I define centralized docketing as a model where a dedicated team manages all firm deadlines. This team follows a uniform process, uses a single system, and operates under unified management. Access is limited to the department itself. The core idea is the consolidation of knowledge, processes, and tools into a single, specialized group.
Notably, this definition doesn't specify whether or not the team e-files for the firm, although in an ideal centralized model, this would likely be handled inhouse within the docketing team.
My first experience with centralization came from a mess. As a new manager at a decentralized firm with nearly 500 attorneys across 13 offices, I saw firsthand the issues. Our main four-person team handled federal docketing for 11 offices, but state matters were scattered among legal assistants. To make things more complicated, two remote offices operated entirely on their own. It was a fragmented system with a lot of inconsistencies and gaps.
My main goal was to fix this fragmentation. I wanted to give attorneys accurate deadline information and provide my team with a clear path for professional growth. I believed centralization would make this possible by enabling standardized training, robust quality control, and cross-coverage systems.
I also saw an opportunity to use technology to automate routine tasks, like court filing retrieval, which would allow our team to focus on more complex work and provide better service to attorneys.
Of course, good intentions don't always guarantee a smooth process. In the next post, we'll explore the challenges of centralization.
In the meantime, how do you define centralized docketing, and what's your take on this approach?