LawyerKM

Back in August 2008 I wondered “Is the AmLaw 100 on Twitter?” The answer was a resounding “no.”  There were a couple of “exceptions.”  Skadden had an account, but it  seemed to be simply parked, with no updates.  It’s still there, still with no updates, but now has 25 followers (including LawyerKM).  It also appeared, back then, that Orrick had an account, but based on the updates, it was clearly “brand jacked” as Steve Matthews put it, in the comments on that post.  The Orrick Twitter account still appears to be controlled by someone other than the firm, but it now has 49 followers, and two new/different updates, which are less offensive than the previous updates.

That was almost six months ago.  This is now, and the new answer to that question “Is the AmLaw 100 on Twitter?” is: well, not really, but sort of.

Here’s what I found looking around Twitter:

• Fulbright & Jaworski has apparently embraced Twitter.  It appears that the account was started in October 2008.  Since then the firm has acquired 106 followers and posted 53 updates.
• Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP has 73 followers, 25 updates and has been tweeting since December 2008. [updated 2/1/09]
  
• McDermott Will & Emery started tweeting in December 2008.  84 followers and 40 updates.
  
• Weil Gotshal & Manges also started tweeting in October 2008.  It has 65 followers and has posted 61 updates.
• Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice gets the award for the best Twitter image (a bulldog) and slogan (“Innovators @ Law!”).  I also like their first update: “Launched the new Womble Carlyle Twitter page. Get current information on the legal issues facing your business. Friend us, we won’t bite.” With 92 followers and 86 updates, they have been tweeting since November 2008.

You’ll notice that the firms mostly post links back to their websites.  Not surprising – this is law firm marketing, after all.

There are several AmLaw 100 firms that have apparently claimed their accounts, but have done nothing with them.  This is a smart move if they are trying to avoid the fate of Orrick.  Here’s a list of firms and possibly their Twitter handles.  I say possibly because this is based on my research on Twitter – I have not contacted any firms to ask whether they have, in fact, claimed their Twitter accounts.  I didn’t include hyperlinks because, for the most part, there is nothing to see on the Twitter pages.  But the URLs, as listed, are valid.  If you see some that have one follower, it’s me.

• Akin Gump – http://twitter.com/AkinGump
• AlstonBird – http://twitter.com/AlstonBird
• Arnold & Porter – http://twitter.com/arnoldporter
• Baker & Hostetler http://twitter.com/BakerHostetler
• Baker & McKenzie – http://twitter.com/bakermckenzie
• Baker Botts – http://twitter.com/BakerBotts
• Bryan Cave – http://twitter.com/BryanCave
• Cleary Gottlieb – http://twitter.com/ClearyGottlieb
• Davis Polk – http://twitter.com/DavisPolk
• Debevoise & Plimpton – http://twitter.com/debevoise
• Dickstein Shapiro – http://twitter.com/dickstein_llp
• DLA Piper – http://twitter.com/DLAPiper
• Fish & Richardson – http://twitter.com/FishRichardson
• Foley & Lardner – http://twitter.com/FoleyLardner
• Gibson, Dunn – http://twitter.com/GibsonDunn
• Goodwin Procter – http://twitter.com/GoodwinProcter
• Hogan & Hartson – http://twitter.com/HoganHartson
• Holland & Knight – http://twitter.com/hollandknight
• Howrey – http://twitter.com/howrey
• Hunton & Williams – http://twitter.com/huntonwilliams
• Jones Day – http://twitter.com/jonesday
• Latham & Watkins – http://twitter.com/lathamwatkins
• Dewey & LeBoeuf – http://twitter.com/deweyleboeuf
• Mayer Brown – http://twitter.com/mayerbrown
• Morgan Lewis & Bockius – http://twitter.com/morganlewis (has four followers and is following four others)
• O’Melveny & Myers – http://twitter.com/omelveny
• Patton Boggs – http://twitter.com/pattonboggs
• Paul Hastings – http://twitter.com/paulhastings
• Paul, Weiss – http://twitter.com/paulweiss (I think that this may be a person named Paul Weiss – probably not the firm)
• Proskauer Rose – http://twitter.com/proskauerrose
• Reed Smith – http://twitter.com/reedsmith (this is a “marketing guy” in Austin Texas – probably named… Reed Smith)
• Ropes & Gray http://twitter.com/ropesgray
• Schulte Roth - http://twitter.com/Schulte
• Seyfarth Shaw – http://twitter.com/seyfarthshaw
• Sidley Austin – http://twitter.com/sidleyaustin
• Simpson Thacher – http://twitter.com/simpsonthacher
• Sonnenschein – http://twitter.com/sonnenschein
• Squire Sanders – http://twitter.com/squiresanders
• Sutherland Asbill  – http://twitter.com/sutherland
• Vinson & Elkins – http://twitter.com/vinsonelkins
• White & Case – http://twitter.com/whitecase
• WilmerHale – http://twitter.com/wilmerhale
• Wilson Sonsini – http://twitter.com/wilsonsonsini
• Winston & Strawn – http://twitter.com/winstonstrawn

