Migrating to a cloud-based legal system is no longer a risky decision. It is the right decision – for most law firms, and in most situations. But “right” does not mean “easy.” A poorly executed cloud migration can cost more than the next three years of license savings.
This guide is about what needs to be in place before the migration starts, and how you ensure its success.
The starting point: what you are migrating from
The most important preparation is not about the new system, but the old one. Before anything else happens, you need clarity on three things:
Data inventory
How many active cases do you have? How many closed cases with retention obligations? How many documents, and in what formats? How many client records? How many time entries need to be migrated and how far back?
It is rare that anyone knows the exact numbers. But a migration without the numbers always goes wrong.
Data quality
How many client records are duplicates? How many cases have inconsistent metadata? How many documents are outside the central structure because someone saved them on the H-drive?
Migration amplifies data quality problems. What was a manageable irritation in the old system becomes a visible problem in the new one. Clean up before – not after.
Integrations
What is the old system connected to? Financial system, email, document management, Power BI, anti-money laundering check provider, BI tool? Each connection must be mapped, with a plan for whether it will be recreated, replaced, or phased out.
Most failed cloud migrations don’t fail because of the new platform. They fail because the old setup was unclear from the start.
Security and compliance: documentation that must be in place
This is where IT typically has the most concrete requirements. But it is also where many firms overlook the soft areas.
Data location: Where does the provider place primary and backup data? Is this documented per contract
Jurisdiction: If the provider is US-owned, this has implications under the CLOUD Act. This must be clarified before the migration starts
Encryption keys: Who holds them? If the provider owns the keys, they have technical access to all data. Customer-managed keys are an option with serious providers.
Sub-processors: Which third parties has the provider engaged? The list changes over time, how are you informed, and what rights do you have to object?
Exit strategy: How do you get all data out if it turns out to not work? In what format, how long, what cost? Agree on this in writing before signing – not after.
Migration strategy: big bang or phased?
There are two basic approaches. Neither is right or wrong. But they suit different firms.
Big bang
The entire firm switches at once. On a set date, the old system closes, and the new one opens. Preparation is longer, but the risk period is shorter. Suitable for smaller firms and for firms where the case portfolio is relatively homogenous.
Phased
An office, a department, or a case type migrates at a time. The rest continue on the old system. The risk is better controlled, but the period when both systems run in parallel is longer and more costly.
Most large firms end up with a hybrid: new cases created in the new system from day one, old cases remain in the old, and closed cases are migrated gradually or archived without migration.
Change management: the area where migrations most often fail
Even the best cloud platform doesn’t solve an adoption problem. If lawyers don’t use the system, or use it incorrectly, the entire investment is lost.
What works:
Choose one or two “champions” per office or department – lawyers who become early experts and help others.
Ensure training is not only about the system but about how it changes the workday.
Be open about what improves and what changes – not everything is an improvement, and this must be communicated honestly.
Communicate continuously – not just in the first two weeks.
What doesn’t work:
Assuming a YouTube video solves onboarding.
Believing that younger lawyers will “just figure it out.”
Pushing the change without management support.
What you should measure after the migration
A success criterion for the migration must be agreed on in advance. Otherwise, it is impossible to say if it succeeded.
Adoption: what proportion of lawyers record time and create cases directly in the system after 90 days?
Data quality: how many duplicates and inconsistencies are there after 90 days compared to before migration?
Time spent per administrative task: is an invoice faster to produce now? A new case creation flow?
IT costs: what is the total cost of the new setup versus the old, including internal resources?
User satisfaction: a simple survey after 90 days, and again after 6 months.
The most important decision: when you start
Cloud migrations don’t get easier by waiting. Data volume grows. Integrations become more complex. Staff turnover means knowledge of the old system disappears.
The right time is rarely “right now, during a busy period.” But it’s also not “in two years, once we have cleaned up.” A well-planned project can start within the next quarter – if work on data mapping and vendor selection begins now.
Conclusion
A cloud-based legal system is an investment with payback in lower IT costs, better accessibility, faster innovation, and stronger security. But only if the migration is handled as a real project, not as an IT upgrade.
It starts with clarity about what you are migrating from. Documentation of what you are migrating to. And a plan for how you bring the lawyers along.