Active Cases KPI

Active Cases is a critical KPI that measures the current workload of a business, influencing operational efficiency and resource allocation.

High active case counts can indicate bottlenecks in service delivery, while low counts may suggest underutilization of resources.

This metric serves as a leading indicator of customer satisfaction and financial health.

By tracking active cases, organizations can better align their strategies and improve forecasting accuracy.

Effective management of this KPI can lead to enhanced business outcomes, including improved customer retention and optimized operational costs.

How Active Cases Connects to Your Strategy

Active Cases is the top-priority metric in KPI Depot's Litigation Handling KPI group, sitting at priority 1 in the internal-process perspective. It anchors a group that then moves through outcome and cost metrics: Win/Loss Ratio and Settlement Rate on the customer side, Trial Success Rate and Appeal Success Rate back in internal process, and the financial trio of Legal Spend on Litigation, Average Cost per Case, and Case Duration.

As an internal-perspective volume metric, Active Cases is a workload signal rather than an outcome. It tells you how much litigation the department is carrying at a point in time, which is why it leads: nearly every other metric in the group is read per case or against the caseload.

The tension to watch runs between Active Cases and Case Duration together with Average Cost per Case. Pressure to bring the active count down rewards fast closure, but closing quickly can mean settling matters that a longer fight might have won, which surfaces later in Win/Loss Ratio and Settlement Rate. A falling caseload is only good news if the outcome and cost metrics hold, so Active Cases should never be read alone.

Measuring Active Cases in Practice

The count comes out of your matter-management system, so the integrity question is what state qualifies as active. Matters that are dormant, stayed, or awaiting a settlement signature can each be counted or excluded, and the choice changes the number more than any real shift in workload. Write the rule down and apply it consistently across periods.

Decide the definitional forks before you measure. Choose whether you report a point-in-time snapshot or matters handled over a period, and whether you normalize by inside lawyer or leave it as a departmental total, since external comparisons demand the same choice. Segment by matter type, because a caseload dominated by routine collections is not comparable to one carrying a few high-exposure disputes even when the counts match. The instrumentation pitfall is double counting: consolidated matters, multi-party actions, and appeals can each inflate the total if the system treats related filings as separate cases, so agree on how linked matters roll up before you trust a trend.

Common Pitfalls

Many organizations overlook the nuances of active cases, leading to distorted interpretations of workload and performance.

• Failing to categorize cases properly can skew analysis. Misclassification leads to inaccurate reporting and misguided resource allocation, impacting overall performance indicators.
• Neglecting to regularly update case management systems results in outdated data. This can create a false sense of security regarding operational efficiency and customer satisfaction.
• Ignoring seasonal trends may lead to unexpected surges in active cases. Without proper forecasting, organizations can find themselves overwhelmed during peak periods, affecting service quality.
• Overlooking employee workload can lead to burnout. High active case counts without adequate support can diminish staff morale and increase turnover rates.

Improvement Levers

Streamlining case management processes is essential for enhancing operational efficiency and improving customer experiences.

• Implement automated case routing to ensure timely handling. Automation reduces delays and allows teams to focus on high-priority cases, improving overall response times.
• Regularly analyze case data to identify patterns and trends. This analytical insight can inform staffing decisions and resource allocation, optimizing performance indicators.
• Enhance training programs for staff to improve case resolution skills. Well-trained employees can handle cases more efficiently, reducing the overall active case count.
• Utilize customer feedback to refine case management processes. Understanding customer pain points can lead to targeted improvements, enhancing satisfaction and retention.

KPI Depot is trusted by consulting, strategy, finance, and analytics teams at leading organizations worldwide, including those listed below.

Active Cases Benchmarks

We have 3 relevant benchmarks in our benchmarks database.

Browse the Top Benchmarked KPIs in Litigation Handling

Reading the Benchmarks for Active Cases

Three sources sit behind the external figures, and they do not measure the same thing, which is exactly why a raw number is easy to misread. The most important split is the denominator. The Association of Corporate Counsel with Major, Lindsey and Africa reports litigation matters on a per inside lawyer basis in one cut and as a total count of matters handled in another, while Norton Rose Fulbright surveys general counsel about their broader litigation load. A figure normalized per lawyer and a raw departmental total answer different questions, and they move independently as a team grows.

Definition is the second split. Active can mean lawsuits still open at the moment of a survey, or every matter handled across a full year, including those opened and closed within it. The first is a snapshot, the second a flow, and they are not comparable. Population and scope compound this: the Association of Corporate Counsel and Major, Lindsey and Africa reads span dozens of industries and many countries with departments ranging from a single lawyer to very large teams, whereas the Norton Rose Fulbright view centers on United States and Canada respondents. Before trusting any external figure, pin down whether it counts matters per lawyer or in total, whether it is a point-in-time snapshot or a yearly flow, and whether the surveyed departments resemble yours in size and geography.

OKRs That Use Active Cases

The Litigation Handling KPI group builds its OKRs around cost efficiency, with an objective to optimize legal spend that leans on Average Cost per Case, Case Duration, and Legal Spend on Litigation as key results. Active Cases is the workload variable underneath those, since spend and duration are functions of how many matters the team carries.

It works as a capacity key result under that same efficiency objective: a team might commit to bringing the active caseload to a manageable level while holding Win/Loss Ratio steady, which ties workload control to outcome quality rather than to closure speed alone. The group's own best-practice guidance pairs cost metrics with risk exposure, and Active Cases fits there as the leading signal of whether the department is over-extended. Any specific caseload target is a goal the team sets for itself, not a benchmark drawn from outside.

See OKR Examples for Litigation Handling

Free Whitepaper

Want to achieve performance excellence in Litigation Handling? Download our in-depth whitepaper: Definitive Guide to Litigation Handling KPIs.

Download the Free Guide

KPI Categories

This KPI is associated with the following categories and industries in our KPI database: