LawyerKM

The Knowledge Management Peer Group of the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) is conducting its biennial knowledge management survey to probe the trends, hot topics and development of KM in the legal industry. Results of the survey will be published in the KM White Paper scheduled for publication in June of 2010.

Please take five to ten minutes to complete the survey or forward it to the appropriate KM person in your organization (we only want one response per organization). The person responsible for KM at your law firm or law department should respond.

As an incentive to participate, ILTA will draw three names from the pool of respondents –– two winners will receive $500, and a third will receive his/her choice of $500 or a waived registration fee for ILTA 2010, the annual conference (a $1,025 value).

Take the Survey Now

It will remain open through March 26, 2010.

And don’t forget the the annual ILTA Conference, which will be held August 22-26, 2010 in Nashville, TN.

Knowledge Management, Technology & Social Media for Lawyers and Law Firms

At the International Legal Technology Association conference in Washington D.C. I’m attending the Autonomy iManage Early Adopter session.   Among others, my colleague at Gibbons P.C., the Chief Technology Officer, Michael Aginsky, is speaking.  On a related note, Michael is starting his own personal blog, Law Firm CTO, soon.  Check it out.  And you can follow him on Twitter at @michaelaginsky.  Another note, my friend David Hobbie is sitting next to me (and typing much faster), so he probably has better coverage than mine at his Caselines blog.  Check that out, too.  Finally, please forgive any typos because I am creating this post at the conference to get it out quickly.

Here are some interesting points from the presentation:

• Email filing is an important aspect of the new system.  How to get attorneys to file their emails in to the document management system (DMS) has been difficult.  iManage 8.5 should help to do that.
• Budget – how to justify the cost of this type of project in this economy. For some, the cost is not too significant.  Also, the offset of eliminating a lot of paper file space makes it worth it.  The cost savings from email management issues makes the project worth  the expense.
• Indexing the documents took much less time on 8.5 than on other systems.  The IDOL indexer is much faster than the previous Interwoven system and apparently faster than competing systems.
• Document accessing performance: there is significant improvement in time for accessing documents.
• Search: search results come back more quickly.   Full text searching is much better and more precise.  Some are even seeing documents that they didn’t even know they had (this can be risky – especially with documents that should be locked down).  The results are “almost instantaneous.”
• Matter-Centric Design: firms are taking guidance from other firms that have been recognized for their MCC designs.   Minimal and simple folder structure seems to be preferable among the panelists.
• User adoption — Buy in from the top is important, and e-discovery issues are also a driving factor.  The firms are essentially requiring that their users adopt the DMS and use it.  The project is seen as a strategic initiative, and it is therefore required by all users.
• Deployment: most firms are deploying to small groups (sometimes admin groups) first to test it out.  Firm-wide deployment will be done later.
• Advice: test, and don’t under estimate IDOL – it needs more attention than the predecessor – Verity; don’t under estimate hardware needs and staffing needs in terms of expertise; early adopter training was helpful, but it only scratched the surface, more training will be necessary.

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

The first sessions at the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) conference have begun.  I’m at the Information Management track listening to Tom Baldwin, Joshua Fireman, and Peter Krakaur talk about Selling Enterprise Search in Your Organization.

Here are some key points (please fogive any typos – I’m doing this on the fly to get it out there quickly):

• Don’t let the vendor define the scope.  Figure out what your firm needs and acquire the technology that works for you – not necessarily the tech the vendor is trying to sell.
• Don’t rely on the users (especially lawyers) to tell you what they need  or how you should deliver it.  They are experts in the law – not in tech.
• Think big about all the stuff that you want to include in your finished product.  What are the buckets that you want to include?
• Manage the “Google expectation” – these systems will not be as simple as Google.  You’ll need some training.
• Don’t under estimate the manpower that you’ll need to maintain these systems.  Expect that you’ll need at least a part time (probably a full time) person to keep the systems running.
• Think about strategies beyond KM and IT – what about records management?  Think about the full life cycle of the information your firm needs to manage.
• Figure out what’s important to your firm.  Is it work product retrieval?  CRM? ERM? a basic intranet?
• Think of search as an enterprise integration layer that is very good at finding things.
• You should have a good business case to present the strategy to the firm.
• Security by obscurity – be careful of documents that will come to the surface when you start an enterprise search project.  These same documents were there before but were “hidden” just because they were hard to find.  Make sure those documents (reviews, employee compensation memos, etc.) are secure before going live with the project because people will find them.
• Don’t get lost in over design and over “tweaking” the system at the outset.
• Google Paradox – manage the expectations of your users.  They can find anything on Google – why can’t they find something on a server three floors away within the firm?  Manage their expectations early.
• “Selling” after the roll out: beware of “If you build it, they will come” approach.
• Don’t leave to chance the perception of the system to the users.  Don’t forget to follow up after the roll out.  See how people are using it.   Make sure they are using it properly.  Drive adoption and utilization.
• Pre-launch communications are only the start…
• How to sell the goods.  Analyze the usage and compare it by practice group, office, and role.  You need firm-wide messages, but also target certain groups.  Let your users do the selling: have the power users evangelize for you: a partner endorsing the system means more than you doing it.  Use “other” ways to reach people – not just email; use webinars, live presentations, etc.  Tom at Reed Smith uses videos of lawyers talking about the system – very effective.
• Maintaining the system.  You’ll need people to do this (at least a pert time position).  Find out who is not using the system and focus on them.   Reporting is key for maintenance.  Check out the firm-wide emails – see what people are asking, then do the search for them and send them a “friendly reminder” email (give them a fish, and teach them to fish).
• Marketing is really important.  ATV campaign Awareness, Training, and Visibility.

