[Note: Please Welcome Guest Blogger Rich Evans]

After graduating law school back in 2007 and practicing in a small firm, local government and solo settings, I decided to become a law librarian. So far, it has been a great fit in my life, much in part to the law librarianship program at Catholic University, which I absolutely love. I honestly have no complaints except for one, the involvement of vendors, specifically LexisNexis.

In contrast, in law school there was never a day when either LexisNexis or Westlaw was not in my life. The relationship was great. I enjoyed full access to both vendors – more than I ever needed. They would even pay me reward points for daily visits to the LexisNexis website or attending one of their “advanced” search classes. I could then exchange the points for goods that seemed a little too extravagant, even a chance to win a car, but I am not one to pass up free lavish stuff.  All of this I thought was just a way to encourage law students to use their services in the future. Although this worked out great for me, I honestly have no idea why they did this.

I seriously doubt as an attorney that I would ever have been in the position to influence a decision between Westlaw and LexisNexis. In addition, given the attrition rate in the legal field, this conclusion seems to apply to most of my classmates. Even if I were in the position to make such a decision, I doubt the gift cards that I won while in law school would affect my decision… unless they gave me a car, which then would make me a lifetime customer.

In my case, until I started the law librarianship program, I have used neither LexisNexis nor Westlaw electronic services since I graduated law school. My first two jobs did not require it and I could not afford it as a solo. The times that I did need to research anything outside a state statute, I was told “we keep it old school” by my managing attorney, which meant I had to walk to the public law library and crack open a book.

So now, I am sitting in an Advance Legal Research class preparing to learn my future craft, which includes an expert proficiency of both Westlaw and LexisNexis. On our first research assignment I logged into LexisNexis to look up my first case, but instead all I got was a screen that stated that the “document was not available” because it was not “within the subscription agreement.” I then tried another citation, which produced the same result. Eventually I just gave up and just used the tried and true old-school method.

Two weeks later, we had a LexisNexis representative visit our class to give us a basic functionality presentation. However, as she was giving us the presentation, all we could do was watch, because a lot of what she was demonstrating we did not have access to. Eventually one of my classmates figured out the problem, the search did not allow us to enter cases by code, only by name. I know how absurd that sounds, but it is true.

Now I completely understand that these services cost a lot of money even for law schools, and it is LexisNexis right to limit access due to cost – which I guess is a large part of the problem. However, I think that LexisNexis needs to take into careful consideration of our demographic when they determine licensing agreements.

I, as most of my classmates, will have a greater chance to influence vendor decisions than most law students will. Further, over the course of our careers, we are more likely to be the heaviest users of electronic legal databases. Most of all, given the size of the enrollment of all the Law Librarianship programs put together, it just seems that LexisNexis and Westlaw could make concessions without breaking the bank. I would bet that the maybe hundreds of library students in law programs across the country will have more influence over their profits than the ten of thousands of law students that they cater to every day.

In order to be a good law librarian, I realize that I will need to have expert knowledge in both LexisNexis and Westlaw’s products and services. However, at this time my class performance trumps my willingness to find workarounds to LexisNexis’ shortcomings. If Google Scholar, Westlaw or the old-school method produces a better work product, then that is what I am most likely to use. When I graduate and move on, the database that I will advocate for is the one I am most comfortable using, and frankly, LexisNexis does not seem to want to be in that race.

I’ve been reading Toby’s last two posts about the questionable financial state of law firms (The Fall of the Legal Cartels? and Warren Buffett Puts Another Nail in the Law Firm Coffin) and wondering to myself “Come on Law Firm Management, do you really not see your future? Do you really not get how current cost and compensation models are one-way tickets in the wrong direction? I know lawyers are slow to change, but we’ve been living in a new economic world for quite some time now, and we’re still billing by the hour on most matters? Still giving bonuses based on hours worked? Really?”