I may have missed some.  If so, please let me know.

It’s not just the AmLaw 100 on Twitter.  Here’s a list of other firms that I’ve encountered from comments on Twitter:

• Deacons (Australia) – 140 followers, 120 updates.
• Staton Law Firm (Huntersville, NC) – 73 followers, 28 updates.
• Clements Law Firm (Charlotte, NC) – 66 followers, 2 updates.
• Christensen Law Firm (Draper, UT) – 4 followers, 1 update.
• Hinshaw (USA) – 32 followers, 0 updates.
• Gowlings (Canada) – 66 followers, 24 updates.
  
• Patel & Warren (Houston, TX) – 47 followers, 12 updates.
  
• Jackson Walker (Texas) – 79 followers, 18 updates (has 13 other associated Twitter accounts, and check out their website, which has a prominent “Follow Jackson Walker on Twitter” link).
• Simmons Cooper (Illinios) – 80 followers, 130 updates.
• ShannonGracey (Texas) – 173 followers, 31 updates.
  

And for those firms that have not *yet* jumped on the Twitter bandwagon, here’s the good news:  You’re still in the Twittersphere.  You may not be tweeting, but others are tweeting about you.  For example, the ABA Journal has a Twitter account, has posted more than 4,400 updates, and has almost 1,000 followers.  The AmLawDaily also posts updates about firms.  It has 188 followers and has made over 350 updates.

Others are Tweeting about law firms, as well.  There is a huge community of lawyers and others in the legal profession on Twitter.  They post updates about firms big and small.  Unfortunately, these days, a lot of what they’re are saying has to do with law firm layoffs.  There’s even a Law Firm Layoff Tracker on the Lawshucks website that’s, sadly, a hot topic on Twitter.

The question remains: should law firms be on Twitter?  Some say no, but that lawyers at firms should be.  Maybe these are the Twitter purists.  Perhaps they think that Twitter should be all about the conversation and not about simple broadcasting and posting links.  My personal opinion is that Twitter conversations are great, but law firms should be on Twitter.  It is a marketing opportunity, just like a law blog.  It’s an opportunity to get a firm’s content in front of more eyes and drive more traffic to its website.  If a firm’s lawyers also use Twitter, then all the better.  Those lawyers can have Twitter conversations and build relationships.  But the two needn’t be mutually exclusive.  Firms might not engage in Twitter conversations, but neither do the many of the mainstream media outlets, like Fox News, CNN Breaking News, and New York Times.  Twitter–in its short life–has grown into more than just a place to chat.  It is a place to post news and information that others will chat about.

Being a mere mortal, and there being only so many hours in the day, I’m sure that I missed some law firms on Twitter.  If you know of others, please let me know by leaving a comment.  Thanks.

