mid-point and is calculated through ordering the responses by size from
the smallest to the greatest and finding the middle response. There will be an equal number
of responses below the median and above the median and so it provides a benchmark of
what a “typical” organisation is doing.
14
5.2 Survey feedback
We would like to thank all those who provided feedback. This will be extremely valuable in
developing the survey to meet the needs of members as closely as possible in the future. There
were some very appreciative comments about how useful the survey was, how carefully the
questions were crafted and that respondents were looking forward to seeing the first results and
trends in the future.
There were also comments about how onerous the survey was to complete and the difficulty of
fitting each situation into the questions as worded. Several respondents required clarification of the
questions on hard copies and budget spend or commented that they did not have the required data
easily at hand. The traditional roles referred to in some of the questions no longer existed in a
number of firms, hinting that future surveys may need to define recognisable staffing models to
allow for more accurate and consistent benchmarking. Several technical problems were also
reported.
Being the inaugural survey, this was the first attempt at trying to capture all the information and
analyse the results in various ways, the aim being to make the results as useful to as many BIALL
members as possible. Hopefully, in future years, the wording of the questions will more accurately
reflect all the various situations required and the technical problems can be resolved.
Further feedback would be very welcome at any time. Please email [email protected] or send
any comments to the BIALL President Elect.
5.3 Acknowledgements
A huge debt of gratitude is due to Claire Greening (Head of Library and Knowledge Services, Withers
LLP). Claire was the key driving force in getting the survey off the ground and leading the Working
Party.
Enormous thanks go to all the members of the Working Party who gave up their time to bring the
survey to fruition:
Karen Gray (Information and Research Services Manager, Gowling WLG)
Helen Gwinn (Legal Information Manager, Blake Morgan LLP)
Diane Nicholls (Knowledge Services Manager, Irwin Mitchell LLP)
Steven Riley (Library/Information Services Officer, Mills & Reeve LLP)
Janet Scoones (Director of Information and KM, Trowers & Hamlins LLP) (Interim Working Group
Leader)
Helen Williams (Senior Information Specialist, Integreon)
We are indebted to Shona McTavish who patiently and comprehensively carried out the analysis of
the survey results.
Finally, David Gee and Laura Griffiths provided valuable guidance based on their experience of
running the academic survey, which was very much appreciated.
15
6. The Law Firm Respondents
An overview of respondents, their annual turnover, the number of offices held in the UK and
Ireland and globally.
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Chart 6.1a Global annual turnover and percentage of respondents
100% of respondents provided data
3% of all survey respondents had a global annual turnover of <£20m
12% of all survey respondents had a global annual turnover of £20-34m
14% of all survey respondents had a global annual turnover of £35-49m
16% of all survey respondents had a global annual turnover of £50-99m
16% of all survey respondents had a global annual turnover of £100-149m
17% of all survey respondents had a global annual turnover of £150-499m
22% of all survey respondents had a global annual turnover of £500m+
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
% of respondents by global annual turnover
16
Chart 6.1b Size of firm (fee-earners) and percentage of respondents
100% of respondents provided data
26% of respondents are within firms of 1-199 fee-earners
9% of respondents are within firms of 200-249 fee-earners
10% of respondents are within firms of 250-349 fee-earners
29% of respondents are within firms of 350-599 fee-earners
16% of respondents are within firms of 600-999 fee-earners
10% of respondents are within firms of 1,000+ fee-earners
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Size of firm (fee-earners) and % of respondents
17
Chart 6.1c Global annual turnover and size of firm (fee-earners)
100% of respondents provided data
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Firms with a global annual turnover of <£20m:
3% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size= 1-199)
Firms with a global annual turnover of £20-34m
7% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 1-199)
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 200-249)
3% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 250-349)
Firms with a global annual turnover of £35-49m
5% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 1-199)
3% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 200-249)
3% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 250-349)
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 350-599)
Firms with a global annual turnover of £50-99m
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 1-199)
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 250-349)
9% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 350-599)
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Global Annual Turnover and size of firm (fee-earners)
1,000+
600-999
350-599
250-349
200-249
1-199
18
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 600-999)
Firms with a global annual turnover of £100-149m
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 200-249)
7% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 350-599)
7% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 600-999)
Firms with a global annual turnover of £150-499m
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 1-199)
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 200-249)
5% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 350-599)
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 600-999)
7% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 1,000+)
Firms with a global annual turnover of £500m+
7% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 1-199)
2% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 250-349)
7% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 350-599)
3% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 600-999)
3% of all survey respondents (fee-earner size = 1,000+)
19
Chart 6.1d Global annual turnover and number of global offices
100% of respondents provided data
12% of respondents noted having 1 global office
26% of respondents noted having between 2 and 5 global offices
19% of respondents noted having between 6 and 10 global offices
9% of respondents noted having between 11 and 15 global offices
34% of respondents noted having >15 global offices
Table 6.1 Breakdown of the number of offices in the UK and Ireland and globally
100% of respondents provided data
Firms 1 UK & Ireland Office 2-5 UK & Ireland Offices
>5 UK and Ireland Offices
1 Global Office 12% 22% 0%
2-5 Global Offices 3% 22% 0%
6-10 Global Offices 3% 5% 10%
11-15 Global Offices 3% 2% 3%
>15 Global Offices 10% 17% 7%
0% 20% 40% 60%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Global annual turnover and number of global offices
>15 global offices
11-15 global offices
6-10 global offices
2-5 global offices
1 global office
20
Chart 6.1e Global Annual Turnover by number of offices in UK and Ireland
100% of respondents provided data
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with <£20m global annual turnover (3% of all survey respondents)
50% have 1 office in the UK and Ireland (with 1-199 fee-earners staff)
50% have 2-5 offices in the UK and Ireland (with 1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £20-34m global annual turnover (12% of all survey respondents)
43% have 1 office in the UK and Ireland (all with 1-199 fee-earners)
43% have 2-5 offices in the UK and Ireland (14% with 1-199 fee-earners, 14% with 200-249
fee-earners and 14% with 200-249 fee-earners)
14% have >5 offices in the UK and Ireland (with 250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with £35-49m global annual turnover (14% of all survey respondents)
38% have 1 office in the UK and Ireland (all with 1-199 fee-earners)
50% have 2-5 offices in the UK and Ireland (25% with 200-249 fee-earners, 13% with 250-349
fee-earners and 13% with 350-599 fee-earners)
13% have >5 offices in the UK and Ireland (with 250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with £50-99m global annual turnover (16% of all survey respondents)
11% have 1 office in the UK and Ireland (with 1-199 fee-earners)
44% have 2-5 offices in the UK and Ireland (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and 33% with 350-
599 fee-earners)
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
UK and Ireland offices and global annual turnover
>5 offices
2-5 offices
1 office
21
44% have >5 offices in the UK and Ireland (22% with 350-599 fee-earners and 22% with 600-
999 fee-earners)
Within firms with £100-149m global annual turnover (16% of all survey respondents)
22% have 1 office in the UK and Ireland (11% with 200-249 fee-earners and 11% with 350-
599 fee-earners)
56% have 2-5 offices in the UK and Ireland (33% have 350-599 fee-earners and 22% have
600-999 fee-earners)
22% have >5 offices in the UK and Ireland (with 600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms with £150-499m global annual turnover (17% of all survey respondents)
30% have 1 office in the UK and Ireland (10% with 1-199 fee-earners, 10% with 200-249 fee-
earners and 10% with 350-599 fee-earners)
30% have 2-5 offices in the UK and Ireland (20% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% with 600-
999 fee-earners)
40% have >5 offices in the UK and Ireland (all with 1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms with £500m+ global annual turnover (22% of all survey respondents)
46% have 1 office in the UK and Ireland (31% with 1-199 fee-earners, 8% with 250-349 fee-
earners and 8% with 350-599 fee-earners)
54% have 2-5 offices in the UK and Ireland (23% with (350-599 fee-earners, 15% with 600-
999 fee-earners and 15% with 1,000+ fee-earners)
7. Library and Knowledge Staff
7.1 FTE Library, Knowledge Management (KM) Team and Professional Support Lawyers (PSL)
This section provides an overview of FTE library, KM team and PSL staff within respondent
organisations. Chart 7.1a and Table 7.1a provide an overall picture of staffing in respondent
organisations. These are followed by charts depicting the ratio of FTE library staffs to fee-earners by
global annual turnover and by size of organisation (fee-earners).
93% of respondents provided data in relation to FTE Library staff
22% of respondents noted having a separate Knowledge Team with FTE staff
74% of respondents noted having Professional Support Lawyers with FTE staff
22
Chart 7.1a FTE Library staff, KM staff and PSL staff
See Table 7.1a below for a percentage breakdown
Table 7.1a FTE Library staff, KM staff and PSL staff
Staff FTE <1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >9
Library staff FTE
2% 19% 21% 10% 10% 9% 9% 2% 3% 2% 7%
Knowledge Team FTE
2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 0% 3% 2% 2% 0% 7%
Professional Support Lawyers FTE
21% 7% 5% 12% 7% 10% 3% 2% 5% 5% 17%
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover:
50% of firms have 2FTE library staff (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover:
57% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff (43% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 200-249 fee-earners)
14% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff (250-349 fee e-earners)
14% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff (1-199 fee-earners)
14% have 1-1.9 FTE PSL staff (1-199 fee-earners)
14% have 3-3.9 FTE PSL staff (1-199 fee-earners)
14% have 5.2 FTE PSL staff (200-249 fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30%
<1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>9
% of respondents
FTE Staff
FTE Library Staff, KM Team & PSL staff
Library Staff FTE
Knowledge Team FTE
Professional SupportLawyers FTE
23
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover:
13% have <1 FTE library staff (1-199 fee-earners)
25% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff (13% with 1-199 fee-earners and 13% 200-249 fee-earners)
25% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff (250-349 fee-earners)
25% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff (13% with 200-249 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-
earners)
13% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff (1-199 fee-earners)
13% have 1-1.9 FTE PSL staff (350-599 fee-earners)
50% have 3-3.9 FTE PSL staff (25% with 200-249 fee-earners and 25% 250-349 fee-earners)
13% have 7 FTE PSL staff (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover:
22% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
44% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and 33% 350-599 fee-
earners)
11% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have 5-5.9 FTE library staff (600-999 fee-earners)
11% have 6-6.9 FTE library staff (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have 1-1.9 FTE PSL staff (250-349 fee-earners)
22% have 2-2.9 FTE PSL staff (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
11% have 3-3.9 FTE PSL staff (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have 4-4.9 FTE PSL staff )350-599 fee-earners)
22% have 5-5.9 FTE PSL staff (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
11% have >9 FTE PSL staff (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have <1 FTE knowledge team staff (250-349 fee-earners)
11% have 8-8.9 FTE knowledge team staff (600-999 fee-earners)
11% have >9 FTE knowledge team staff (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover:
33% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff (22% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-
earners)
22% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff (11% with 200-249 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-
earners)
11% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff (600-999 fee-earners)
11% have 6-6.9 FTE library staff (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have 9 FTE library staff (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have 4-4.9 FTE PSL staff (600-999 fee-earners)
22% have 5-5.9 FTE PSL staff (11% with 200-249 fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-earners)
24
11% have 8-8.9 FTE PSL staff (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have 9 FTE PSL staff (600-999 fee-earners)
11% have >9 FTE PSL 350-599 fee-earners)
11% have 6-6.9 knowledge team staff (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have 7-7.9 knowledge team staff (200-249 fee-earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover:
10% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff (1-199 fee-earners)
10% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff (200-249 fee-earners)
20% have 5-5.9 FTE library staff (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
30% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff (20% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 600-999 fee-
earners)
10% have 8-8.9 FTE library staff 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% have >9 FTE library staff (1,000+ fee-earners)
20% have 4-4.9 FTE PSL staff (10% with 1-199 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
20% have 6-6.9 FTE PSL staff (10% with 200-249 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% have 8-8.9 FTE PSL staff (350-599 fee-earners)
50% have >9 FTE PSL staff (20% with 350-599 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-earners and 20%
1,000+ fee-earners)
10% have 1-1.9 FTE knowledge team staff (200-249 fee-earners)
10% have 4-4.9 FTE knowledge team staff (1-199 fee-earners)
10% have 6-6.9 FTE knowledge team staff (350-599 fee-earners)
10% have >9 FTE knowledge team staff (1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover:
23% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff (1-199 fee-earners)
15% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff (8% with 250-349 fee-earners and 8% 350-599 fee-earners)
15% have 5-5.9 FTE library staff (350-599 fee-earners)
8% have 7-7.9 FTE library staff (1-199 fee-earners)
8% have 8-8.9 FTE library staff (1,000+ fee-earners)
23% have >9 FTE library staff (8% with 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-earners and 8%
1,000+ fee-earners)
8% have 1-1.9 FTE PSL staff (350-599 fee-earners)
8% have 2-2.9 FTE PSL staff (1-199 fee-earners)
8% have 3-3.9 FTE PSL staff (1-199 fee-earners)
8% have 5-5.9 FTE PSL staff (1-199 fee-earners)
8% have 8-8.9 FTE PSL staff (350-599 fee-earners)
8% have 9 FTE PSL staff (250-349 fee-earners)
25
31% have >9 FTE PSL staff (8% with 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-earners and 15%
1,000+ fee-earners)
8% have 1-1.9 FTE knowledge team staff (1-199 fee-earners)
8% have 3-3.9 FTE knowledge team staff (350-599 fee-earners)
15% have >9 FTE knowledge team staff (8% with 600-999 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-
earners)
7.2 Ratio of library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland
90% of respondents provided data
Chart 7.2a Ratio of FTE library staff to fee-earners within firms with a global annual turnover of
<£20m
Within firms with a global annual turnover of <£20m 50% have 2.0 FTE library staff to 61 fee-earners.