Great presentation.

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

I’m very interested in how different generations of lawyers and legal staff will affect the way law firms will operate.  See Attorney 2.0 – Generation Y in Your Law Firm.   Here’s my coverage of a related ILTA program called Baby Boomers and Generation X and Generation Y – Addressing Generation Gaps in Culture and Technology in the Legal Industry. 

ILTA – August 28, 2008 2:00 pm

These are my notes from the ILTA program [Since I am taking paper-free notes and because there is free Wi-Fi here, I thought that I’d add the notes to the blog.  Disclaimer: my notes are rough, so forgive the typos.]

From ILTA:

Title: Baby Boomers and Generation X and Generation Y – Addressing Generation Gaps in Culture and Technology in the Legal Industry  – slides
Description: Are law firms dealing with the reality that there are real differences in how the various generations perceive the world, the expectations they have around technology and mobility, and how they relate to each other and member of different generations?  With most law firms being run by Boomers, we need to consider the issues around the fact that most new attorneys and staff are members of gen-X, gen-Y or gen-ME.
Speaker(s): Mark Cameron Willis – Kutak Rock LLP
Matthew Willis – IKON Office Solutions, Inc.
Learning Objectives: Learn new approaches to management.

LawyerKM’s Notes:

Today’s Emerging Law Firm

• Many firms have been involved in mergers and acquisitions
  Firms are operating like larger companies (they have c-level people)
  There is a global practice
  Competition for institutional clients
  multi-generational workplace

Generation Characteristics

Traditionalist

• Characteristics:
  64+ years old (5% of firm population)
  traditional family values
  loyalty to firm
  strong work ethic
• Legal practice:
  not tech savvy
  prefer phone vs email
  traditional legal practice – value of relationships
• Value to Firm:
  loyal clients
  relatinships in community / practice areas
  good mentors (valued by younger generations)
• Myths / perceptions:
  perception - that this group has stopped learning
  reality – they have vast knowledge

Baby Boomer

• Characteristics:
  late 40-60’s (70% of law firm partners)
  they surpassed the former generation many ways (e.g., first to go to college, etc.)
  work your way up mentality
  the “me generation” – affluent
  work-a-holics
• Legal practice:
  loyal clients
  traditional legal practice, but they embrace change dictated by their clients
  client-service oriented
• Value to Firm:
  managing the firm
  transition from traditional practice
  these people run the firm
• Myths / perceptions:
  perception – they are obsolete
  reality – they run the firm
  perception – work-a-holic
  reality – hard workers

Generation X

• Characteristics:
  30s / 40s year old
  saw 50% divorce rate growing up
  7-8 career changes
  consider themselves as “free agents”
• Legal practice:
  traditional legal training- research and writing
  they question traditional firm policies
  first generation to adopt technology advances (e.g., Westlaw and Lexis)
• Value to Firm:
  money makers
  control day-to-day relationship with clients
  they embrace technology
• Myths / perceptions:
  perception – self-centered (e.g., salary hikes)
  reality – family-centered
  perception – sense of entitlement
  reality – unwilling to sacrifice personal life for firm
  perception – “slackers”
  reality – maybe, but positive response to challenges

Generation Y

• Characteristics and values:
  late 20s year olds
  quality of life
  brought up on technology in school and in social networks
  “trophy generation” – they need a reward for what they’ve done
• Legal practice:
  technology is the backbone of practice
  diversity
  few strong client relatinships
  pressure to bill hours
• Value to Firm:
  fresh insight
  resourceful and adaptable
  teaching boomers and traditionalists
  access to information (e.g., Findlaw)
• Myths / perceptions:
  perception – undisciplined
  reality – they actually crave structure
  perception – they challenge authority
  reality – they crave to learn from their elders
  perception – disrespectful
  reality – they tend to treat everyone as equals