So why exactly is it that law firm partners and management haven’t been persuaded to change their models? I’ve been reading the same articles and statistics that you have that explain that clients aren’t pushing hard enough, and that partners are afraid of losing their current levels of profit. I get that. But isn’t making sure your business doesn’t go out of business next year right up there in priority with making sure your income this year remains high? And yet partners and management on the whole are not acting in ways consistent with a recognition that models need to change for business to survive. There are little inroads here and there, but those are still considered the exceptions to the rule, not a new and revised rule.
What is the sticking point? I believe it is not just a desire for profit, but a desire for profit combined with an inability to face our own mortality. Individuals never quite believe that they will be harmed by their own bad behavior, even if research and social wisdom tell them otherwise; so they behave in a slew of self-destructive ways because of the “It will never happen to me” syndrome. Similarly, law firm partners who are enjoying past profits never really believe that the vice of hourly billing and compensating is going to threaten their existence. Even in the face of others’ deaths, human beings still assume that they are somehow special or better or different and are immune to whatever befell the others. So too no law firm, deep in its heart, believes it is going to dissolve and therefore the incentive to take a risk and threaten a significant-profit model just doesn’t exist.
I suspect that nothing short of the likes of a BodyWorlds exhibit — putting the inner workings of a dissolved law firm on display next to that of a successful one, like the smoker’s lung next to the non-smoker’s — will shake the way law firm owners and managers think. But when those owners and managers do realize the very real possibilities of losing clients, losing business, and losing existence, they will also appreciate that they have the power to change their future.

Warren Buffett, the quintessential capitalist, was recently quoted:

“[t]he single most important decision in evaluating a business is pricing power. If you’ve got the power to raise prices without losing business to a competitor, you’ve got a very good business. And if you have to have a prayer session before raising the price by 10 percent, then you’ve got a terrible business.”

These statements exposes Buffett’s core strategy in picking winning companies. His point is that most any other deficiency in a business can be overcome by the simple ability to raise prices without losing business. Law firms, to their great misfortune, currently lack the ability to raise prices and in many circumstances the market is actually lowering them.
I’ve previously contemplated the Perfect Economic Storm law firms are in, citing 1) the transition to a competitive market, 2) the Great Recession, and 3) the accelerating impact of technology. I think Mr. Buffett is spot-on with his statement and as such will now add this fourth factor to the Perfect Storm. Given Mr. Buffett’s deep understanding of markets, the pricing factor may well be the most influential.
Not wanting to leave our readers on a completely negative note, Mr. Buffett did add the following statement to his assessment, which may give law firms some level of optimism:

“The extraordinary business does not require good management.”

In chatting with my boss / colleague / mentor about the economic state of the legal industry, we stumbled on an interesting analogy. We were discussing the recent CT TyMetrix Real Rate report and the fact that the number one driver of differences in billing rates is a lawyer’s location. We concluded that law firms still live like its 2005 and base their billing rates on a lawyer’s comp instead of their value. So lawyers in NY and LA will have higher rates than those in Denver or Dallas. And this all hinges on the very standard market level of pay for new associates in each jurisdiction.
This lead us to the thought that law firms have been acting in an informal cartel. Previously I have written about the “Monopoly” of the legal profession, but in many respects “Cartel” is a better moniker.
The purpose of a cartel is controlling pricing such that commoditized products and services can be priced at non-commodity levels, enabling the realization of higher levels of profit. You see this behavior on the in-bound side of firms in how associates salaries have been set in the market. And you see it on the out-bound side in how billing rates were increased in a similar lock-step fashion over the past 20 years.
The legal industry has been able to support this informal cartel subject to demand increasing at a faster rate than supply. About 5 years ago this balance began to shift. The shift is a result of a greater supply of lawyers entering the market and the impact of new technologies. The Great Recession accelerated these forces, putting us in our current situation.
The crazy thing is that so many firms continue to treat the market as if the cartel is still in place. Once the economy started to turn-around, firms went right back to their former associate hiring and pay model. And they continue with their old-school compensation models. They only thing that hasn’t gone back to “normal” is the way they raise billing rates and bill hours in a relatively unchecked fashion.
Bottom-line this means firms are using the cartel model in how they managed the price of inputs, but they no longer control the price of the outputs. The results of this type of behavior are obvious yet remain elusive to many law firm leaders.
Ultimately all cartels breakdown under the strain of market pressures. Only under normal circumstances, the market players are aware when this has happened.

