Actionstep vs. CARET Legal

ActionStep is a powerful CRM and matter management tool. It provides many other good benefits too. For example powerful accounting and billing, time tracking and document management. Only in highly specific areas, like multiple many to many contact relations has it fallen short. But even in this highly specialized area, so many other benefits are provided that it hardly matters.

Well-suited to a small to midsized law firm setting. Would also recommend for management seek easy ways to keep track of a large volume of business and to track which staff are doing what. The software isn't the best suited for running a lot of complex reports--we can obtain simple information in the reports, but sometimes we find ourselves pulling certain data from Zola and working with it in other software environments instead.

Incentivized

• The workflows are great to automate simple tasks like notifying people when an engagement letter is signed.
• Mobility. Because it's in the cloud it's easy to access from anywhere.
• The scratch pad is a good way to take quick notes.
• ActionStep lets you create custom fields so you can make sure the data you need is collected.

• Provide me with instant list of assignments.
• Easily record billable hours.
• Monitor the work of colleagues whom I supervise.

Incentivized

• ActionStep is difficult to setup. I suggest working with a consultant which increases cost.
• Needs mobile app.
• One of our practice areas, Property Law, request we have a many to many contact relation. ActionStep cannot accommodate this. However, no other software I have reviewed can do this either. ActionStep is the most robust that I have seen and comes closest to making this work.

• The email integration feature has never consistently worked.
• I can't toggle easily between viewing all time and just my time, have to use the filters.
• Pulling reports to capture certain notes/details not perfected yet.

Incentivized

I have worked with a lot of software. Each one has a different focus. ActionStep is better at workflow and task automation that the items above, in my opinion. However, having gone through many different deployments, what really matters is identifying your key requirements and needs. Then evaluation software against those. Once you have your requirements and software, focus on using that software to fix issues in existing workflow. This, when compared with ongoing training, is what it means to invest in software. Simply purchasing ActionStep or any software without identifying needs, problems in workflow or an investment in training is not a good plan. Neither is comparing the vendors to one another without knowing all of your specific needs.

I didn't have the ultimate decision-making power to choose Zola. Clio was more expensive and may have offered a more robust platform, but with some options we didn't need. Westlaw was good for case management, but we would have likely still needed separate software to patch together something like Zola. Zola support isn't that great, but we rarely need it.

Incentivized

• I love the workflows that can be deployed for practice areas to ensure consistency. This has reduced new employee onboarding time and increased the speed at which we can complete matters.
• Since ActionStep lives in the cloud, and we have O365 our firm is very mobile without spending lots of money in TS or other such infrastructure.
• Creating the workflows is a bit complex, so this increases the overall cost and makes an ROI take longer. I suggest spending a bit more initially to get everything setup and working with a consultant to learn how to do this on your own during that initial setup.

• Collections have been better overall.
• Verifying staff work has been made much easier, potentially leading to more efficiencies.
• The software itself is costly.

Incentivized