Digital change in legal isn’t slowing down. However, the way many fi rms select priorities still feels like a mix of instinct, internal politics, and whoever shouts the loudest in the meeting.
Let's set the scene. OneAdvanced found that 60% of UK law firms plan to upgrade their digital systems in 2025. They also found 42% cite budget constraints as a barrier. Lastly, 24% cite poor system integration as a blocker.
That’s the real tension. Most fi rms want to move forward. But they can’t afford to “try everything”. So picking the right priorities (and shipping them) matters more than having more ideas.
This is where WHNN helps.
In this post you’ll learn
Most fi rms don’t struggle because they’re short of ideas. They struggle because too many priorities compete for attention. So budgets get spread thin, people get pulled in different directions, and delivery slows down the moment fee work or client issues ramp up.
Legal services fi rms have extra constraints here. You’re balancing client confidentiality, risk, professional standards, and the realities of partnership decision-making. That’s why “just run an innovation programme” often fails. Not because the people are wrong, but because the operating rhythm isn’t there.
WHNN is a decision system for that problem. It’s designed to stop the pattern of “strategy day → good intentions → nothing delivered”.
WHNN (pronounced “win”) stands for The What and the How, for the Now and the Next. It’s a framework that turns ambition into a short list of priorities and a delivery plan that stands up in the real world.
What makes WHNN useful is that it forces four decisions in the right sequence. You agree on where you need to get to (“Next”), you get honest about where you are today (“Now”), you choose the few initiatives that close the gap (“What”), and you set up delivery properly (“How”). Then you repeat that cycle every quarter, so progress becomes normal, not heroic.
If there’s one thing that causes chaos in legal digital planning, it’s skipping the “Next” part.
Most fi rms jump straight into the “what”. New tools. New features. Maybe a portal. Maybe AI. Maybe a new website. The problem is that without a shared view of where the fi rm needs to be, every project becomes a debate. Not because people enjoy debating, but because you’re asking them to choose without a clear destination.
Here’s what this looks like in practice. Someone says, “We need to improve client experience”. One person hears “better comms”. Another hears “new tech”. Someone else hears “more marketing”. Everyone’s right, and the fi rm still doesn’t move.
A better “Next” is specific and measurable. Not because you’re obsessed with metrics, but because metrics stop the fi rm arguing in circles. If “Next” is clear, then the later decisions get easier. You can sort the projects that matter from the ones that are just noise.
Once “Next” is agreed, you can look at “Now” without it turning personal.
Most firms have hidden friction. It’s rarely obvious because people have built workarounds over the years. They’ve learned which admin person “knows how to get it done”, which spreadsheet “has the real numbers”, and which system fi elds people should ignore. This is how legal services fi rms keep moving. But it’s also why digital change stalls.
OneAdvanced’s research highlights that poor system integration is a real blocker for many firms.
This typically shows up as manual re-keying, duplicate data, inconsistent matter information, and teams not trusting what the system says.
A useful “Now” baseline isn’t a giant report. It’s a short, honest view of where work slows down, where handoffs break, and where the client journey creates confusion or chasing. If you can’t describe that plainly, your “What” list is probably guesswork.
This is where most fi rms overreach.
They pick too much because it feels productive to have a long list. But long lists kill delivery. You end up spreading budget and attention thin, and then everyone concludes “digital transformation doesn’t work”.
WHNN is simple here: choose a small set of priorities for the quarter. Not for the year. For the quarter. That forces you to slice big problems into deliverable chunks and stop pretending everything can be fi xed at once.
If you need a simple test for whether something belongs in the “What” list, ask: Will this move the measures we set in “Next”? If it doesn’t, it’s probably not priority work this quarter. It might still be valuable, but it’s not the thing you should be betting your scarce attention on.
And when fi rms apply this properly, the same three themes keep coming back: fixing the foundation (especially integration), removing manual work in repeatable areas, and tightening intake so work comes in cleanly. Those aren’t exciting words, but they’re the moves that make the rest possible.
Mid‑post nudge: if you want a sanity check on your current priority list before you commit budget, I’m happy to compare notes.
The “How” is where good ideas die. Not because they were bad ideas, but because ownership is vague, time isn’t protected, and nobody agrees what success looks like.
Legal services fi rms don’t need more committees. They need clear ownership, a realistic slice of work, and a way to measure whether it’s working. This is also why pilots are so effective. You can prove value quickly, build internal confi dence, and reduce the risk of a big-bang programme that fails.
Budget constraints are real. OneAdvanced’s research shows 42% cite budget as a key barrier.
Pilots respect that reality because they’re designed to show value before you scale investment.
At Distinction, the practical delivery approach is simple: get clear on the problem (not just the solution), then ship in increments so progress stays visible. That’s the
combination of design thinking and agile delivery, but stripped of any theatre. It’s just a sensible way to reduce risk and keep momentum.
Marketing teams often get judged on leads. But for most fi rms, the bigger lever is what happens after someone raises their hand.
Picture this. The fi rm runs a campaign or publishes a thought leadership piece. The right prospects arrive. Enquiries come in. But the response is inconsistent. Some prospects get a sharp reply and a clear next step. Others get a generic email, or a delayed callback, or are passed around internally. Nobody is trying to do a bad job. The process just isn’t designed.
That’s not an SEO problem. That’s an operating layer problem. When you fi x enquiry handling, routing, and follow-up, you improve conversion without chasing more traffic. And you give marketing something partners actually respect: a clearer line between activity and instructions.
Where AI fits (and why it’s rarely step one)
It’s tempting to jump straight to AI. It looks like progress. It’s visible. It’s easy to talk about in a partner meeting.
But AI is only as good as the foundations underneath it. If your data is inconsistent, your workfl ows are unclear, and your systems don’t connect, AI won’t fi x the mess. It will amplify it. So in WHNN terms, AI often belongs in “Next” as an ambition, but not in your first “What” list unless your foundations are stable.
If you want AI to deliver real value, the boring work comes first: integration, data, adoption, repeatable workflows. Then AI becomes useful, because you’re applying it to a workfl ow you actually understand.
If you’re a COO, practice manager, or marketing manager and your digital priorities are turning into a debate, I’m happy to do a sanity check. Not a sales call. A practical conversation about what’s worth doing first, and what will probably stall.