Chart 7.2b Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£20-34m global annual
turnover)
Within firms with a global annual turnover of £20-34m:
14% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to <50 fee-earners
14% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30%
<1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>9
% of respondents
FTE library staff
Ratio of FTE library staff to fee-earners within firms with a global
annual turnover of £20-34m
300+ fee-earners
250-299 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
150-199 fee-earners
100-149 fee-earners
50-99 fee-earners
<50 fee-earners
26
29% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to 150-199 fee-earners
14% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff to 150-199 fee-earners
14% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff to <50 fee-earners
Chart 7.2c Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£35-49m global annual
turnover)
Within firms with a global annual turnover of £35-49m:
13% have <1 FTE library staff to 300+ fee-earners
13% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
13% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to 200-249 fee-earners
25% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
25% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
13% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff to <50 fee-earners
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
<1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>9
% of respondents
Ratio of FTE library staff to fee-earners within firms with a global annual
turnover of £35-49
300+ fee-earners
250-299 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
150-199 fee-earners
100-149 fee-earners
50-99 fee-earners
<50 fee-earners
27
Chart 7.2d Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£50-99m global annual
turnover)
Within firms with a global annual turnover of £50-99m:
11% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
11% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to 300+ fee-earners
11% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
11% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff to 150-199 fee-earners
22% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff to 200-249 fee-earners
11% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
11% have 5-5.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
11% have 6-6.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30%
<1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>9
% of respondents
FTE Library staff
Ratio of FTE library staff to fee-earners within firms with a global
annual turnover of £50-99m
<50 fee-earners
50-99 fee-earners
100-149 fee-earners
150-199 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
250-299 fee-earners
300+ fee-earners
28
Chart 7.2e Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£100-149m global annual
turnover)
Within firms with a global annual turnover of £100-149m:
22% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff to 150-199 fee-earners
11% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
11% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff to 200-249 fee-earners
11% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff to 200-249 fee-earners
11% have 6-6.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
11% have 9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30%
<1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>9
% of respondents
FTE library staff
Ratio of FTE library staff to fee-earners within firms with a global annual
turnover of £100-149m
300+ fee-earners
250-299 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
150-199 fee-earners
100-149 fee-earners
50-99 fee-earners
<50 fee-earners
29
Chart 7.2f Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£150-499m global annual
turnover)
Within firms with a global annual turnover of £150-499m:
10% have 2-2.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
10% have 3-3.9 FTE library staff to 250-299 fee-earners
10% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
10% have 5-5.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
10% have 5-5.9 FTE library staff to 250-299 fee-earners
20% have 6-6.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
10% have 6-6.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
10% have 8-8.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
<1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>9
% of respondents
FTE library staff
Ratio of FTE library staff to fee-earners within firms with a global annual
turnover of £150-499m
300+ fee-earners
250-299 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
150-199 fee-earners
100-149 fee-earners
50-99 fee-earners
<50 fee-earners
30
Chart 7.2g Ratio of FTE library staff to legal staff in the UK and Ireland (£500m+ global annual
turnover)
Within firms with a global annual turnover of £500m+:
8% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
8% have 1-1.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
17% have 4-4.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
8% have 5-5.9 FTE library staff to 50-99 fee-earners
8% have 7-7.9 FTE library staff to <50 fee-earners
8% have 8-8.9 FTE library staff to 100-149 fee-earners
25% have >9 FTE library staff to <50 fee-earners
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
<1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>9
% of respondents
FTE library staff
Ratio of FTE library staff to fee-earners within firms with a global annual
turnover of £500m+
300+ fee-earners
250-299 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
150-199 fee-earners
100-149 fee-earners
50-99 fee-earners
<50 fee-earners
31
7.3 Mean staffing numbers and global annual turnover
NB: Mean figures have been calculated against those respondents who noted having FTE library,
knowledge team and/or professional support lawyer staff.
93% of respondents provided data regarding FTE library staff
22% of respondents noted having a separate knowledge team
74% of respondents noted having professional support lawyer staff
Chart 7.3a Mean FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff by global annual
turnover
See Table 7.3a below for a tabular explanation
0 5 10 15 20
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499
£500m+
Number of staff
Global annual turnover
Mean FTE library, knowledge and PSL staff by global annual turnover
Mean FTE library staff
Mean FTE knowledgeteam staff
Mean FTE PSL staff
32
Table 7.3a Mean FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff by global annual
turnover
Global turnover
<£20m £20-34m £35-49m £50-99 £100-149m
£150-499m
>£500m
Mean FTE library staff
2.0 1.7 2.3 3.1 4.0 6.0 8.0
Mean FTE Knowledge team staff
0 0 0 9.7 6.8 13.2 14.5
Mean FTE PSL staff
0 3.0 3.6 4.2 8.1 11.1 15.8
Chart 7.3b Mean FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff by size of firm (fee-
earners)
See Table 7.3b below for a tabular explanation
0 10 20 30 40
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
Number of staff
Fee-earners
Mean FTE library, knowledge and PSL staff by size of firm (fee-earners)
Mean FTE library staff
Mean FTE knowledge teamstaff
Mean FTE PSL staff
33
Table 7.3b Mean FTE library staff, FTE knowledge team staff and FTE PSL staff by size of firm (fee-
earners)
1-199 200-249 250-349 350-599 600-999 1,000+
Mean FTE library staff
2 2.74 2.5 5 13.4 10.5
Mean FTE Knowledge team staff
2.5 4.7 0.7 8.9 14.7 36.7
Mean FTE PSL staff
3.4 4.82 4.25 7.7 14 20
7.4 Do UK and Ireland library staff support fee-earners based outside the UK and Ireland?
93% of respondents provided data
50% of respondents providing data noted ‘yes’
50% of respondents providing data noted ‘no’
Of those who responded ‘yes’ 96% provided data as to the number of fee-earners supported
26% supported up to 19 fee-earners outside of the UK and Ireland
30% supported 20-49 fee-earners outside of the UK and Ireland
11% supported 50-99 fee-earners outside of the UK and Ireland
15% supported 100-199 fee-earners outside of the UK and Ireland
15% supported 200+ fee-earners outside of the UK and Ireland
7.5 Employment status of the FTE library staff
90% of all respondents noted being ‘employed directly by the firm’
5% of all respondents noted being employed through an ‘outsourcing agency’
2% of all respondents noted being ‘freelance’
7.6 Percentage of library staff with qualifications
91% of all respondents provided data in relation to LIS qualifications
The following charts provide an overview of ‘the percentage of staff with qualifications within
organisations by global annual turnover’ followed by ‘percentage of staff with qualifications within
organisations by size (fee-earners)’.
34
Chart 7.6a Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of <£20m
There was insufficient data to produce a chart. 50% of respondents in this grouping had library staff
with LIS degrees and CILIP Chartership.
Chart 7.6b Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £20-34m
Chart 7.6c Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £35-49m
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations with a global annual turnover of £20-34m
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations with a global annual turnover of £35-49m
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
35
Chart 7.6d Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £50-99m
Chart 7.6e Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £100-149m
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations with a global annual turnover of £50-99m
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations with a global annual turnover of £100-149m
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
36
Chart 7.6f Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £150-499m
Chart 7.6g Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within organisations with a
global annual turnover of £500m+
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations with a global annual turnover of £150-499m
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations with a global annual turnover of £500m+
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
37
Chart 7.6h Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 1-199 fee-earners
Chart 7.6i Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 200-249 fee-
earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations of 1-199 fee-earners
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations of 200-249 fee-earners
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
38
Chart 7.6j Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 250-349 fee-
earners
Chart 7.6k Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 350-599 fee-
earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations of 250-349 fee-earners
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations of 350-599 fee-earners
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
39
Chart 7.6l Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 600-999 fee-
earners
Chart 7.6m Percentage of library staff with qualifications within organisations of 1,000+ fee-
earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations of 600-999 fee-earners
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
LIS qualifications
Law Degree
CILIP Chartership
CILIP Fellowship
Other Professional Legal…
% of respondents
Percentage of library/information staff with qualifications within
organisations of 1,000+ fee-earners
75-100% of staff
50-74% of staff
25-49% of staff
<25% of staff
40
7.7 Whom does the Head of Library/information team report to?
91% of respondents provided data
The title of the person to whom the Head of the Library/Information team reported to varied across
the 58 respondents to this survey. In total there were 37 differing titles including:
‘CEO’, ‘Chief Knowledge Officer’, ‘Chief Operating Officer’, ‘Chief People Officer’,
‘Director’, ‘Director of Administration’, ‘Director of Business Transformation’, ‘Director of IT’,
‘Director of IT and Operations’, ‘Director of Knowledge Management’, ‘Director of
Knowledge’, ‘Director of Knowledge and Learning’, ‘Director of Knowledge, Information and
Data’, ‘Director of Knowledge, Learning and Development’, ‘Director of Operations and
Performance’, ‘Director of Quality and Risk’, ‘Director of Risk Management’, Director of
Library and Research Services’,
‘General Counsel’, ‘Global Head of Knowledge’,
‘Head of Information and Research’, ‘Head of Innovation and Digital’, ‘Head of Knowledge
Management’, ‘Head of Knowledge’, ‘Head of Learning and Development’, ‘Head of Learning
and Talent Development’, ‘Head of Research and Information Services’, ‘Human Resources
Director’,
‘Information Partner’,
‘KM Manager Global’, ‘KM Partner’, ‘Know-How Partner’,
‘Managing Partner’,
‘Operations Director’, ‘Operations Manager’,
‘Partner’, ‘Partnership Secretary’
7.8 Is the Library/information service part of a specific department?
57% of all respondents noted that their library/information service is part of a specific department
within the firm. These included:
‘Admin/Business Support’
‘Business Services’, ‘Business Support’,
‘Digital Information and Legal Systematics’,
‘Global Knowledge’,
‘HR’,
‘Information and Knowledge Management’, ‘Information Services’,
‘Knowledge Management’, ‘Knowledge Management Services’, ‘Know-How’, ‘Knowledge
and Information Services’, ‘Knowledge and Learning’, ‘Knowledge and Library’, ‘Knowledge
Learning and Development’, ‘Knowledge Team’, ‘Knowledge Information and Data’,
‘Legal Information Centre’, ‘Library and Information Services’, ‘Library and Knowledge
Services’, ‘Library and research Service’,
‘Practice development’,
‘Research and Information Services’, ‘Research and Library’, Risk Management’
41
8. Library Services
8.1 Charging for staff time
Table 8.1 Do the library staff in the UK and Ireland charge their time to client matters?
Always charge
Frequently charge
Sometimes charge
Rarely charge
Option to charge but do not charge
No option to charge
% of respondents
10% 5% 9% 17% 7% 45%
It is clear from the above table that is more common within respondent firms to ‘NOT’ charge
library/information staff time to client matters.
The following two charts provide a graphic presentation depicting charging time to client matters by
global annual turnover followed by size of firm (fee-earners).
Chart 8.1a Charging time to client matters by global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Charging time to client matters by global annual turnover
No option to charge
Option to charge but do notcharge
Rarely charge
Sometimes charge
Frequently charge
Always charge
42
Chart 8.1b Charging time to client matters by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with <£20m global annual turnover:
50% sometimes charge (1-199 fee-earners)
50% have no option to charge (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £20-34m global annual turnover:
29% rarely charge (14% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
14% have the option to charge but do not charge (1-199 fee-earners)
43% have no option to charge (29% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 200-249 fee-earners)
Within firms with £35-49m global annual turnover:
13% always charge (1-199 fee-earners)
25% rarely charge (13% with 200-249 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-earners)
13% have the option to charge but do not charge (200-249 fee-earners)
50% have no option to charge (25% with 1-199 fee-earners and 25% 250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with £50-99m global annual turnover:
22% rarely charge (350-599 fee-earners)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Charging time to client matters by size of firm (fee-earners)
No option to charge
Option to charge but do notcharge
Rarely charge
Sometimes charge
Frequently charge
Always charge
43
11% have the option to charge but do not charge (600-999 fee-earners)
66% have no option to charge (11% with 1-199 fee-earners, 11% 250-349 fee-earners, 33%
350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms with £100-149m global annual turnover:
11% always charge (350-599 fee-earners)
11% frequently charge (200-249 fee-earners)
11% sometimes charge (350-599 fee-earners)
22% rarely charge (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
33% have no option to charge (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 22% 600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms with £150-499m global annual turnover:
20% frequently charge (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% sometimes charge (1-199 fee-earners)
10% rarely charge (1,000+ fee-earners)
60% have no option to charge (10% with 200-249 fee-earners, 30% 350-599 fee-earners,
10% 600-999 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms with £500m+ global annual turnover:
31% always charge (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 15% 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-
earners)
15% sometimes charge (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 8% 350-599 fee-earners)
8% rarely charge (1-199 fee-earners)
8% have the option to charge but do not charge (600-999 fee-earners)
23% have no option to charge (8% with 250-349 fee-earners, 8% 350-599 fee-earners and
8% 1,000+ fee-earners)
44
8.2 Tasks that the library/information team are involved in
Table 8.2 Tasks that the library/information team are involved in
Task % of respondents undertaking task
Anti-money laundering or know your client research 45%
Contributing to or formulating the firm’s business strategy 41%
Creating and/or indexing know-how 50%
Dealing with circulation queries 91%
Delivering current awareness and updating services 88%
Fulfilling legal information and research requests 90%
Fulfilling non-legal research requests, e.g., background research on target companies or competitors
83%
Managing the firm’s intranet 24%
Negotiating contracts and purchasing new subscriptions or resources
88%
Processing/cataloguing new library resources 90%
Researching and testing new products 90%
Training users 93%
Updating specific pages on the firm’s intranet 79%
Other 26%
Other included: ‘Attending practice group meetings’, ‘Budgeting’, ‘Client advice’, ‘Copyright advice’,
‘Creation and maintenance of an approved experts database’, ‘Creation and maintenance of client
contract database’, ‘Deal analysis’, ‘Developing team databases’, ‘Direct work for clients’, ‘Extranets’,
‘Federated search engine technology’, ‘Financial modelling’, ‘Firm wide projects’, ‘Fulfilling firm’s KM
strategy’, ‘Knowledge technology tools’, ‘Licences’, ‘Loose leafing’, ‘Maintaining library intranet’,
‘Managing firm document assembly function’, ‘Managing firm’s enterprise search engine’,
‘Managing firm’s professional memberships’, ‘Managing practice group files’, ‘Managing library
catalogue as part of global team’, ‘Managing relationship with subscription agents’, ‘Managing wikis
within the firm’, ‘Sector specialisation’, ‘Taxonomies’, ‘Updating firm history and managing an
archive of staff photos’, ‘Vessel tracking for shipping group’.
The following charts provide a graphic breakdown of ‘tasks undertaken’ by global annual turnover
followed by size of firm (fee-earners).
45
Chart 8.2a Tasks undertaken by global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Anti-money laundering or know yourclient research
Contributing to the firm’s business strategy
Creating and/or indexing know-how
Dealing with circulation queries
Delivering current awareness andupdating services
Fulfilling legal information andresearch requests
Fulfilling non-legal research requests
Managing the firm’s intranet
Negotiating contracts and purchasingnew subscriptions or resources
Processing/cataloguing new libraryresources
Researching and testing new products
Training users
Updating pages on the firm’s intranet
% of respondents
Tasks undertaken by global annual turnover
£500m+
£150-499m
£100-149m
£50-99m
£35-49m
£20-34m
<£20m
46
Chart 8.2b Tasks undertaken by firms by size of firm (fee-earners)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Anti-money laundering or knowyour client research
Contributing to the firm’s business strategy
Creating and/or indexing know-how
Dealing with circulation queries
Delivering current awareness andupdating services
Fulfilling legal information andresearch requests
Fulfilling non-legal researchrequests
Managing the firm’s intranet
Negotiating contracts andpurchasing new subscriptions or…
Processing/cataloguing newlibrary resources
Researching and testing newproducts
Training users
Updating pages on the firm’s intranet
% of respondents
Tasks undertaken by size of firm (fee-earners)
1,000+
600-999 fee-earners
350-599 fee-earners
250-349 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
1-199 fee-earners
47
9. Enquiries
59% of all respondents noted that they collected enquiry statistics.
