IT strategy

Ground up IT strategy

Few resources
- To pay for IT
- To package/maintain/install IT
- To configure for use
- To train users

User intransigence
- technological: don’t understand/like new technology imposed on us; we have change fatigue
- Technical: trained to be inflexible; formal;
- Lawyers don’t write well. Legal drafting is convoluted, over particularised, and therefore prone to negotiation and error
User knowledge is imperfect
- Individuals who don’t understand policies are incentivised to apply them literally (being institutionally short an option - see below)
- Institutional Knowledge: Generally is good (UBS turnover is comparatively low) but we leak institutional knowledge and it is not tracked and captured.
Institutional knowledge is poor
- We don’t track our decisions - no MI kept on litigation close shaves; which issues come up and which don’t.
Legal department’s institutional position: Being a control function, Legal is “short an option” - will get no credit for approving a deal that is successful; will be criticised for failing to approving a deal which encounters any legal issues.
- Important to carefully differentiate legal from commercial issues and allocate ownership correctly.

Data we don’t use: All historical departmental email: - a rich source of indexable institutional knowledge - this resource should not be restricted to use in conducting.
Underused/misunderstood existing tools -
- Sharepoint
- Microsoft Word/Excel
- Workshare
Opportunities to enhance/improve existing tools
- TADH
Easy implementation to enhance interaction and connectivity
- “Business Data Catalogs” to interrogate external databases from within Sharepoint
- Application Interfaces (“API”s)