Firms Adjusting to the generation gaps:
Check out the matrix in the slides that show differences
Communications: face-to-face > telephone > email> email/text/sms
Bridging the generation gap

HR:
offices are designed to attract and keep employees (i.e., Google style vs. Stuffy NYC firm style)
quality of life – some firms have QoL committees
telecommuting
feedback that matches the generational needs
firm evaluations (the employee can offer reverse feedback)
mentoring
meaningful work
pro bono opportunities

Technology:
Education and training (training up and down, promoting new technology – wikis, web hosting, webinars, virtual conferneces)
Showed Common Craft’s Wikis in Plain English – the audience actually applauded this video – they loved it.
Technology committee – involving tech end users in tech decisions; comparing tech with corporate clients

Marketing: the new way of marketing involves blogs

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

Today is the last day of ILTA.  I’ll be covering a couple of sessions later. 

There are so many great programs here that it’s impossible to attend all of the ones that you’d like.  That’s why I am very happy to see that several people are sharing their notes and thoughts about the sessions.  Many people have expressed appreciation for this, so I want to make sure that everyone knows of some of the other live bloggers:

I’ve mentioned coverage by David Hobbie of Caselines and Doug Cornelius of KM Space.  I noticed that Amy Witt of Nina Platt Consulting is ILTA blogging at The Law Firm Intranet. 

If you know of others, please drop me a line and I’ll revise and / or repost a new list. 

Thanks. 

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

ILTA – August 26, 2008 1:30 pm

These are my notes from the program.  [Since I am taking paper-free notes and because there is free Wi-Fi here, I thought that I’d add the notes to the blog.  Disclaimer: my notes are rough, so forgive the typos.]

From ILTA:

Title: The Ultimate Legal Technologist
Description: We discuss the value of legal or IT expertise as a foundation for legal technologists, specifically in the field of practice (or litigation) support.  The panel discusses their findings and experiences when the pendulum is swung in either direction.  Can you find legal technologists who hold in-depth expertise in both areas, and do they make the ultimate technologist?
Speaker(s): Joel Vogel – Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, LLP
Florinda Baldridge – Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P.
Michelle Mahoney – Mallesons Stephen Jaques
 
Learning Objectives: Identify the dynamics that lead to a successful service delivered by multi-disciplined professionals.
Learn about the personality types, perceptions and the reality when managing expectations of legal staff and clients.

No LawyerKM notes due to technical problems.  I recommend checking out the slides from the presentation.

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

ILTA – August 27, 2008 1:00 pm

These are my notes from the program.  [Since I am taking paper-free notes and because there is free Wi-Fi here, I thought that I’d add the notes to the blog.  Disclaimer: my notes are rough, so forgive the typos.]

From ILTA – See the description and download the slides here

Title: Web 2.0 – Law Firm Adoption
Description: As Web2.0 tools mature, there is an increased number of adoptions by Fortune 500 companies.  We explore and learn if Web 2.0 solutions already being adapted by Fortune 500 companies would be accepted by the lawyers in your firm.
Speaker(s): Bruce MacEwen – Adam Smith, Esq.

Learning Objectives: Learn how the new Web 2.0 tools are being utilized by Fortune 500 companies and its potential impact for law firms.
Analyze adoption rates amongst law firms.

LawyerKM’s notes:

These notes are highlights, you can see the slides on the ILTA site.
Bruce has many good diagrams in his presentation – check it out.

Web 2.0 Agenda:

• Blogs
• Wikis
• Mashups
• Social Networking
• Implications for law firms

The nature of the web and how it has changed:

Web 1.0 > Web 1.5 > Web 2.0
key difference is 1.0=surf, 1.5=search,  2.0=share

Blogs 101
23 blogs known in 1999
125 million blogs in 2008

Blogs as a management tool: a place in professional services firms because there are so many advantages over email.

Blog Basics:
important to have firm-wide blogging policies
you’re personally responsibe
respect and keep secretsinclude positive and negative comments (for credibility); some firms use blogs just for a replacement of client alerts, etc. and disallow comments (whether your firm does this depends on the culture)
be nice

Be Aware:
there is significant time committment to blogging.
your firm may require legal approval

Do’s & Don’ts:
there were a number of these, see the slides link above.
Highlights: don’t get defensive; develop a tone of voice – there is a brand aspect to your blog, a brand is a promise to your readers.