60% of all respondents provide data in relation to the number of enquiries received in an
average week.
9.1 Collection of enquiry statistics and time spent on enquiries
Table 9.1a Does your library service collect enquiry statistics and if yes how many do you receive
in an average week?
Number of enquires received in an average week
0-25 26-50 51-100 101-250 251-500 >500
Received by UK & Ireland
10% 12% 28% 10% 5% 0%
The median range for ‘enquiries received in an average week’ is ‘51-100’.
Chart 9.1a Number of enquires received in an average week by global annual turnover
60% of respondents provided data
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Number of enquires received in an average week and global annual
turnover
251-500
101-250
51-100
26-50
0-25
48
Chart 9.1b Number of enquires received in an average week by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with a turnover of <£20m:
50% received 51-100 enquiries in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £20-34m:
29% received 0-25 enquires in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
14% received 51-100 enquiries in an average week (250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £35-49m:
13% received 0-25 enquires in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
50% received 26-50 enquiries in an average week (13% with 1-199 fee-earners, 25% 200-249
fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-earners)
13% received 51-100 enquiries in an average week (250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £50-99m:
11% received 0-25 enquires in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
11% received 26-50 enquiries in an average week (250-349 fee-earners)
22% received 51-100 enquiries in an average week (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11%
600-999 fee-earners)
11% received 101-250 enquires in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Number of enquiries received in an average week by size of firm (fee-
earners)
251-500
101-250
51-100
26-50
0-25
49
11% received 251-500 enquires in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £100-149m:
11% received 0-25 enquires in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
11% received 51-100 enquiries in an average week (200-249 fee-earners)
11% received 101-250 enquires in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £150-499m:
10% received 0-25 enquires in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
10% received 26-50 enquiries in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
40% received 51-100 enquiries in an average week (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 30%
1,000+ fee-earners)
10% received 101-250 enquires in an average week (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% received 251-500 enquires in an average week (600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £500m:
8% received 26-50 enquiries in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
23% received 51-100 enquiries in an average week (8% with 250-349 fee-earners, 8% 350-
599 fee-earners and 8% 600-999 fee-earners)
23% received 101-250 enquires in an average week (15% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8%
1,000+ fee-earners)
8% received 251-500 enquires in an average week (1,000+ fee-earners)
No organisation received in excess of 500 enquiries in an average week
Table 9.1b Percentage of enquiries received from people based in offices outside of the UK and
Ireland
31% of all respondents provided data in relation to the percentage of enquiries received
from outside the UK and Ireland.
% of enquires received
1-5% 6-10% 11-20% 21-30% 31-40% >40%
% received from offices outside of the UK & Ireland
17% 5% 5% 2% 3% 0%
50
Chart 9.1c Percentage of enquiries received from offices outside of the UK and Ireland by global
annual turnover
Chart 9.1d Percentage of enquiries received from offices outside of the UK and Ireland and size of
firm (fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
% of enquiries received from offices outside of the UK and Ireland by global
annual turnover
>40%
31-40%
21-30%
11-20%
6-10%
1-5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% respondents
Fee-earners
% of enquiries received from offices outside of the UK and Ireland and
size of firm (fee-earners)
>40%
31-40%
21-30%
11-20%
6-10%
1-5%
51
Within firms with a turnover of <£20m, £20-34m and £35-49m
No enquires were received from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
Within firms with a turnover of £50-99m:
For 11% of firms 6-10% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
(350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £100-149m:
For 11% of firms 1-5% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
(350-599 fee-earners)
For 11% of firms 21-30% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
(200-249 fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £150-499m:
For 40% of firms 1-5% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
(10% with 350-599 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-earners and 20% 1,000+ fee-earners)
For 20% of firms 6-10% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
(10% with 1-199 fee-earners and 10% 350-599 fee-earners)
For 10% of firms 11-20% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
(1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms with a turnover of £500m+:
For 31% of firms 1-5% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland (8%
with 1-199 fee-earners, 8% 250-349 fee-earners, 8% 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 600-999
fee-earners)
For 15% of firms 11-20% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
(350-599 fee-earners)
For 15% of firms 31-40% of their enquiries came from offices outside of the UK and Ireland
(1,000+ fee-earners)
52
Table 9.1c Time spent by library services in firms in the UK and Ireland answering enquiries in an
average week
86% of all respondents provided data in relation to the time spent answering enquiries in an average
week.
Hours spent 0-5 6-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 >50 Unable to estimate
% of respondents
7% 12% 16% 10% 9% 5% 21% 7%
The median range for ‘time spent answering enquiries in an average week’ is ‘21-30’.
Chart 9.1e Hours spent on enquires in an average week by global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Hours spent on enquiries each week by global annual turnover
unable to estimate
>50 hours
41-50 hours
31-40 hours
21-30 hours
11-20 hours
6-10 hours
0-5 hours
53
Chart 9.1f Hours spent on enquires in an average week by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with an annual turnover of <£20m:
50% spend between 0-5 hours in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
50% spend between 31-40 hours in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with an annual turnover of £20-34m:
29% spend between 0-5 hours in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
29% spend between 6-10 hours in an average week (14% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14%
200-249 fee-earners)
14% spend between 21-30 hours in an average week (250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with an annual turnover of £35-49m:
38% spend between 6-10 hours in an average week (13% with 1-199 fee-earners, 13% 200-
249 fee-earners and 13% 250-349 fee-earners)
13% spend between 11-20 hours in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
25% spend between 31-40 hours in an average week (13% with 1-199 fee-earners and 13%
250-349 fee-earners)
13% spend >50 hours in an average week (200-249 fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Hours spent on enquiries each week by size of firm (fee-earners)
>50 hours
41-50 hours
31-40 hours
21-30 hours
11-20 hours
6-10 hours
0-5 hours
54
Within firms with an annual turnover of £50-99m:
11% spend between 0-5 hours in an average week (1-199 fee-earners)
33% spend between 21-30 hours in an average week (22% with 350-599 fee-earners and
11% 600-999 fee-earners)
11% spend between 41-50 hours in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
11% spend >50 hours in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
22% were unable to estimate (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with an annual turnover of £100-149m:
22% spend between 6-10 hours in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
11% spend between 11-20 hours in an average week (600-999 fee-earners)
22% spend between 41-50 hours in an average week (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and
11% 600-999 fee-earners)
11% spend >50 hours in an average week (600-999 fee-earners)
11% were unable to estimate (200-249 fee-earners)
Within firms with an annual turnover of £150-499m:
40% spend between 11-20 hours in an average week (10% with 1-199 fee-earners, 10% 200-
249 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
20% spend between 21-30 hours in an average week (10% with 600-999 fee-earners and
10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% spend between 31-40 hours in an average week (1,000+ fee-earners)
20% spend >50 hours in an average week (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+
fee-earners)
10% were unable to estimate (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with an annual turnover of £500m+:
23% spend between 11-20 hours in an average week (15% with 1-199 fee-earners and 8%
350-599 fee-earners)
8% spend between 31-40 hours in an average week (350-599 fee-earners)
54% spend >50 hours in an average week (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 8% 250-349 fee-
earners, 15% 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-earners and 15% 1,000+ fee-earners)
55
9.2 Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency
Table 9.2a Time spent on specific types of enquires over the course of a year
Several times a day
Several times a week
Several times a month
Less frequently
Never
AML documentation 10% 14% 5% 19% 34%
Business development research (e.g., competitive intelligence, information for pitches and tenders)
17% 19% 31% 16% 3%
Company secretarial information (e.g., due diligence, winding up checks)
5% 16% 14% 22% 29%
Current awareness (e.g., searching press, setting up alerts)
29% 38% 12% 3% 3%
Finding information (e.g., a specific document or piece of information, e.g. a treaty or a share price; research that cannot be classed as legal or business development)
14% 34% 29% 7% 2%
Individuals’ information (e.g., bankruptcy searches, electoral roll)
2% 16% 10% 31% 28%
Legal research (e.g., assistance with commentary, guidance, articles, cases, legislation, precedents)
34% 40% 9% 2% 2%
Library administration (e.g., finding missing books)
10% 40% 22% 12% 2%
Online technical (e.g., forgotten passwords)
26% 40% 12% 7% 2%
Property searches (Land registry, radon searches, OS maps etc.)
2% 3% 5% 24% 52%
Straightforward copying or retrieval requests (e.g., cases, articles, legislation)
34% 40% 7% 3% 2%
Other included:
‘There is a separate business research team and risk and compliance team’,
‘Intranet help – several times a day’,
‘Historical company searches – several times a day’,
‘Company searches, news searches’ – no frequency given.
Commonly undertaken enquiries included:
On a daily basis the enquiry work most commonly undertaken by 34% of all respondents
were ‘straightforward copying’ and ‘legal research’.
56
On a weekly basis 40% of respondents undertook enquiries that involved ‘straightforward
copying’, ‘legal research’, ‘library administration’ and ‘online technical tasks’.
On a monthly basis, 39% and 29% of respondents respectively, undertook the enquiries
involving ‘business development research’ and ‘finding information’.
Enquiries less frequently undertaken but undertaken by 31% of respondents involved
‘individuals’ information’
Enquiries never undertaken by a number of respondents included ‘property searches’ (52%)
and ‘AML documentation’ (34%)
The following charts provide a breakdown of enquires undertaken and their frequency by global
annual turnover
Chart 9.2a Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with <£20m global annual
turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with <£20m
global annual turnover
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
57
Chart 9.2b Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £20-34m global annual
turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with £20-34m global
annual turnover
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
58
Chart 9.2c Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £35-49m global annual
turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with £35-49m
global annual turnover
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
59
Chart 9.2d Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £50-99m global annual
turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with £50-99m
global annual turnover
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
60
Chart 9.2e Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £100-149m global
annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with £100-149
global annual turnover
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
61
Chart 9.2f Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £150-499m global
annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with £150-499m
global annual turnover
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
62
Chart 9.2g Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with £500m+ global annual
turnover
0% 20% 40% 60%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with £500m+
global annual turnover
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
63
Chart 9.2h Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 1-199 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with 1-199 fee-
earners
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
64
Chart 9.2i Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 200-249 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with 200-249 fee-
earners
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
65
Chart 9.2j Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 250-349 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with 250-349 fee-
earners
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
66
Chart 9.2k Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 350-599 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with 350-599
fee-earners
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
67
Chart 9.2l Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 600-999 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with 600-999 fee-
earners
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
68
Chart 9.2m Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency – firms with 1,000+ fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
AML documentation
Business Dev. Res.
Company secretarial info.
Current awareness
Finding information
Individual's info.
Legal research
Library admin.
Online technical
Property searches
Straightforward copying
% of respondents
Types of enquiries undertaken and their frequency - firms with 1,000+ fee-
earners
Daily (several times)
Week (several times)
Month (several times)
Less Frequently
Never
69
10. Library Budget
10.1 Hardcopy and online resources
66% of all respondents provided data in relation to the total library budget for 2015/16 for hardcopy
and online resources in the UK and Ireland as a percentage of their firm’s annual global turnover.
Chart 10.1a Library budget for hardcopy and online resources as a % of the firm’s annual global
turnover
The library budget for hardcopy and online resources was <1% of the global annual turnover for 33%
of all respondents.
The library budget for hardcopy and online resources was =>1% but <3% of the global annual
turnover for 33% of all respondents.
The median budget for hardcopy and online resources was 1% of the global annual turnover.
The mean budget for hardcopy and online resources was 1.16% of the global annual turnover.
The following charts provide a graphic presentation of library budgets as a % of the firm’s global
annual turnover by global annual turnover and by size of firm (fee-earners) followed by a written
breakdown.
0% 10% 20% 30%
0.0 - 0.5
0.6 - 0.9
1.0 - 1.2
1.3 - 1.5
1.6 - 1.9
2
3
% of respondents
% figure of annual global
turnover
Library budget for hardcopy and online resources as a % of the firm's annual
global turnover
Libray budget for hardcopyand online respurces as a %of the firm's annual globalturnover
70
Chart 10.1b Hardcopy and online budget as a % of global annual turnover and by global annual
turnover
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
>1,000
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Hardcopy and online budget as a % of global annual turnover and by number of
fee-earners in UK and Ireland offices
3%
2%
1.6 - 1.9%
1.3 - 1.5%
1.0 - 1.2%
0.6 - 0.9%
0.0 - 0.5%
71
Chart 10.1c Hardcopy and online budget as a % of global annual turnover and by number of fee-
earners in UK and Ireland offices
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with <£20m global annual turnover:
50% had a budget of 1.3-1.5% of their global annual turnover (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £20-34m global annual turnover:
43% had a budget of 1.0-1.2% of their global annual turnover (29% with 1-199 fee-earners
and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
14% had a budget of 1.3-1.5% of their global annual turnover (1-199 fee-earners)
14% had a budget of 1.6-1.9% of their global annual turnover (200-249 fee-earners)
Within firms with £35-49m global annual turnover:
13% had a budget of 0.6-0.9% of their global annual turnover (200-249 fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
>1,000
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Hardcopy and online budget as a % of global annual turnover and by number of
fee-earners in UK and Ireland offices
3%
2%
1.6 - 1.9%
1.3 - 1.5%
1.0 - 1.2%
0.6 - 0.9%
0.0 - 0.5%
72
40% had a budget of 1.0-1.2% of their global annual turnover (13% with 1-199 fee-earners,
13% 200-249 fee-earners and 13% 250-349 fee-earners)
13% had a budget of 1.3-1.5% of their global annual turnover (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with £50-99m global annual turnover:
11% had a budget of 0.0-0.5% of their global annual turnover (350-599 fee-earners)
55% had a budget of 0.6-0.9% of their global annual turnover (11% with 1-199 fee-earners
and 44% 350-599 fee-earners)
11% had a budget of 1.3-1.5% of their global annual turnover (250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with £100-149m global annual turnover:
11% had a budget of 0.0-0.5% of their global annual turnover (600-999 fee-earners)
44% had a budget of 1.0-1.2% of their global annual turnover (11% with 200-249 fee-
earners, 22% 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms with £150-499m global annual turnover:
50% had a budget of 0.0-0.5% of their global annual turnover (10% with 1-199 fee-earners,
10% 200-249 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners and 20% 1,000+ fee-earners)
20% had a budget of 0.6-0.9% of their global annual turnover (10% with 600-999 fee-earners
and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% had a budget of 1.0-1.2% of their global annual turnover (1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms with £500m+ global annual turnover:
23% had a budget of 0.0-0.5% of their global annual turnover (8% with 1-199 fee-earners
and 15% 350-599 fee-earners)
8% had a budget of 1.0-1.2% of their global annual turnover (1-199 fee-earners)
8% had a budget of 2% of their global annual turnover (1,000+ fee-earners)
8% had a budget of 3% of their global annual turnover (600-999 fee-earners)
Table 10.1 2015/16 spend on the major databases of ‘Lawtel’, Lexis Library’, ‘Lexis PSL’, ‘Practical
law’ and ‘Westlaw’ as a percentage of the UK and Ireland library budget
69% of respondents provided data
% of UK & Northern Ireland budget
0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100%
% of respondents
0% 7% 22% 24% 16%
73
The following charts provide a graphic presentation of spend on the major databases by global
annual turnover by global annual turnover and by size of firm (fee-earners) followed by a written
breakdown.
Chart 10.1d Percentage spend on the major databases of Lawtel, Lexis, Lexis PSL, Practical Law and
Westlaw by global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-449m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
% spend on the major databases of Lawtel, Lexis, Lexis PSL, Practical Law
and Westlaw by global annual turnover
81-100%
61-80%
41-60%
21-40%
0-20%
74
Chart 10.1e Percentage spend on the major databases of Lawtel, Lexis, Lexis PSL, Practical Law and
Westlaw by fee-earner size of firm
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover:
50% spent between 81-100% of their budget on the major legal databases (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover
57% spent between 61-80% of their budget on the major legal databases (43% with 1-199
fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
14% spent between 81-100% of their budget on the major legal databases (200-249 fee-
earners)
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover
75% spent between 61-80% of their budget on the major legal databases (25% with 1-199
fee-earners, 25% 200-249 fee-earners, 13% 250-349 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-
earners)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
>1,000
% of respondents
Fee-earners
% spend on the major legal databases of Lawtel, Lexis, Lexis PSL, Practical
Law and Westlaw by size of firm (fee-earners)
81-100%
61-80%
41-60%
21-40%
0-20%
75
11% spent between 41-60% of their budget on the major legal databases (350-599 fee-
earners)
22% spent between 61-80% of their budget on the major legal databases (350-599 fee-
earners)
44% spent between 81-100% of their budget on the major legal databases (11% with 1-199
fee-earners, 11% 250-349 fee-earners and 22% 350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover
22% spent between 41-60% of their budget on the major legal databases (11% with 350-599
fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
22% spent between 61-80% of their budget on the major legal databases (11% with 200-249
fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-earners)
11% spent between 81-100% of their budget on the major legal databases (600-999 fee-
earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover
10% spent between 21-40% of their budget on the major legal databases (1,000+ fee-
earners)
50% spent between 41-60% of their budget on the major legal databases (10% with 1-199
fee-earners, 10% 200-249 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-earners
and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
20% spent between 81-100% of their budget on the major legal databases (1,000+ fee-
earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover
23% spent between 21-40% of their budget on the major legal databases (8% with 1-199
fee-earners, 8% 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-earners)
31% spent between 41-60% of their budget on the major legal databases (8% with 1-199
fee-earners, 15% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 600-999 fee-earners)
8% spent between 61-80% of their budget on the major legal databases (350-599 fee-
earners)
76
10.2 How the cost of major database usage is charged within the firm.
Chart 10.2a How the cost of major database usage is charged within the firm.
(NB: respondents may have selected more than one option)
60% of all respondents noted that the costs of the major online databases were charged to a
central budget code for the UK and Ireland.
2% of all respondents noted the costs as being evenly split across offices.
2% of all respondents noted the costs as being evenly split across practice areas.
7% of all respondents noted the costs as being charged against headcount across offices.
2% of all respondents noted the costs as being charged against headcount across practice
areas.
7% of all respondents noted the costs as being charged according to usage.
14% of all respondents also included ‘other’ approaches. These included:
Some specific services are charged to a department, e.g., Justis
Recharged internally to other offices
Mixed allocation methods according to product
Charged to practice groups and offices based on the number of passwords or office or
practice group headcount depending on the database
Charged to a central budget for administration but the allocated across practice groups for
financial reporting.
Unable to give breakdowns
Allocated to industry group based on content on resource
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
How costs for the major databases used are charged within the firm
% of respondents
77
10.3 Total spend on resources other than the major databases (outlined in 10.1 above)
63% of all respondents provided data in relation to spending on ‘other databases’
71% of all respondents provided data in relation to spending on ‘hardcopy books’ and ‘loose-
leaf’ services
69% of all respondents provided data in relation to spending on hardcopy journals and
reports
Chart 10.3a Percentage of budget spent on resources other than the major legal databases (given
in chart 10.1 above)
See Table 10.3 below for a percentage breakdown
0% 20% 40% 60%
0-10%
11-20%
21-30%
31-40%
41-50%
>50%
% of respondents
% budget spend
% of Budget spent on resources other than the major legal databases
Hardcopy Journals andReports
Hardcopy Books andLoose-leaf services
Other databases, e.g.,Business databases
78
Table 10.3a Percentage budget spend on resources other than the major legal databases
previously outlined (chart 10.3a above)
% of UK and Ireland library budget
0-10% 11-20% 21-30% 31-40% 41-50% >50%
Spend on other databases e.g., business
38% 10% 5% 5% 2% 3%
Spend on hardcopy books and loose-leaf services
41% 26% 0% 2% 2% 0%
Spend on hardcopy journals and reports
60% 7% 0% 0% 2% 0%
The following charts provide a graphic presentation of spend on resources other than the major
databases by global annual turnover by global annual turnover and by size of firm (fee-earners)
followed by a written analysis.
79
Chart 10.3b Percentage budget spend on databases other than the major databases by global
annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-449m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
% of budget spent on databases other than the major legal databases
by global annual turnover
>50%
41-50%
31-40%
21-30%
11-20%
0-10%
80
Chart 10.3c Percentage budget spend on databases other than the major databases and by fee-
earner size of firm
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover:
50% spent between 0-10% on databases other than the major legal databases (1-199 fee-
earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover:
71% spent between 0-10% on databases other than the major legal databases (43% with 1-
199 fee-earners, 14% 200-249 fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover:
50% spent between 0-10% on databases other than the major legal databases (13% with 1-
199 fee-earners, 13% 200-249 fee-earners, 13% 250-349 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-
earners)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover:
55% spent between 0-10% on databases other than the major legal databases (11% with 1-
199 fee-earners, 11% 250-349 fee-earners and 33% 350-599 fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
>1,000
% of respondents
Fee-earners
% of budget spent on databases other than the major legal databases
by size of firm (fee-earners)
>50%
41-50%
31-40%
21-30%
11-20%
0-10%
81
11% spent between 11-20% on databases other than the major legal databases (350-599
fee-earners)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover:
33% spent between 0-10% on databases other than the major legal databases (22% with
350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
22% spent between 11-20% on databases other than the major legal databases (11% 200-
249 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover:
30% spent between 0-10% on databases other than the major legal databases (10% with
600-999 fee-earners and 20% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% spent between 11-20% on databases other than the major legal databases (200-249
fee-earners)
10% spent between 21-30% on databases other than the major legal databases (200-249
fee-earners)
20% spent between 31-40% on databases other than the major legal databases (10% with
350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% spent >50% on databases other than the major legal databases (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover
8% spent between 0-10% on databases other than the major legal databases (350-599 fee-
earners)
15% spent between 11-20% on databases other than the major legal databases (350-599
fee-earners)
15% spent between 21-30% on databases other than the major legal databases (8% with 1-
199 fee-earners and 8% 600-999 fee-earners)
8% spent between 31-40% on databases other than the major legal databases (1-199 fee-
earners)
8% spent between 41-50% on databases other than the major legal databases (1,000+ fee-
earners)
8% spent >50% on databases other than the major legal databases (350-599 fee-earners)
82
11. Hardcopy Resources
11.1 Hardcopy Books
Chart 11.1a Total number of hardcopy books held in UK and Ireland collection
66% of all respondents provided data in relation to the number of hardcopy books held.
16% of all respondents hold 1,000 or less hardcopy books
16% of all respondents hold between 1,001 and 2,000 hardcopy books
9% of all respondents hold between 2,001 and 3,000 hardcopy books
5% of all respondents hold between 3,001 and 4,000 hardcopy books
3% of all respondents hold between 4,001 and 5,000 hardcopy books
2% of all respondents hold between 5,001 and 6,000 hardcopy books
2% of all respondents hold between 6,001 and 7,000 hardcopy books
0% of all respondents hold between 7,001 and 8,000 hardcopy books
7% of all respondents hold between 8,001 and 9.000 hardcopy books
7% of all respondents held > 9,000 hardcopy books
The following two charts provide a graphic presentation of books held by ‘global annual turnover’
and by ‘size of firm (fee-earners)’. A textual analysis can be found after the second chart that
combines both global annual turnover and fee-earners size of firm.
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
up to 1,000
2,001-3,000
4,001-5,000
6,001-7,000
8,001-9,000
Hardcopy books held by
firms
Total number of hardcopy books in UK and Ireland collection
% of respondents
83
Chart 11.1b Hardcopy books held by global annual turnover
66% of respondents provided data
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Hardcopy books held by global annual turnover
>9,000
8,001-9,000
7,001-8,000
6,001-7,000
5,001-6,000
4,001-5,000
3,001-4,000
2,001-3,000
1,001-2,000
up to 1,000
84
Chart 11.1c Hardcopy books held by size of firm (fee-earners)
Number of hardcopies held by global annual turnover (N.B. percentages have been rounded up or
down as appropriate and therefore can differ slightly from the total number of respondents providing
data):
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover:
50% hold between 2,001 and 3,000 hardcopy books (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover:
29% hold up to 1,000 hardcopy books (14% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-
earners)
43% hold between 1,001-2,000 hardcopy books (29% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 200-
249 fee-earners)
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover:
0% 2% 4% 6% 8%
1-199 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
250-349 fee-earners
350-599 fee-earners
600-999 fee-earners
>1000 fee-earners
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Hardcopy books held by size of firm (fee-earners)
>9,000
8,001-9,000
7,001-8,000
6,001-7,000
5,001-6,000
4,001-5,000
3,001-4,000
2,001-3,000
1,001-2,000
up to 1,000
85
25% hold up to 1,000 hardcopy books (13% with 1-199 fee-earners and 13% 250-349 fee-
earners)
25% hold between 1,001-2,000 hardcopy books (250-349 fee-earners)
25% hold >9,000 hardcopy books (13% with 1-199 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-
earners)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover:
11% hold up to 1,000 hardcopy books (350-599 fee-earners)
22% hold between 1,001-2,000 hardcopy books (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 11% 250-
349 fee-earners)
22% hold between 2,001 and 3,000 hardcopy books (350-599 fee-earners)
11% hold between 3,001 and 4,000 hardcopy books (350-599 fee-earners)
11% hold between 4,001 and 5,000 hardcopy books (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover:
11% hold up to 1,000 hardcopy books (600-999 fee-earners)
11% hold between 1,001-2,000 hardcopy books (600-999 fee-earners)
11% hold between 5,001-6,000 hardcopy books (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover:
10% hold up to 1,000 hardcopy books (1-199 fee-earners)
10% hold between 1,001-2,000 hardcopy books (1,000+ fee-earners)
20% hold between 2,001 and 3,000 hardcopy books (10% with 200-249 fee-earners and 10%
600-999 fee-earners)
10% hold between 4,001-5,000 hardcopy books (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% hold between 6,001-7,000 hardcopy books (1,000+ fee-earners)
20% hold between 8,001-9,000 hardcopy books (10% with 350-599 and 10% 1,000+ fee-
earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover:
15% hold up to 1,000 hardcopy books (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 8% 350-599 fee-
earners)
15% hold between 3,001-4,000 hardcopy books (350-599 fee-earners)
15% hold between 8,001-9,000 hardcopy books (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+
fee-earners)
15% hold >9,000 hardcopy books (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 8% 600-999 fee-earners)
86
11.2 Hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions held by firms in the UK and Ireland
67% of respondents provided data
Chart11.2a Hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions held by firms in the UK and Ireland
Hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions held (N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as
appropriate and therefore can differ slightly from the total number of respondents providing data):
36% of respondents held =<50
17% of respondents held between 51 and 100
5% of respondents held between 101 and 150
0% of respondents held between 151 and 200
3% of respondents held between 201 and 250
0% of respondents held between 251 and 300
5% of respondents held >300
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
0-50
51-100
101-150
151-200
201-250
251-300
>300
Number of Loose-leaf
subscriptions
Number of hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions held by firms
% of respondents
87
Chart11.2b Hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions by global annual turnover
67% of respondents provided data
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Hardcopy Loose-leaf subscriptions by global annual turnover
>300
251-300
201-250
151-200
101-150
51-100
0-50
88
Chart 11.2c Hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions by size of firm (fee-earners)
67% of respondents provided data
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover
50% hold 0-50 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover
57% hold 0-50 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (29% with 1-199 fee-earners, 14% 200-249
fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
14% hold between 51-100 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover
50% hold 0-50 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (25% with 1-199 fee-earners, 13% 200-249
fee-earners and 13% 250-349 fee-earners and )
0% 5% 10% 15%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1000+
% of firms by fee-earner size
Fee-earners
Hardcopy Loose-leaf subscriptions held by size of firm (fee-earners )
>300
251-300
201-250
151-200
101-150
51-100
0-50
89
25% hold between 51-100 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (13% 200-249 fee-earners and
13% 350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover
33% hold 0-50 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
22% hold between 51-100 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (11% with 1-199 fee-earners
and 11% 250-349 fee-earners)
11% hold between 101-150 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
11% hold >300 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover
22% hold 0-50 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (600-999 fee-earners)
11% hold between 201 and 250 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover
40% hold 0-50 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (10% with 1-199 fee-earners, 20% 350-599
fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
30% hold between 51-100 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (10% with 200-249 fee-earners
and 20% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% hold between 101-150 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (600-999 fee-earners)
10% hold >300 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover
23% hold 0-50 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 8% 350-599
fee-earners and 8% 600-999 fee-earners)
15% hold between 51-100 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and
8% 350-599 fee-earners)
8% hold between 101-150 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
8% hold between 201 and 250 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
8% hold >300 hardcopy loose-leaf subscriptions (1,000+ fee-earners)
90
11.3 Hardcopy law report subscriptions
Chart 11.3a Hardcopy law report subscriptions
67% of respondents provided data
Hardcopy law report subscriptions held (N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as
appropriate and due to rounding, some totals may not correspond with the sum of the separate
figures)
26% of respondents held 0-1
12% of respondents held 2-3
9% of respondents held 4-5
5% of respondents held 6-7
5% of respondents held 8-9
10% of respondents held more than 8 (it should be noted here that the number of law
reports held varied from 13-14, 22-23 up to as many as 160)
0% 10% 20% 30%
0-1
2-3
4-5
6-7
8-9
>9
No. Hardcopy Law reports
Hardcopy law reports held by firms
% of respondents
91
Chart 11.3b Hardcopy law report subscriptions by global annual turnover
Chart 11.3c Hardcopy law report subscriptions held by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Hardcopy Law reports held by global annual turnover
>9
8-9
6-7
4-5
2-3
1
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Hardcopy law reports held by size of firm (fee-earners)
>9
8-9
6-7
4-5
2-3
0-1
92
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover
50% hold 1 hardcopy law report subscription (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover
29% have between 2-3 hardcopy law report subscriptions (1-199 fee-earners)
14% have between 4-5 hardcopy law report subscriptions (250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover
25% hold 1 hardcopy law report subscription (13% with 1-199 fee-earners and 13% 250-349
fee-earners)
13% have between 4-5 hardcopy law report subscriptions (200-249 fee-earners)
13% have between 8-9 hardcopy law report subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
25% have >9 hardcopy law report subscriptions (13% with 1-199 fee-earners and 13% 200-
249 fee-earners)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover
33% hold 1 hardcopy law report subscription (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 22% 350-599
fee-earners)
11% have between 2-3 hardcopy law report subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have between 8-9 hardcopy law report subscriptions (250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover
11% hold 1 hardcopy law report subscription (600-999 fee-earners)
11% have between 2-3 hardcopy law report subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
11% have between 6-7 hardcopy law report subscriptions (600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover
10% hold 1 hardcopy law report subscription (1-199 fee-earners)
30% have between 2-3 hardcopy law report subscriptions (10% 350-599 fee-earners, 10%
600-999 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
20% have between 4-5 hardcopy law report subscriptions (10% with 200-249 fee-earners,
and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% have between 6-7 hardcopy law report subscriptions (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% have >9 hardcopy law report subscriptions (1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover
8% hold 1 hardcopy law report subscription (350-599 fee-earners)
8% have between 4-5 hardcopy law report subscriptions (1-199 fee-earners)
8% have between 6-7 hardcopy law report subscriptions (350-599 fee-earners)
8% have between 8-9 hardcopy law report subscriptions (1-199 fee-earners)
23% have >9 hardcopy law report subscriptions (8% with 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999
and 8% 1,000+ fee-earners)
93
11.4 Location of hardcopy resources
62% of respondents noted their collection or part of their collection being held in a central
Library.