Finally, if you’re going to LegalTech NY this coming week, you won’t want to miss “What is Twitter And How Can I Use It?” – a panel discussion moderated by Monica Bay with panelists Matthew Homann, Kevin O’Keefe, and Chris Winfield.   It’s Monday Feb. 2, 2009 at 3:00 PM.  I’ll be there.   And feel free to DM me and say hello – http://twitter.com/lawyerkm- in person.

In the meanwhile, join the conversation about Twitter in the comments below.

• Should law firms be on Twitter?  If so, how should they use it?
  

Update: Thanks to Bruce Carton for pointing out his great list of BigLaw Lawyers on Twitter.  He noted a few firms I missed (now updated above).

LawyerKM :: Knowledge Management & Technology for Lawyers and Law Firms

     

This is the second post in a new series about legal knowledge management, called KM 101.  If you haven’t already, you can read the first entry, called KM 101: Introduction to Legal Knowledge Management.

Today, the conversation is about tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge.

At a very high level, it is generally agreed that tacit knowledge is that which has not been recorded, written, printed, or otherwise captured in some medium.  Explicit knowledge, on the other hand, is that which has been codified or captured in some medium.  Simply put, explicit knowledge has be written down or recorded.

Thus, tacit knowledge comprises personal experiences known only to an individual.  Unless converted into explicit knowledge, it cannot be shared because it is “trapped” in one’s mind.  For example, a trial lawyer may know how a particular judge tends to react to certain trial tactics because he has tried cases before that judge.  That knowledge is certainly useful to that trial lawyer, but is of no use to the other lawyers at his firm, unless the knowledge is shared among them.  From an organization’s (as opposed to a personal) KM perspective, tacit knowledge is useless because multiple members of the organization cannot benefit from it.

Conversely, some explicit knowledge can be useful to an organization because others can find it.  For example, the trial lawyer, mentioned above, could prepare notes and make a presentation to the other litigators in his firm about tips and tricks when trying cases.  The notes (e.g., a PowerPoint presentation) could be saved on a networked hard drive, document management system, or intranet page, so that others can find and use them.  Just as important, those notes, because they are accessible by others, can help fellow lawyers determine that the lawyer may be an expert in trial practice.

The tacit-explicit distinction may be interesting, but it is academic and does little for those who are trying to implement KM at a law firm.  For practical purposes, knowledge is either accessible or inaccessible.  Note that explicit knowledge, by definition, is not necessarily accessible.  That PowerPoint presentation, when saved on the author’s  local hard drive, is technically “explicit knowledge,” but is accessible only by the author.  It is not until the knowledge is made available to others that it becomes useful.

Doug Cornelius, of KM Space, has written about tacit and explicit knowledge, and he shares some of these views.  He says that the tacit-explicit distinction is abstract and, in reality, knowledge is “either findable by your computer or it is not findable by your computer.”  There are also some interesting comments on his blog post that are worth a look.

The take-away about tacit and explicit knowledge is to get people to understand that unless knowledge is shared and made accessible to others, it is useless from a KM perspective.  Converting tacit knowledge (or explicit knowledge) into accessible knowledge is truly one of the challenges of knowledge management.

Please join in the discussion. Leave a comment.

• How do you define tacit and explicit knowledge?
• Is the tacit-explicit distinction merely academic or is there a practical application?
  

LawyerKM :: Knowledge Management & Technology for Lawyers and Law Firms

     

David Gurteen, a definite KM must-follow tweeter, has come up with his own really nice list of must-follow tweeters.  Check out his KM Tweeters! blog post.  He merged, removed duplicates and sorted my list list of lists and turned them into links [very helpful! Why didn't I think of that?!?] to the individual’s tweet page.  And he listed his Top Ten Tweeters, a few I hadn’t been following.  Also, he reminds us to use #KM when tweeting about knowledge management, a practice I find really helpful because it allows me to create an RSS feed of knowledge management tweets.

LawyerKM :: Knowledge Management & Technology for Lawyers and Law Firms