Why blog?
Internally – facilitates collaboration
Externally- demonstrates expertise

Web 2.0 [and Enterprised 2.0] –  At the heart of the knowledge management function; also at the heart of the project management function.

What lawyers do (cases, deals, etc.) are projects.  The intrinsic characteristics of blogs lend themselves to project manaement – the most recent thing is on top.

The way a firm is organized is usually different that the way people interact (see Bruce’s diagram)

Wikis
like a blog with multiple authors (e.g. wikipedia)
“it will never work in theory, but it works in practice”
the concerns that people will vandalize wiki pages is unfounded (if it happens, the good people will fix it and the vandals will be exposed)
Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein reported 75% drop in email on projects after implementing wikis.
There is very little instruction required.

There is not much downside to trying out wikis and blogs becuase they are generally inexpensive and they are generally accepted because they mirror the way people work.

Mashups
Definition: basically mixing two or more databases together (e.g. craigslist rentals with google maps or chicago crime with google maps)
Hypo – key clients mashup with a map of an area – could have real value to a firm.
Hypo – “caller ID on steroids” when a client calls, identifies the person as a client, it pulls up all types of firm info and a news feed related to the client.  [this is a great idea - other than this I haven't heard too many good ideas for mashups in organizations].  this is real “just in time” information that can be very useful for lawyers – getting the right information to the right people at the right time.

This stuff is not “high tech” it is “appropriate tech”

Social Networks
MySpace, Facebook, LinkedIn, Legal OnRamp (specifically for lawyers).

Bruce is disturbed by the number of members and the presence detection features of Legal OnRamp.   [to me this is of minor concern - better platforms, like Facebook allow better control over privacy and presence detection].

Success Stories:
there are some anecdotes, but most are struggling for a balance

McKinsey study: companys are shifting from experimental to broad adoption.  But, 21% were satisfied and 22 were not satified.
Specific internal uses: KM is 83%
External uses: improving client services is 73%

Leadership buy-in, promotion, and endorsement are keys to the success of social networking.  [in my view, this certainly is the key.  you may get some adoption, without it, but it will never be widely adotped and considered a success without it.]

Main take-away: power of the tools is to strengthen relationships that already exist.  It requires business and IT / KM to really collaborate.  It is the IT / KM job to identify new tools, such as social networking, and for senior management to push it forward.

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

ILTA – August 27, 2008 11:00 am

These are my notes from the program.  [Since I am taking paper-free notes and because there is free Wi-Fi here, I thought that I’d add the notes to the blog.  Disclaimer: my notes are rough, so forgive the typos.]

From ILTA:

Title: Project Management Anatomy – Standards, Roles, Responsibilities and Skills
Description: You’ve just been assigned the role or title of “PM” and not exactly sure what that means, or you’re a project manager looking to be even more effective, or your firm is considering adding a project manager position to the staff.  We discuss the different roles that project managers play and the key skill sets that are important to be successful.

Speaker(s):
Juliet Alters – Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, L.L.P
Heidi Golabek – Shearman & Sterling
Kristin Linoski – Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P.
Judy Katany – Huron Consulting Group
Scott David – Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP
 
Learning Objectives: Understand the skills and responsibilities included in a typical job description of a project manager.
Recognize different skill sets that impact the success of a project manager.
Chart project manager career growth and/or development opportunities.

LawyerKM’s notes:

Where does PM sit within the firm:
Some in IT, some are not yet formal, some are one-person PMOs

Art and Science of Project Management

Art – negotiation, communication
Science – budget, scope, etc.
Three Cs:communication, collaboration, and closure.  Need to know your audience when communicating. 
People, processes and technology are the three pillars. 
Collaboration – how to get it.  It goes back to communication; build trust, stand up and support your team, PM is like a movie director, provide guidance without over-directing.
Humor is important – to relieve stress.
Closure – this is most important, of course.  Need a sense of completion.  Post-implementation review (post-mortem has a negative connotation), document it for lessons learned, and for reporting to senior management. 
Reviewing the project – it may make sense to to reviews at various points in the project – not necessarily at the end. 
Tips for developing soft skills: meetings to review points in private so people feel free to be open and honest; invite internal speakers to discuss what is going on in other departments – helps give people context and get to know others in various departments. 

Hiring a Project Manager – What to look for when hiring a PM?