64% of respondents noted their collection or part of their collection being held in satellite
libraries or in team collections.
59% of respondents noted their collection or part of their collection being held by
individuals.
Chart 11.4a Location of hardcopy resources
From the chart above we can see that:
For 9% of respondents 81-100% of their hardcopy collection is held in a central library
for 19% of respondents 61-80% of their hardcopy collection is held in a central library
for 10% of respondents 41-60% of their hardcopy collection is held in a central library
for 14% of respondents 21-40% of their hardcopy collection is held in a central library
for 10% of respondents 0-20% of their hardcopy collection is held in a central library
for 5% of respondents 81-100% of their hardcopy collection is held in a satellite library or
team collection
for 12% of respondents 61-80% of their hardcopy collection is held in a satellite library or
team collection
for 9% of respondents 41-60% of their hardcopy collection is held in a satellite library or
team collection
for 16% of respondents 21-40% of their hardcopy collection is held in a satellite library or
team collection
for 22% of respondents 0-20% of their hardcopy collection is held in a satellite library or
team collection
for 2% of respondents 81-100% of their hardcopy collection is held by individuals
0% 20% 40% 60%
0-20%
21-40%
41-60%
61-80%
81-100%
% of firms
% of hardcopy collection
Location of hardcopy collection
Held by indivdiuals
Held in satellite library orteam collection
Held in central library
94
for 2% of respondents 41-60% of their hardcopy collection is held by individuals
for 5% of respondents 21-40% of their hardcopy collection is held by individuals
for 50% of respondents 0-20% of their hardcopy collection is held by individuals
11.5 How UK and Ireland hardcopy collections have changed over the last 12 months
Table 11.5a How UK and Ireland hardcopy collections have changed over the last 12 months
71% of all respondents provided data
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Increased since previous year
Decreased since previous year
No noticeable change since previous year
Size of hardcopy book collection
9% 34% 28%
Size of hardcopy journals collection
5% 34% 31%
Size of hardcopy loose-leaf collection
3% 45% 22%
Size of hardcopy law report collection
2% 22% 47%
Chart 11.5b Reasons for changes in hardcopy collections
Respondents were entitled to select more than one option
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Other
Reduction in budget forlibrary resources
Move to online resources
Lack of space
Fee-earner preference
Reasons for changes in hardcopy collections
% of respondents
95
12. Electronic Resources
12.1 E-Books
Chart 12.1a E-books held by global annual turnover
29% of all respondents to the survey noted subscribing to e-books.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
E-books held by global annual turnover
>9 e-books
8-9 e-books
6-7 e-books
4-5 e-books
2-3 e-books
1 e-book
96
Chart 12.1b E-books held by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover
50% held 8-9 e-books (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover
14% held 4-5 e-books (200-249 fee-earners)
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover
13% held 1 e-book (200-249 fee-earners)
13% held >9 e-books (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover
22% held 1 e-book (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-earners)
22% held 2-3 e-books (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover
11% held 1 e-book (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
E-books held by size of firm (fee-earners)
>9 e-books
8-9 e-books
6-7 e-books
4-5 e-books
2-3 e-books
1 e-book
97
10% held 4-5 e-books (200-249 fee-earners)
10% held >9 e-books (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover
8% held 2-3 e-books (1-199 fee-earners)
23% held 4-5 e-books (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 15% 350-599 fee-earners)
15% held >9 e-books (1,000+ fee-earners)
12.2 Legal Research Resources and Systems
Chart 12.2a Legal electronic resource subscriptions (all respondents)
See Table 12.2a below for a full breakdown of resources and subscription options taken
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Other
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
98
Table 12.2a Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Complete service Selected parts Considering a subscription
% of respondents to survey
Aries 3% 0% 0% 3%
i-law 5% 19% 0% 24%
ICLR Online 3% 0% 0% 3%
JustCite 16% 2% 0% 17%
Justis 12% 14% 2% 28%
Jordan’s Family Law Online
0% 3% 2% 5%
Other Jordan’s Services
2% 7% 0% 9%
Kluwer Arbitration 24% 2% 0% 26%
Kluwer Law International
2% 3% 0% 5%
Lawtel EU 26% 0% 0% 26%
Lawtel UK 59% 3% 0% 62%
Lexis.com (USA) 9% 9% 0% 17%
Lexis Hong Kong 2% 7% 0% 9%
Lexis Library 52% 19% 0% 71%
Lexis PSL 9% 40% 7% 55%
Perspective (Pendragon)
33% 2% 0% 34%
Practical Law 60% 7% 0% 67%
Westlaw (IE) Irish Law 0% 3% 0% 3%
Westlaw International 3% 3% 0% 7%
Westlaw UK 40% 29% 2% 71%
Other 14%
Databases subscribed to by 50% plus respondents included: ‘Lexis Library’, ‘Lawtel UK’ and
‘Practical Law’.
‘Other’ Legal Electronic Resource subscriptions included: ‘Achilles THEMis’ (complete),
‘Binley’s’ (selective), ‘BNA Tax Management Portfolios’ (complete), ‘Cayman Islands Judicial
and Legal Information’ (complete), Commercial Dispute Resolution’ (complete), ‘Estates
Gazette Interactive’ (complete and selective) ‘Garant’ (selective), ‘GTDT’ (complete), ‘IBFD’
(complete), ‘ISLG’ (selective), ‘JCT Contracts Digital Service’ (complete), ‘Jersey Legal
Information Board’ (complete), ‘Law 360’ (complete), ‘Legislation Monitoring Service for
Charities’ (complete), ‘Mint’ (complete), ‘Mlex’ (selective) and ‘Nexis’ (complete).
Darts-IP, Global and Tax Explorer were also listed.
99
Chart 12.2b Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£<20m
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with a global annual turnover of <£20m
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
100
Chart 12.2c Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£20-34m
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with a
global annual turnover of £20-34m
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
101
Chart 12.2d Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£35-49m
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with a
global annual turnover of £35-49m
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
102
Chart 12.2e Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£50-99m
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with a
global annual turnover of £50-99m
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
103
Chart 12.2f Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£100-149m
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with a
global annual turnover of £100-149m
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
104
Chart 12.2g Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£150-499m
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with a
global annual turnover of £150-499m
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
105
Chart 12.2h Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with a global annual turnover of
£500m+
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with a global annual turnover of £500m+
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
106
Chart 12.2i Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 1-199 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Other
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with 1-199
Fee-earners
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
107
Chart 12.2j Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 200-249 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Other
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with 200-
249 Fee-earners
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
108
Chart 12.2k Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 250-349 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Other
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with 250-
349 Fee-earners
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
109
Chart 12.2l Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 350-599 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with 350-
599 Fee-earners
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
110
Chart 12.2m Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 600-999 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with 600-
999 Fee-earners
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
111
Chart 12.2n Legal electronic resource subscriptions within firms with 1,000+ fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Westlaw UK
Westlaw IE Irish Law
Westlaw International
Practical law
Perspective (Pendragon)
Lexis PSL
Lexis Library
Lexis Hong Kong
Lexis.com USA
Lawtel EU
Lawtel UK
Kluwer Law International
Kluwer Arbitration
Justis
JustCite
Other Jordan's Services
Jordan's Family Law Online
i-law
ICLR Online
Aries
% of respondents
Legal Electronic Resource Subscriptions within Firms with
1,000+ Fee-earners
Complete
Considering
Selected Parts
112
12.3 Enquiry Management Systems
Chart 12.3a Enquiry Management Systems in use or being considered
See Table 12.3a below for a breakdown of percentages for all respondents.
Table 12.3a Enquiry Management Systems in use or being considered
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
In use Considering % of respondents to survey
None 33% 0% 33%
In-house system 9% 3% 12%
KnowAll Enquire 3% 7% 10%
Landesk 2% 0% 2%
Onelog 0% 2% 2%
Quest 2% 2% 2%
Research Monitor 9% 9% 17%
SydneyPLUS 3% 0% 3%
Other 17% 0% 17%
33% of respondents did not use an Enquiry Management System
‘Other’ systems in use included: InMagic DB Textworks, JIRA Service Desk, KnowAll Research,
ManageEngine Service Desk, Record Time on Intapp, Ref Tracker by Aktarama, Request
Tracker (PTFS), ServiceNow and ZenDesk.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Other
SydneyPlus
Research Monitor
Quest
Onelog
Landesk
KnowAll Enquire
In-house system
None
Enquiry Management systems
In Use
Considering
113
The following 2 charts provide the reader with a graphic presentation of ‘Enquiry Management
systems in use’ by ‘global annual turnover’ and ‘size of firm (fee-earner)’. Those that are ‘being
considered’ by firms can be found in the analysis following the two charts.
Chart 12.3b Enquiry management systems in ‘use’ by global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Enquiry Management Systems in 'use' by global annual turnover
None
In-house system
KnowAll Enquire
Landesk
Onelog
Quest
Research Monitor
SydneyPlus
Other
114
Chart 12.3c Enquiry management systems in ‘use’ by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with <£20m global annual turnover
50% of respondents are using an in-house system (with 1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £20-34m global annual turnover
71% of respondents are not using an enquiry management system (43% with 1-199 fee-
earners, 14% 200-249 fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with £35-49m global annual turnover
63% are not using an enquiry management system (25% with 1-199 fee-earners, 13% 200-
249 fee-earners, 13% 250-349 fee-earners and 13% 35-599 fee-earners)
25% are using ‘other’ enquiry management systems (13% with 1-199 fee-earners and 13%
200-249 fee-earners)
Within firms with £50-99m global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Enquiry Management Systems in 'use' by size of firm (fee-earners)
None
In-house system
KnowAll Enquire
Landesk
Onelog
Quest
Research Monitor
SydneyPlus
Other
115
44% are not using an enquiry management system (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 33%
350-599 fee-earners)
11% are using an in-house system (with 350-599 fee-earners)
11% are using Sydney Plus (with 350-599 fee-earners)
11% are using ‘other’ enquiry management systems (with 250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with £100-149m global annual turnover
22% are not using an enquiry management system (with 11% 350-599 fee-earners and 11%
650-999 fee-earners)
11% are considering an in-house system (with 600-999 fee-earners)
22% are considering Knowall Enquire ( 11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-
earners)
22% are considering Research Monitor (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-
earners)
22% are using ‘other’ enquiry management systems (with 350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with £150-499m global annual turnover
20% are not using an enquiry management system (10% with 200-249 fee-earners and 10%
with 1,000+ fee-earners)
30% are using an in-house system (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 20% with 1,000+ fee-
earners).
10% are considering an in-house system (with 200-249 fee-earners)
20% are considering Knowall Enquire (10% with 200-249 fee-earners and 10% 600-999 fee-
earners)
10% are using Landesk (with 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are considering Onelog (with 200-249 fee-earners)
20% are using Research Monitor (10% with 600-999 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-
earners)
10% are considering Research Monitor (with 350-599 fee-earners)
10% are using Sydney Plus (with 1-199 fee-earners)
20% are using ‘other’ enquiry management systems (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10%
with 1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms with £500m+ global annual turnover
8% are not using an enquiry management system (with 350-599 fee-earners)
15% are using Knowall Enquire (8% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8% with 1,000+ fee-
earners)
8% are using Quest (with 1-199 fee-earners)
8% are considering Quest (with 350-599 fee-earners)
23% are using Research Monitor (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 15% 350-599 fee-earners)
15% are considering Research Monitor (8% with 35-599 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-
earners)
116
23% are using ‘other’ enquiry management systems (15% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8%
with 600-999 fee-earners)
12.4 Library Management Systems
Chart 12.4a Library Management Systems in use or being considered
(Respondents can select more than one option)
See Table 12.4a below for a percentage breakdown
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Other
Sydney Plus
Softlink
OLIB
Knowall
Heritage
Capita
247lib
None
Library Management systems
In Use
Considering
117
Table 12.4a Library Management Systems in Use or being considered
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
In use Considering % of respondents to survey
None 3% 0% 3%
In-house system, e.g., Access database
0% 0% 0%
247Lib 0% 0% 0%
Autolib 2% 0% 2%
Capita 0% 0% 0%
EOS 5% 2% 7%
Heritage 2% 0% 2%
Inmagic 2% 0% 2%
KnowAll 26% 2% 28%
Konduct 0% 0% 0%
OLIB 2% 0% 2%
Penlib 10% 0% 10%
Softlink 7% 0% 7%
Soutron 5% 2% 7%
Sydney Plus 3% 0% 3%
Unicorn 0% 0% 0%
Other 5% 2% 7%
Library Management systems in use or being considered by 25% plus respondents included:
KnowAll
‘Other’ Library Management Systems in use included: ‘Koha’
‘Other’ Library management Systems being considered included: ‘Simply little Library
System’ (Bailey Solutions)
The following 2 charts provide the reader with a graphic presentation of Library management
systems ‘in use’ by ‘global annual turnover’ and ‘size of firm (fee-earner)’. Those that are ‘being
considered’ by firms can be found in the analysis following the two charts.
118
Chart 12.4b Library Management Systems ‘in use’ by global annual turnover
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
<£20m
£20-34m
£34-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Library Management Systems 'in use' by global annual turnover
Other
Sydney Plus
Soutron
Softlink
Penlib
OLIB
Knowall
Inmagic
Heritage
EOS
Autolib
119
Chart 12.4c Library Management Systems ‘in use’ by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with <£20m global annual turnover
50% of respondents are using Penlib (with 1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £20-34m global annual turnover
14% of respondents are using Autolib (with 1-199 fee-earners)
14% of respondents are using Soutron (with 200-249 fee-earners)
29% of respondents are using Penlib (14% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-
earners)
14% of respondents are using Knowall (with 1-199 fee-earners)
14% of respondents are considering Knowall (with 1-199 fee-earners)
14% of respondents are using ‘other’ systems (with 1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £35-49m global annual turnover
13% of respondents are using Inmagic (with 200-249 fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1-199 fee-earners
200-249 fee-earners
250-349 fee-earners
350-599 fee-earners
600-999 fee-earners
1,000+ fee-earners
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Library Management Systems 'in use' by size of firm (fee-earners)
Other
Sydney Plus
Soutron
Softlink
Penlib
OLIB
Knowall
Inmagic
Heritage
EOS
Autolib
120
50% of respondents are using Knowall (25% with 1-199 fee-earners, 13% 200-249 fee-
earners and 13% 350-599 fee-earners)
13% of respondents are using Penlib (with 250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with £50-99m global annual turnover
11% of respondents are using Knowall (with 1-199 fee-earners)
22% of respondents are using Penlib (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-
earners)
11% of respondents are using Softlink (with 350-599 fee-earners)
11% of respondents are using Sydney Plus (with 350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with £100-149m global annual turnover
22% of respondents are using Knowall (with 350-599 fee-earners)
11% of respondents are using OLIB (with 600-999 fee-earners)
11% are using Soutron (with 600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms with £150-499m global annual turnover
10% are using Heritage (350-599 fee-earners)
50% are using Knowall (10% with 200-249 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners, 10% 600-
999 fee-earners and 20% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are using Softlink (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are using Soutron (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are using Sydney Plus (1-199 fee-earners)
10% are using ‘other’ library management systems (1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms with £500m+ global annual turnover
23% are using EOS (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 15% 350-599 fee-earners)
8% are considering EOS (with 350-599 fee-earners)
15% are using Knowall (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 8% 350-599 fee-earners)
15% are using Softlink (8% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 1,000 fee-earners)
8% are considering Soutron (with 1,000+ fee-earners)
15% are using ‘other’ library management systems (8% with 600-999 fee-earners and 8%
1,000+ fee-earners)
Table 12.4b Where there is a Library Management System is it used by offices outside of the UK
and Ireland?
19% of respondents noted that the Library Management System was being used by all
outside offices
15% of respondents noted that the Library management System was being used by some
outside offices
121
2% of respondents noted that the Library Management System was not being used by
outside offices
29% of respondents noted this question was not applicable as although they a Library
Management System they did not have offices outside of the UK and Ireland
Table 12.4c Is your Library Management System hosted externally?
69% of all respondents provided data
Yes No
36% 33%
12.5 Database Access Management Systems
Chart 12.5a Database Access Management Systems in use or being considered
See Table 12.5a below for a percentage breakdown
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Other
Not Known
Research Monitor
Quattrove
Precision
Onelog
None
% of respondents
Database Access Management Systems
In Use
Considering
122
Table 12.5a Database Access Management Systems in use or being considered
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
In use Considering % of respondents to survey
None 34% 0% 34%
Onelog 3% 2% 5%
Precision 0% 0% 0%
Quattrove 0% 0% 0%
Research Monitor 22% 9% 31%
Not known 0% 0% 0%
Other 3% 0% 3%
34% of respondents did not use a Database Access Management System
‘Other’ Database Access Management Systems included: PTFS
The following 2 charts provide the reader with a graphic presentation of database access
management systems ‘in use’ by ‘global annual turnover’ and ‘size of firm (fee-earner)’. Those that
are ‘being considered’ by firms can be found in the analysis following the two charts.
123
Chart 12.5b Database Access Management Systems in use and global annual turnover
Chart 12.5c Database Access Management Systems in use by size of firm (fee-earners)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Database Access Management Systems 'in use' by global annual
turnover
Other
Not known
Research Monitor
Quattrove
Precision
Onelog
None
0% 20% 40% 60%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Database Access Management Systems 'in use' by size of firm (fee-
earners)
Other
Not known
Research Monitor
Quattrove
Precision
Onelog
None
124
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with <£20m global annual turnover
50% are not using a database access management system (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £20-34m global annual turnover
43% do not use a database access management system (29% with 1-199 fee-earners and
14% 200-249 fee-earners)
14% are considering Research Monitor
Within firms with £35-49m global annual turnover
75% do not use a database access management system (25% with 1-199 fee-earners, 25%
200-249 fee-earners, 13% 250-349 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms with £50-99m global annual turnover
55% do not use a database access management system (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and
44% 350-599 fee-earners)
11% are using Research Monitor (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering Onelog (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £100-149m global annual turnover
22% do not use a database access management system (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Onelog (600-999 fee-earners)
11% are using Research Monitor (600-999 fee-earners)
22% are considering Research Monitor (350-599 fee earners)
Within firms with £150-499m global annual turnover
30% do not use a database access management system (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and
20% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% use Onelog (200-249 fee-earners)
30% use Research Monitor (10% with 350-599 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-earners and
10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are considering Research Monitor (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £500m+ global annual turnover
62% are using Research Monitor (15% with 1-199 fee-earners, 23% 350-599 fee-earners, 8%
600-999 fee-earners and 15% 1,000+ fee-earners)
8% are considering Research Monitor (350-599 fee-earners)
125
12.6 Current Awareness and Aggregator Products
Chart 12.6a Current Awareness and Aggregator Products in use or being considered
See Table 12.6a below for a percentage breakdown
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Other
Not known
Manual extraction of newspapers…
Westlaw Next
Ozmosys
Nexis
Newsedge
Newsdesk -LexisNexis
Manzama
Linex
Lexis Publisher
InfoNgen
Bulletin Pro
Attensa
None
% of respondents
Current Awareness and Aggregator Products
In use
Considering
126
Table 12.6a Current Awareness and Aggregator Products in use or being considered
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
In use Considering % of respondents to survey
None 7% 0% 7%
Attensa 2% 0% 2%
Bulletin Pro 0% 9% 9%
InfoNgen 0% 0% 0%
Lexis Publisher 12% 2% 14%
Linex 17% 7% 24%
Manzama 12% 10% 22%
Newsdesk – LexisNexis
12% 12% 24%
Newsedge 2% 0% 2%
Nexis 33% 0% 33%
Ozmosys 7% 0% 7%
Westlaw Next 5% 0% 5%
Manual Extraction of newspapers etc.
12% 2% 14%
Not known 2% 0% 2%
Other 2% 2% 3%
Current awareness and aggregator products used by 30% plus respondents include ‘Nexis’
‘Other’ included: ‘Google News Alerts’ and ‘Signal’
The following 2 charts provide the reader with a graphic presentation of current awareness and
aggregator products ‘in use’ by ‘global annual turnover’ and ‘size of firm (fee-earner)’. Those that are
‘being considered’ by firms can be found in the analysis following the two charts
127
Chart 12.6b Current Awareness and Aggregator Products in use by global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Current Awareness and Aggregator Products 'in use' by global annual turnover
Other
Not known
Manual Extraction ofnewspapers
Westlaw Next
Ozmosys
Nexis
Newsedge
News Desk
Manzama
Linex
Lexis Publisher
128
Chart 12.6c Current Awareness and Aggregator Products in use by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms with <£20m global annual turnover
50% use manual extraction of newspapers (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £20-34m global annual turnover
43% do not use a current awareness product (14% with 1-199 fee-earners, 14% 200-249 fee-
earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
14% are considering Bulletin Pro (200-249 fee-earners)
14% use Linex (1-199 fee-earners)
14% are considering using Linex (200-249 fee-earners)
29% are considering Manzama (14% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 200-249 fee-earners)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Current Awareness and Aggregator Products 'in use' by size of firm (fee-
earners)
Other
Not known
Manual Extraction ofnewspapers
Westlaw Next
Ozmosys
Nexis
Newsedge
News Desk
Manzama
Linex
Lexis Publisher
129
14% are considering Newsdesk (1-199 fee-earners)
29% use Nexis (1-199 fee-earners)
29% use manual extraction of newspapers (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £35-49m global annual turnover
13% are considering Bulletin Pro (1-199 fee-earners)
13% use Linex (200-249 fee-earners)
13% use Manzama (200-249 fee-earners)
13% use Newsdesk (350-599 fee-earners)
25% use Nexis (13% with 200-249 fee-earners and 13% 250-349 fee-earners)
13% use Westlaw Next (1-199 fee-earners)
13% do not know (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £50-99m global annual turnover
11% do not use a current awareness product (1-199 fee-earners)
11% are considering Bulletin Pro ( 250-349 fee-earners)
11% are considering lexis Publisher (350-599 fee-earners)
13% use Linex (250-349 fee-earners)
13% use Manzama (350-599 fee-earners)
22% are considering Manzama (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-earners)
22% use Newsdesk (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Nexis (350-599 fee-earners)
33% use manual extraction of newspapers (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering manual extraction (250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms with £100-149m global annual turnover
11% use Attensa (600-999 fee-earners)
11% use Lexis Publisher (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering Linex (600-999 fee-earners)
11% use Manzama (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Newsdesk (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering Newsdesk (600-999 fee-earners)
22% use Nexis (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
11% use Ozmosys (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use manual extraction of newspapers (600-999 fee-earners)
11% use ‘other’ current awareness products (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering Bulletin Pro (600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms with £150-499m global annual turnover
30% use Lexis Publisher (10% with 200-249 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners and 10%
1,000+ fee-earners)
10% use Linex (1,000+ fee-earners)
130
10% are considering Linex (350-599 fee-earners)
30% use Manzama (10% with 1-199 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+
fee-earners)
20% are considering Manzama (350-599 fee-earners)
10% use Newsdesk (200-249 fee-earners)
40% are considering Newsdesk (20% with 350-599 fee-earners and 20% with 1,000+ fee-
earners)
10% use Newsedge (350-599 fee-earners)
70% use Nexis (10% with 200-249 fee-earners, 20% 350-599 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-
earners and 30% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% use Ozmosys (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% use Westlaw Next (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms with £500m+ global annual turnover
8% are considering Bulletin Pro (350-599 fee-earners)
23% use Lexis Publisher (350-599 fee-earners)
46% use Linex (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 23% 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-
earners and 8% with 1,000+ fee-earners)
8% are considering Linex (1-199 fee-earners)
8% use Manzama (1-199 fee-earners)
15% use Newsdesk (8% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8% with 1,000+ fee-earners)
8% are considering Newsdesk (600-999 fee-earners)
38% use Nexis (23% with 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-
earners)
15% use Ozmosys (8% with 1-199 fee-earners and 8% 350-599 fee-earners)
8% use Westlaw Next (350-599 fee-earners)
131
12.7. Company and Business Intelligence Resources
Chart 12.7a Company and Business Intelligence Resources in use or being considered
See Table 12.7a below for a percentage breakdown
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Bloomberg
Catalyst
Cisco
Datamonitor
Dun & Bradstreet
Experian
Fame
Global Data
IBIS World
Key Note
The Lawyer Market Intelligence
Legalinx 7side
Marketline
Mergermarket
Mint
Morning Star
Nexis UK
OneSource
Orbis
Perfect Information - Debt
Perfect Information - Navigator
Perfect Information - UK/International…
Pitchbook
Prequin
Research IQ
Thomson One
Zephyr
Other
Not known
None
% of respondents
Company and Business Intelligence Resources
In Use
Considering
132
Table 12.7a Company and Business Intelligence Resources in use or being considered
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
In use Considering % of respondents to this survey
Bloomberg 17% 2% 19%
Catalyst (Bureau Van Dijk
0% 0% 0%
Cisco 0% 0% 0%
Datamonitor 0% 0% 0%
Dun & Bradstreet 26% 2% 28%
Experian 12% 0% 12%
Fame (Bureau Van Dijk)
3% 0% 3%
Global Data 2% 0% 2%
IBISWorld 5% 2% 7%
Key Note 0% 0% 0%
The Lawyer Market Intelligence
12% 2% 14%
Legalinx 7side 31% 0% 31%
Marketline 2% 2% 3%
Mergermarket 17% 2% 19%
Mint (Bureau Van Dijk) 26% 0% 26%
Morning star 3% 0% 3%
Nexis UK 34% 0% 34%
OneSource (Avention) 16% 2% 17%
Orbis (Bureau Van Dijk) 21% 2% 22%
Perfect Information – Debt
14% 0% 14%
Perfect Information – Navigator
31% 0% 31%
Perfect Information – UK/International Private Company Data
2% 0% 2%
Pitchbook 2% 0% 2%
Prequin 12% 0% 12%
Research IQ 0% 0% 0%
Thomson One 9% 0% 9%
Zephyr (Bureau Van Dijk)
2% 0% 2%
Not known 0% 0% 0%
None 5% 0% 5%
Other 0% 0% 16%
Company and Business Intelligence databases in use by 30% plus respondents included:
‘Legalinx 7side’, ‘Nexis UK’ and ‘Perfect Information Navigator’
133
‘Other’ included comments such as: ‘There are 90 more resources with contracts’ and ‘too
many to list’.
‘Other’ databases listed as being in use included: ‘Capital IQ’, ‘Capital Structure’, ‘CRO’,
‘Compliance Complete’, ‘Creditflux’, ‘Creditsafe’, ‘Debtwire’, ‘DebtXplained’, ‘Duedil’,
‘eFinancial News’, ‘EIU’, ‘FT.com’, ‘Global Capital’, ‘Hoovers’, ‘Moody’s’, ‘Structured Credit
Investor’, ‘Private Equity News’, ‘Reorg Research’, ‘Tracker’ and ‘Xtract Research’.
The following 2 charts provide the reader with a graphic presentation of company and business
intelligence resources ‘in use’ by ‘global annual turnover’ and ‘size of firm (fee-earner)’. Those that
are ‘being considered’ by firms can be found in the analysis following the two charts
134
Chart 12.7b Company and Business Intelligence Resources in use by global annual turnover
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Bloomberg
Dun & Bradstreet
Experian
Fame
Global Data
IBIS World
The Lawyer Market Intelligence
Legalinx 7side
Marketline
Mergermarket
Mint
Morning Star
Nexis UK
OneSource
Orbis
Perfect Inf. - Debt
Perfect Inf. - Navigator
Perfect Inf. - UK Int.