1. In resumes: Objective: look for desire to engage in “project management” – not just “management”;
2. Postion tenure: it often takes a long time to complile a list of accomplishments – beware of short tenures.
3. Metrics: what kind of metrics did they achieve? save money, reduce staff, etc.
4. Engagement vs. Oversight: how involved was the candidate in their projects?
5. Writing Style: the resume can be an indicator of their work on the projects they manage (also ask for writing samples, get a sense of the templates they’ve used)
6. Business case: look at the application as a business case.
7. Professional Development – look for initiative by the applicant – shows passion and drive.
8. Consider internal applicants because they have insight in the firm; but external applicants bring frest ideas and insights.
9. Interviews: individual meeting followed by a panel and others. 

I couldn’t stay for Career Path for a PM or Value of PM in the organization

Where to get more information: PMBOK – project management body of knowledge; ILTA PM members; Book: Project Management Jumpstart; seek out mentors; PMI

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

ILTA – August 27, 2008 9:00 am

These are my notes from the program. [Since I am taking paper-free notes and because there is free Wi-Fi here, I thought that I’d add the notes to the blog. Disclaimer: my notes are rough, so forgive the typos.]

From ILTA:

Title: Legal Aspects of Collaboration Tools (Blogs, Wikis, MashUps, IM, Text Messages, Social Networks and More)
Description: Collaboration technologies help promote information sharing, efficiency, cost reduction and can provide competitive advantages. How does the legal environment deal with the information overload and the security of confidential information escaping the realm of the organization? What aspects of legal information need to be considered to help determine how collaboration tools should be utilized in the legal world (and when they should not)? What policies must be in place to protect the shared information?

Speaker(s): Tom Mighell – Cowles & Thompson, P.C.
Dennis Kennedy – MasterCard Worldwide

LawyerKM’s notes:

• See my notes from yesterday’s presentation
• Collaboration is no longer an option.
• Web tools are moving beyond email.
• News and communication:
  Blogs -
  IM -
  Twitter -
• Working together:
  Documents – drafts & revisions: the old way was redlining.
  Conferencing – scheduling is a major difficulty and very time consuming.
  Wikis -
• Web 2.0
  1.0 – focus was getting all the info online – no interaction
  2.0 – making the info available to people in more interesting, interactive ways (e.g. Google Maps, Mashups); moving to user-generated content (e.g., wikis and blogs); software as a service (SAAS); cloud computing.
  e.g., Yelp, Delicious, social networking tools, Facebook and LinkedIn are the main players.
  Martindale-Hubbell is testing their own social network (should be coming out in the next couple of months.
  Mashups – SharePoint can be used to mashup information
  Google Sites – allows you to make a mini portal platform on the web
• The benefits of collaboration:
  1. taking an active role
  2. enhancing the workflow
  3. getting better results
• Potential Problems of collaboration:
  1. Loss of control – lawyers are tought that they should control the draft and the drafting proscess. Collaborative drafting (like with Google Docs) can take away this feeling of control, blog comments and wikis also may contribute to the feeling of loss of control. Internal vs. external storage (many lawyers are not comfortable with their data on external servers) there is also the issue of down time of third-party systems.
  2. Security – because you are going outside the firewall, there is a concern. You are potentialll opening up multiple points of compromise.
  3. Ethics – need to be a lawyer’s ethical responsibilities. There have not been many ethics decisions about technology. None were cited about collaboration. Is encryption mandatory? Metadata – one state has found that lawyers should have knowledge that metadata exists in their documents.
• The Balance between riks and benefits:
  1. Cultural – what is the tolerance for risk at your firm? Balanced scorecard, risk-reward framework.
  2. Costs – many of these tools are free – so lawyers might be inclined to try it out. But, some of those tools may be risky. Hidden costs – free tools have implimentation issues [and what about ads in Gmail].
  3. Portfolio approach – is an economic portfolio approach right (i.e., having a diversified portfolio)? Check out some of the collaboration tools.
• Defining and Implementing Appropriate Policies:
  1. channel appropriate behaviors – lawyers are good at finding work-arounds when they can’t get what they need.
  2. keeping control – policies, procedures, processes – need some sort of formality to it. Very few people in the audience have any sort of policies or procedures that cover collaboration tools.
  3. security and ethical concers – #1 is confidentiality; different levels of access, authority are key to this.
• Looking into the Future
  1. recent devlopments – since the cost of travel is high, there is/will be an increase in online collaboration.
  2. trends – web2.0 is becoming more common and people are willing to explore
  3. predicions – clients will drive this (if they want it, lawyers will provide it) video will be bigger in the future
• Conclusions:
  1. keep current – read blogs [like LawyerKM!]
  2. action steps – find your firms policies; look at the tools that you use; think about the issues that arise with the tools that you use.

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