Pitchbook
Prequin
Thomson One
Zephyr
Other
None
% of respondents
Company & Business Intelligence Resources 'in use' by global annual turnover
£500m+
£150-499m
£100-149m
£50-99m
£35-49m
£20-34m
<£20m
135
Chart 12.7c Company and Business Intelligence Resources in use by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover
50% use Mint (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Bloomberg
Dun & Bradstreet
Experian
Fame
Global Data
IBIS World
The Lawyer Market Intelligence
Legalinx 7side
Marketline
Mergermarket
Mint
Morning Star
Nexis UK
OneSource
Orbis
Perfect Inf. - Debt
Perfect Inf. - Navigator
Perfect Inf. - UK Int.
Pitchbook
Prequin
Thomson One
Zephyr
Other
None
% of respondents
Company & Business Intelligence Resources 'in use' by size of firm (fee-
earners)
1,000+
600-999
350-599
250-349
200-249
1-199
136
14% use Dun & Bradstreet (250-349 fee-earners)
14% use Experian (250-349 fee-earners)
14% use Legalinx 7side (250-349 fee-earners)
14% use Mint (1-199 fee-earners)
14% use Nexis (1-199 fee-earners)
14% use Perfect Information – Navigator (1-199 fee-earners)
14% use ‘other’ databases (200-249 fee-earners)
14% use ‘none’ (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover
38% use Dun & Bradstreet (25% with 1-199 fee-earners, 13% 350-599 fee-earners)
13% use Experian (350-599 fee-earners)
13% use FAME (350-599 fee-earners)
38% use Legalinx 7side (13% with 1-199 fee-earners, 13% 250-349 fee-earners and 13% 350-
599 fee-earners)
25% use Mint (13% with 200-249 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-earners)
25% use Nexis UK (200-249 fee-earners)
13% use Perfect Information – Navigator (200-249 fee-earners)
14% use ‘other’ databases (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover
11% use Dun & Bradstreet (350-599 fee-earners)
22% use Experian (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-earners)
11% use FAME (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use IBIS World (1-199 fee-earners)
11% use The Lawyer Market Intelligence (350-599 fee-earners)
33% use Legalinx 7side (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and 22% 350-599 fee-earners)
22% use Mint (11% with 250-349 fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-earners)
33% use Nexis UK (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 22% 350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering OneSource (1-199 fee-earners)
11% use Orbis (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering Orbis (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Perfect Information – Navigator (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Prequin (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use ‘other’ databases (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use ‘none’ (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover
11% use Dun & Bradstreet (600-999 fee-earners)
11% are considering Dun & Bradstreet (600-999 fee-earners)
11% use Experian (600-999 fee-earners)
22% use The Lawyer Market Intelligence (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999
fee-earners)
137
11% use Legalinx 7side (11% with 600-999 fee-earners)
22% use Mint (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
33% use Nexis UK (22% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
11% use OneSource (350-599 fee-earners)
22% use Perfect Information – Navigator (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% with 600-
999 fee-earners)
11% use ‘other’ databases (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover
30% use Bloomberg (10% with 200-249 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners and 10%
1,000+ fee-earners)
40% use Dun & Bradstreet (10% with 350-599 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-earners and
20% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% use Experian (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are considering IBIS World (1,000+ fee-earners)
20% use The Lawyer Market Intelligence (1,000+ fee-earners)
40% use Legalinx 7side (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 30% 1,000+ fee-earners)
40% use Mergermarket (10% with 1-199 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners and 20%
1,000+ fee-earners)
40% use Mint (10% with 200-249 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-earners and 20% 1,000+ fee-
earners)
50% use Nexis UK (10% with 200-249 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners and 30% 1,000+
fee-earners)
20% use OneSource (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000 fee-earners)
40% use Orbis (10% with 200-249 fee-earners, 20% 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+
fee-earners)
10% use Perfect Information – Debt (350-599 fee-earners)
50% use Perfect Information – Navigator (10% with 1-199 fee-earners, 20% 350-599 fee-
earners, 10% 600-999 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% use Prequin (1,000+ fee-earners)
11% use Thomson One (1-199 fee-earners)
11% use ‘other’ databases (1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover
53% use Bloomberg (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 23% 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-
earners and 15% 1,000+ fee-earners)
8% are considering Bloomberg (350-599 fee-earners)
38% use Dun & Bradstreet (23% with 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-earners and 8%
1,000+ fee-earners)
8% use Experian (350-599 fee-earners)
8% use Global data (1,000+ fee-earners)
15% use IBIS World (350-599 fee-earners)
138
15% use The Lawyer Market Intelligence (8% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 600-999 fee-
earners)
8% are considering The Lawyer Market Intelligence (350-599 fee-earners)
46% use Legalinx 7side (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 23% 350-599 fee-earners 8% 600-999
fee-earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-earners)
8% use Marketline (1,000+ fee-earners)
8% are considering Marketline (350-599 fee-earners)
46% use Mergermarket (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 15% 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999
fee-earners and 15% 1,000+ fee-earners)
8% are considering Mergermarket (350-599 fee-earners)
23% use Mint (15% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-earners)
15% use Morning Star (8% 1-199 fee-earners and 8% 350-599 fee-earners)
46% use Nexis UK (23% with 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-earners and 15% 1,000+
fee-earners)
46% use OneSource (15% with 1-199 fee-earners, 23% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8%
600-999 fee-earners)
54% use Orbis (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 23% with 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-
earners and 15% 1,000+ fee-earners)
54% use Perfect Information - Debit (15% with 1-199 fee-earners, 23% with 350-599 fee-
earners and 15% 1,000+ fee-earners)
62% use Perfect Information - Navigator (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 31% with 350-599 fee-
earners, 8% 600-999 fee-earners and 15% 1,000+ fee-earners)
8% use Perfect Information - UK/International Private Company Data (1,000+ fee-earners)
8% use Pitchbook (350-599 fee-earners)
38% use Prequin (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 15% 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-
earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-earners)
31% use Thomson One (15% with 350-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-999 fee-earners and 8%
1,000+ fee-earners)
8% use Zephyr (350-599 fee-earners)
31% use ‘other’ databases (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 8% 350-599 fee-earners and 15%
1,000+ fee-earners)
139
12.8 Knowledge Management and Search Solutions
Chart 12.8a Knowledge Management and Search Solutions in use or being considered
See table 12.8a below for a percentage breakdown
Table 12.8a Knowledge Management and Search Solutions in use or being considered
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
In use Considering % of respondents to this survey
None 7% 0% 7%
In-house system 19% 3% 22%
Autonomy IDOL 2% 0% 2%
BA Insight 0% 0% 0%
KnowAll 0% 2% 2%
RAVN Connect 3% 9% 12%
Recommind Decisiv 9% 3% 12%
SharePoint 22% 5% 28%
Solcara Know How 7% 0% 7%
Solcara Legal search 5% 5% 10%
Tikit KHS 5% 0% 5%
Not known 3% 2% 5%
Other 5% 2% 9%
Knowledge Management and Search Solutions in use by 20% plus respondents included:
‘Sharepoint’
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Other
Tikit KHS
Solcara Know How
Recommind Decisiv
KnowAll
Autonomy IDOL
None
% of respondents
Knowledge Management & Search Solutions
In use
Considering
140
‘Other’ included: ‘Evolve’ (does not mention whether in use or considering) ‘Imanage
FileSite’ –(in use), ‘Intrafind’ – (in use) ‘Sysero’ (in use) and ‘Tiger eye’ (considering).
The following 2 charts provide the reader with a graphic presentation of knowledge management
and search solutions ‘in use’ by ‘global annual turnover’ and ‘size of firm (fee-earner)’. Those that
are ‘being considered’ by firms can be found in the analysis following the two charts
Chart 12.8b Knowledge Management and Search Solutions in use by global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Knowledge Management & Search Solutions 'in use' by global annual
turnover
Other
Not known
Tikit KHS
Solcara Legal Search
Solcara Know How
SharePoint
Recommind Decisiv
RAVN Connect
KnowAll
Autonomy IDOL
In-house
None
141
Chart 12.8c Knowledge Management and Search Solutions in use by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover
50% use an in-house system (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of 20-34m global annual turnover
29% use SharePoint (14% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
14% are considering SharePoint ( 200-249 fee-earners)
14% use ‘other’ systems (1-199 fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Knowledge Management & Search Solutions 'in use' by size of firm (fee-
earners)
Other
Not known
Tikit KHS
Solcara Legal Search
Solcara Know How
SharePoint
Recommind Decisiv
RAVN Connect
KnowAll
Autonomy IDOL
In-house
None
142
Within firms of 35-49m global annual turnover
13% use SharePoint (1-199 fee-earners)
13% use Solcara Know How (200-249 fee-earners)
13% are considering Solcara Legal Research (200-249 fee-earners)
13% use Tikit KHS (350-599 fee-earners)
25% use ‘other’ systems (13% 1-199 fee-earners and 13% 200-249 fee-earners)
Within firms of 50-99m global annual turnover
11% are considering KnowAll (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use RAVN Connect (1-199 fee-earners)
11% use Recommind Decisiv (350-599 fee-earners)
22% use SharePoint (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering Solcara Legal Research (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use ‘other’ systems (350-599 fee-earners)
11% do not know
Within firms of 100-149m global annual turnover
22% are considering RAVN Connect (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-
earners)
11% use Recommind Decisiv (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use SharePoint (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering SharePoint (350-599 fee-earners)
22% use Solcara Know How (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Solcara Legal Research (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use ‘other’ systems (600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms of 150-499m global annual turnover
10% do not use a system (600-999 fee-earners)
10% use RAVN Connect (200-249 fee-earners)
30% use Recommind Decisiv (10% with 1-199 fee-earners, 20% 350-599 fee-earners)
20% use SharePoint (10% with 200-249 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are considering SharePoint (35-599 fee-earners)
20% use Solcara Legal Research (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are considering Solcara Legal Research (1,000+ fee-earners)
10% use Tikit KHS (350-599 fee-earners)
10% do not know
Within firms of 500m+ global annual turnover
8% use Autonomy (600-999 fee-earners)
23% are considering RAVN Connect (15% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 600-999 fee-
earners)
15% are considering Recommind Decisiv (350-599 fee-earners)
143
38% use SharePoint (15% with 1-199 fee-earners, 15% 350-599 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+
fee-earners
8% use Solcara Know How (1,000+ fee-earners)
8% use Tikit KHS (1,000+ fee-earners)
8% do not know
12.9 KYC / AML Services
Chart 12.9a KYC/AML Services in use or being considered
See Table 12.9a below for a percentage breakdown
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
None
192.com
Accelus Screening Online
Accelus World-Check
Accuity Online Compliance
Avention
Callcredit
CallML
Dun & Bradstreet
LexisNexis Risk Solutions…
Market IQ
Not known
Other
% of respondents
KYC / AML Services
In use
Considering
144
Table 12.9a KYC / AML Services in use or being considered
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
In use Considering % of respondents to this survey
None 22% 0% 22%
192.com 14% 0% 14%
Accelus Screening Online 3% 0% 3%
Accelus World-Check 12% 0% 12%
Accuity Online Compliance 5% 2% 7%
Avention 2% 0% 2%
Callcredit 2% 0% 2%
CallML 3% 0% 3%
Dun & Bradstreet 14% 0% 14%
LexisNexis Risk Solutions (TraceIQ) 0% 2% 2%
Market IQ 2% 0% 2%
Not known 9% 3% 12%
Other 10% 0% 19%
KYC/AML services in use by 14% of respondents included: ‘192.com’ and ‘Dun & Bradstreet’
‘Other’ KYC/AML Services listed included: ‘Complinet’ (does not mention whether in use or
considering), ‘Credit Assist’ (does not mention whether in use or considering), ‘Creditsafe’ (in
use), ‘Equifax’ (in use), ‘Experian’ (in use), ‘Lexis Bridger’ (in use), ‘Lexis Diligence’ (in use),
‘Mint’ (in use), ‘TracelQ’ (does not mention whether in use or considering), and ‘URU’ (does
not mention whether in use or considering)
The following 2 charts provide the reader with a graphic presentation of KYC / AML services ‘in use’
by ‘global annual turnover’ and ‘size of firm (fee-earner)’. Those that are ‘being considered’ by firms
can be found in the analysis following the two charts
145
Chart 12.9b KYC/AML Services in use by global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
KYC / AML Services 'in use' by global annual turnover
Other
Not Known
Market IQ
LexisNexis Risk Solutions
Dun & Bradstreet
CallML
Callcredit
Avention
Accuity Online Compliance
Accelus World-Check
Accelus Screening Online
192.com
None
146
Chart 12.9c KYC/AML Services in use by size of firm (fee-earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover
50% use ‘other’ services (1-199 fee-earners
Within firms of 20-34m global annual turnover
29% do not use a KYC / AML service (14% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 200-249 fee-
earners)
43% use 192.com (29% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
14% use Accuity Online Compliance (1-199 fee-earners)
14% use Dun & Bradstreet (250-349 fee-earners)
14% are considering LexisNexis Risk Solutions (1-199 fee-earners)
57% use ‘other’ services (43% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 250-349 fee-earners)
0% 20% 40% 60%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
KYC / AML services 'in use' by size of firm (fee-earners)
Other
Not Known
Market IQ
LexisNexis Risk Solutions
Dun & Bradstreet
CallML
Callcredit
Avention
Accuity Online Compliance
Accelus World-Check
Accelus Screening Online
192.com
None
147
Within firms of 35-49m global annual turnover
38% do not use a KYC / AML service (14% with 1-199 fee-earners and 14% 200-249 fee-
earners)
25% use Dun & Bradstreet (13% with 250-349 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-earners)
13% do not know (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of 50-99m global annual turnover
44% do not use a KYC / AML service (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 33% 350-599 fee-
earners)
11% use 192.com (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Accelus Screening (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Accelus World Check (350-599 fee-earners)
22% use Accuity Online Compliance (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Callcredit (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use CallML (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Dun & Bradstreet (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Market IQ (350-599 fee-earners)
11% do not know (250-349 fee-earners)
Within firms of 100-149m global annual turnover
11% do not use a KYC / AML service (350-599 fee-earners)
22% use 192.com (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
11% use Accelus Screening (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Accelus World Check (600-999 fee-earners)
11% use CallML (600-999 fee-earners)
11% use Dun & Bradstreet (600-999 fee-earners)
22% use ‘other’ services (11% with 350-599 fee-earners and 11% 600-999 fee-earners)
Within firms of 150-499m global annual turnover
20% do not use a KYC / AML service (10% with 200-249 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-
earners)
20% use 192.com (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
20% use Accelus World Check (10% with 600-999 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% use Dun & Bradstreet (1,000+ fee-earners)
20% do not know (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% know a service is under consideration but do not know which one (1-199 fee-earners)
20% use ‘other’ services (1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms of 500m+ global annual turnover
8% do not use a KYC / AML service (600-999 fee-earners)
23% use Accelus World Check (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 8% 350-599 fee-earners and 8%
1,000+ fee-earners)
148
8% are considering Accuity (1,000+ fee-earners)
8% use Avention (350-599 fee-earners)
15% use Dun & Bradstreet (8% with 350-599 fee-earners and 8% with 1,000+ fee-earners)
8% do not know (350-599 fee-earners)
8% know a service is under consideration but do not know which one (1-199 fee-earners)
15% use ‘other’ services (350-599 fee-earners)
12.10 Document Automation and Proof Reading Software
Chart 12.10a Document Automation and Proof Reading Software in use or being considered
See Table 12.10a below for a percentage breakdown
Table 12.10a Document Automation and Proof Reading Software
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
In use Considering % of respondents to this survey
None 17% 0% 17%
Deal Proof 2% 3% 5%
DealBuilder 2% 2% 3%
HotDocs 3% 0% 3%
Lexis Draft 12% 16% 28%
Xref 9% 5% 14%
Not known 12% 0% 12%
Other 2% 2% 3%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
None
Deal Proof
DealBuilder
HotDocs
Lexis Draft
Xref
Not known
Other
% of respondents
Document Automation and Proof Reading Software
In use
Considering
149
17% of respondents did not use Document Automation and Proof Reading Software
12% of respondents used Lexis Draft
12% of respondents did not know.
‘Other’ Document Automation and Proof Reading Software included: ‘Contract Express’ from
Reuters (considering) and In-house system (in use).
The following 2 charts provide the reader with a graphic presentation of document automation and
proof reading software ‘in use’ by ‘global annual turnover’ and ‘size of firm (fee-earner)’. Those that
are ‘being considered’ by firms can be found in the analysis following the two charts.
Chart 12.10b Document Automation and Proof Reading Software in use by global annual turnover
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Document Automation and Proof Reading Software 'in use' by global
annual turnover
Other
Not known
Xref
Lexis Draft
HotDocs
DealBuilder
Deal Proof
None
150
Chart 12.10c Document Automation and Proof Reading Software in use by size of firm (fee-
earners)
(N.B. percentages have been rounded up or down as appropriate and due to rounding, some totals
may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures)
Within firms of <£20m global annual turnover
50% do not use document automation and proof reading software (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £20-34m global annual turnover
29% do not use document automation and proof reading software (1-199 fee-earners)
29% use Lexis Draft (14% with 200-249 fee-earners and 14% 25-349 fee-earners)
14% are considering Lexis Draft (1-199 fee-earners)
Within firms of £35-49m global annual turnover
50% do not use document automation and proof reading software (13% with1-199 fee-
earners, 25% 200-249 fee-earners and 13% 350-599 fee-earners)
13% use Xref (1-199 fee-earners)
13% do not know (250-349)
Within firms of £50-99m global annual turnover
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Document Automation and Proof Reading Software 'in use' by size of firm
(fee-earners)
Other
Not known
Xref
Lexis Draft
HotDocs
DealBuilder
Deal Proof
None
151
11% do not use document automation and proof reading software (350-599 fee-earners)
11% are considering Deal Proof (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use HotDocs (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Lexis Draft (200-249 fee-earners)
22% are considering Lexis Draft (11% with 1-199 fee-earners and 11% 350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Xref (350-599 fee-earners)
22% are considering Xref (350-599 fee-earners)
11% do not know (350-599)
Within firms of £100-149m global annual turnover
11% do not use document automation and proof reading software (600-999 fee-earners)
11% use DealBuilder (350-599 fee-earners)
11% use Lexis Draft (600-999 fee-earners)
11% are considering Lexis Draft (350-599 fee-earners)
Within firms of £150-499m global annual turnover
10% do not use document automation and proof reading software (1,000+ fee-earners)
20% use Lexis Draft (10% 200-249 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
10% are considering Lexis Draft (350-599 fee-earners)
40% do not know (10% with 1-999 fee-earners, 10% 350-599 fee-earners, 10% 600-999 fee-
earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
20% use ‘other’ software (10% with 350-599 fee-earners and 10% 1,000+ fee-earners)
Within firms of £500m+ global annual turnover
8% use Deal Proof (350-599 fee-earners)
8% are considering Deal Proof (1,000+ fee-earners)
8% use HotDocs (350-599 fee-earners)
8% use Lexis Draft (1,000+ fee-earners)
31% are considering Lexis Draft (8% with 1-199 fee-earners, 8% 35-599 fee-earners, 8% 600-
999 fee-earners and 8% 1,000+ fee-earners)
23% use Xref (350-599 fee-earners)
8% are considering Xref (600-999 fee-earners)
8% do not know (1-199 fee-earners)
152
13 Training
13.1 To whom and how training is delivered
Chart 13.1a To whom training is offered by global annual turnover
Respondents were entitled to select more than one option and not all respondents will have
provided data.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
To whom training is offered by global annual turnover
Don't provide training
Other
Support staff
Secretaries
>1 PQE
Trainees
Newly qualified lawyers
Partners
153
Chart 13.1b To whom training is offered by size of firm (fee-earners)
Respondents were entitled to select more than one option and not all respondents will have
provided data.
‘Other’ included: ‘we arrange online resource training and research training for anyone’, ‘paralegals’,
‘new starters’ and ‘compliance team’.
From the responses it is clear that all firms provide training of some sort to selective groups of staff.
41% of all respondents noted providing training for all categories of staff. These respondents had
between 1 and 24 FTE library/information staff.
71% of all respondents noted that library staff provided training and 57% noted that vendors
provided training. 57% of all respondents noted having both library staff and vendors providing
training.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
To whom training is offered by size of firm (fee-earners)
Don't provide training
Other
Support staff
Secretaries
>1 PQE
Trainees
Newly qualified lawyers
Partners
154
13.2 The format of training offered
The following two charts provide a graphic presentation of the format of training offered by global
annual turnover and by size of firm (fee-earners).
Chart 13.2a Format of training by global annual turnover
Respondents were entitled to select more than one option.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Format of training by global annual turnover
Webinars
Video conferencing
Vendor e-learning
Scenario based
One-to-one at desk
In-house e-learning
Group hands-on sessions
Classroom demo/lecture
155
Chart 13.2b Format of training by size of firm (fee-earners)
One-to-one at desk training (71%) and classroom demonstration/lectures (66%) are the more
frequently adopted formats of training offered by respondents.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Format of training by size of firm (fee-earners)
Webinars
Video conferencing
Vendor e-learning
Scenario based
One-to-one at desk
In-house e-learning
Group hands-on sessions
Classroom demo/lecture
156
13.3 Training topics
The following two charts provide a graphic presentation of training topics offered by global annual
turnover and by size of firm (fee-earners).
Chart 13.3a Training offered by global annual turnover
Respondents were entitled to select more than one option.
0% 50% 100%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Training offered by global annual turnover
Other
Legal research andinformation literacy skills
How to use onlinesubscription services
How to use hardcopyresearch materials
157
Chart 13.3b Training offered by size of firm (fee-earners)
‘Other’ formats of training included: ‘the role of information services and how we can assist and
enable research’, ‘questions for summer students and trainees to work on in a classroom setting’,
‘matter inception’, ‘how to use automated templates’, ‘KM product’, ‘how to use in-house
resources, e.g., how to log a query with the help desk and use the catalogue’, ‘business research
skills’ and ‘how to get the best out of the internet’.
0% 50% 100%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Training offered by size of firm (fee-earners)
Other
Legal research andinformation literacy skills
How to use onlinesubscription services
How to use hardcopyresearch materials
158
13.4 Steps taken to prepare for the training of new trainees
Chart 13.4a Preparation for the training of new trainees
Respondents could select more than one option
‘Liaison with Professional Support Lawyers’ (26%), ‘surveying lawyers to identify training needs’
(24%) and ‘no special training offered’ (22%) were the three most popular options selected by
respondents to the survey.
10% of respondents were found to ‘contact trainees before they commenced work with the firm’
and 5% of respondents were found to ‘liaise with Law Schools’.
‘Other’ steps taken included: ‘working together with HR and training committee’, ‘preparing
additional documentation to take away from sessions’, ‘liaise with learning and development team
and specifically those with responsibility for trainees’, ‘liaise with graduate recruitment team’, ‘liaise
with 2nd year trainees for feedback on their experience and what they would have found useful’ and
‘included in firm wide induction programme’.
The two charts below provide a graphic presentation of preparation undertaken for the training
needs of new trainees by global annual turnover and by size of firm (fee-earners)
0% 10% 20% 30%
Other
Survey lawyers to identify…
Liaise with Practice…
Liaise with Law Schools
Contact trainees before…
No special training offered
% of respondents
Preparing for the training of new trainees
% of respondents
159
Chart 13.4b Preparation for the training of new trainees by global annual turnover
Respondents were entitled to select more than one option.
0% 20% 40% 60%
<£20m
£20-34m
£35-49m
£50-99m
£100-149m
£150-499m
£500m+
% of respondents
Global annual turnover
Preparation for the training of new trainees by global annual turnover
Other
Survey lawyers to identifytraining needs
Liaise with PracticeSupport Lawyers
Liaise with Law Schools
Contact trainees beforethey start work
No special trainingoffered
160
Chart 13.4c Preparation for the training of new trainees by size of firm (fee-earners)
Respondents were entitled to select more than one option.
0% 50% 100%
1-199
200-249
250-349
350-599
600-999
1,000+
% of respondents
Fee-earners
Preparation for the training of new trainees by size of firm (fee-earners)
Other
Survey lawyers to identifytraining needs
Liaise with Practice SupportLawyers
Liaise with Law Schools
Contact trainees before theystart work
No special training offered
161
14 Future Challenges
Table 14.1 Key issues facing law firms 2016/17
Key issue Aware of but not an issue
Not relevant or not of interest
Library training (improving or re-developing)
53% 16% 2%
Moving to online rather than hardcopy resources
40% 31% 0%
Negotiating global or multi-office licences
36% 17% 17%
Mobile or remote working (facilitating of resources)
34% 33% 3%
Reduction in physical space within the library
28% 22% 21%
Staffing levels 26% 22% 22%
Serving a growing number of legal staff in satellite offices
24% 21% 26%
Coordinating the library service globally across the firm
22% 19% 28%
Personalisation of online services, e.g., user-tagging and self-service
21% 29% 21%
Information literacy 17% 43% 9%
Other key challenges 12%
Federated search solution (increasing requirement for)
10% 28% 33%
Embedding librarians into practice areas
7% 24% 38%
Enterprise search solution (increasing requirement for)
7% 33% 31%
Offering library services directly to the firm’s clients
7% 40% 24%
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
5% 31% 33%
Outsourcing of your service 3% 17% 50%
A Key issue identified by 50% plus of respondents is ‘improving or re-developing library
training’
An issue that was identified by 50% of respondents as ‘not being relevant or not of interest’
is ‘outsourcing your service’
‘Other’ key challenges noted by respondents included:
‘using technology to automate some elements of the service and bring in new efficiencies’
‘redevelopment of intranet and move to Sharepoint’, ‘how we collect and manage our
know-how’ and ‘improving and automating CA provision’
‘playing a role in KM developments’, ‘AI’ and ‘business developments’
162
‘implementing password monitoring tool’, ‘dealing with post-merger issues in integrating
collections’, ‘implementing new enquiry database’, ‘raising profile of library team
capabilities within the firm’, ‘building partnerships with marketing and RD team’
‘growing demand for support by business function’
‘global budget reduction target’
‘cost cutting - amount of time spent on online services’
The following charts provide a graphic presentation of the ‘key issues’ identified by global annual
turnover and then by size of firm (fee-earners). The headings in the charts have been altered slightly
in some instances to aid clarity. For example ‘increasing requirement for federated search solution’
has been labelled ‘federated search solution’.
163
Chart 14.1a Challenges facing firms with <£20m global annual turnover
‘Other’ included: ‘using technology to automate elements of the service and bring in new
efficiencies’
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement /development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (global ormulti-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging and…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with <£20m global annual turnover
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not of interest
164
Chart 14.1b Challenges facing firms with £20-34m global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement/ development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with £20-34m global annual turnover
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not of interest
165
Chart 14.1c Challenges facing firms with £35-49m global annual turnover
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement/ development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% respondents
Challenges facing firms with £35-49m global annual turnover
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not ofinterest
166
Chart 14.1d Challenges facing firms with £50-99m global annual turnover
‘Other’ included: ‘cost cutting, particularly the amount of time spent on online services’
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement/ development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with £50-99m global annual turnover
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not ofinterest
167
Chart 14.1e Challenges facing firms with £100-149m global annual turnover
‘Other’ included: ‘growing demand for support by business function’, ‘implementing password
monitoring tool’, ‘dealing with post-merger issues in integrating collections’, ‘implementing new
enquiry database’, ‘raising profile of library team capabilities’, ‘building partnerships with marketing
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library trainingimprovement /…
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with £100-149m global annual turnover
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not of interest
168
and RD team’ ‘re-developing intranet and moving to Sharepoint’, ‘how we collect and manage our
know-how’, ‘improving and automating CA provision’.
Chart 14.1f Challenges facing firms with £150-499m global annual turnover
‘Other’ included: ‘playing a role in KM developments’, ‘AI’, ‘business development’
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement/ development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with £150-499m global annual turnover
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not ofinterest
169
Chart 14.1g Challenges facing firms with £500m+ global annual turnover
‘Other’ included: ‘global budget reduction target’
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement/ development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% respondents
Challenges facing firms with £500m+ global annual turnover
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not ofinterest
170
Chart 14.1h Challenges facing firms with 1-199 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library trainingimprovement /…
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with 1-199 fee-earners
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not ofinterest
171
Chart 14.1i Challenges facing firms with 200-249 fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement/ development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (global ormulti-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with 200-249 fee-earners
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not ofinterest
172
Chart 14.1j Challenges facing firms with 250-349 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement/ development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with 250-349 fee-earners
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not ofinterest
173
Chart 14.1k Challenges facing firms with 350-599 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement /development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (global ormulti-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with 350-599 fee-earners
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not of interest
174
Chart 14.1l Challenges facing firms with 600-999 fee-earners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library training improvement/ development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with 600-999 fee-earners
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not of interest
175
Chart 14.1m Challenges facing firms with 1,000+ fee-earners
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Coordinating library servicesglobally across the firm
Embedding librarians intopractice areas
Enterprise search solution(increasingly required)
Federated search solution(increasingly required)
Library trainingimprovement / development
Information literacy
Library as a profit centre – charging for staff time
Mobile or remote working(resources)
Moving to online resources
Negotiating licenses (globalor multi-office)
Offering clients a service
Outsourcing your service
Personalisation of onlineservices, e.g., user-tagging…
Reduction in physical spacewithin the library
Serving satellite offices
Staffing levels
% of respondents
Challenges facing firms with 1,000+ fee-earners
Key issue
Aware but not an issue
Not relevant or not of interest
176
15. Conclusion
We hope the survey will prove to be a useful tool and would like to thank everyone who took part.
The BIALL President Elect will oversee the survey in the future and the next one is planned for the beginning of
2018.