[Note: There has been an update on the status of the Archives Library that says that they will not be abolishing it. Please see the ALA Update.]

The Archivist of the United States (AOTUS), David Ferriero, wrote that the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is facing a funding situation where they are “Doing More With Less.” An 8.2% decrease in funding for FY2012 means some hard decisions have to be made, one of which is the abolishment of the National Archives Library.

Bernadine Abbot Hoduski, well-respected Government Documents Librarian, and founder of the Government Documents Roundtable (GODORT) in 1972, send out this email to the GOVDOC-L listserv, and I asked her if I could reprint it here to help get her message out about what happens to the actual material held in the National Archives Library. Bernadine points out something that we all know happens during economic downturns that cause governments to begin cutting services:

As we all know as librarians, libraries are often the first to be cut in an economic crisis. We also know that once the resources in these libraries are lost they are almost impossible to replace.

I’ve taken the liberty of including some links when possible, and placing some of her key questions in bold-face type, and hope that AOTUS would address these issues as soon as possible.


[Note: There is an update from ALA that seems to contradict the initial NARA memo. I’ve placed it at the end of this post. I’ll keep you updated if any new information comes out of NARA clarifying the closure and layoffs that were initially announce.]

Hello All,

The Archivist of the United States has issued Memo 2011-113, which announces the abolishment of the National Archives Library by the end of this fiscal year.

I went to the NARA site and found the Archives Library Information Center (ALIC) to find the number and jobs of the staff and the services provided. This center is heavily used by historians, genealogists and others. Check it out yourself.
The library is part of the by-law program run by GPO and is entitled to all the government publications issued through the GPO. The library collects publications such as phone directories and other publications that concern personnel. These types of publications usually do not go to depository libraries or if they are, they are discarded when the new edition is issued. NARA keeps those older editions and these are invaluable to researchers and genealogists as well as agency historians. Since some of the planning for the future of the depository library program has depended upon back up collections at NARA and LC and the national
libraries, it is important to know what will happen to the collections held by ALIC. 
  • Will [the collections held by ALIC] be kept by NARA and sent to other units or will they be discarded? 
  • Will librarians throughout the world be able to borrow those publications and will they be able to send researchers to NARA in DC to do research? 

The staff at ALIC have provided excellent service and have created on line tools to help researchers more easily find both government documents and other resources.

  • Who will provide this service once these librarians are gone?

It is important to know what will happen to RG 287 (This is the collection of several million government documents collected and cataloged by GPO. The collection was transferred from the Department of Interior in 1895 to GPO and was organized by Adelaide Hasse. It was transferred to NARA by GPO in 1972 so it would be permanently protected as government records). RG287 is under the control of NARA Legislative Archives. It is not clear where RG287 is housed and whether it is kept as one unit or scattered among various units of NARA. It is not clear as to who is providing service to this collection. It would make sense to transfer library staff most familiar with government documents to legislative archives so that the nation can continue to benefit from the expertise and knowledge of librarians at NARA. As we all know as librarians, libraries are often the first to be cut in an economic crisis. We also know that once the resources in these libraries are lost they are almost impossible to replace.

I have listed the names and positions of the library staff below along with the memo from the Archivist. Please send this message on to your state association listservs and other organizations.

Bernadine Abbott Hoduski

National Archives Library (ALIC) abolished – Archivist Memo 2011-113
7 positions to be eliminated:
Current Library employees:
  1. Jeff Hartley [Chief Librarian]
  2. Carolyn Gilliam [Reference]
  3. Randall Fortson [Reference A2]
  4.  Torin Pollock [Technician]
  5. Melissa Copp [Cataloger]
  6. Nancy Wing [Reference head A1] (Military)
  7. Tim Syzek [Reference (Military)]
  8. Marquetta Troy [Technician]
  9. Maryellen Trautman [Documents Cataloger-By Law] 
Bernadine Abbott Hoduski

AOTUS listed these links for more information on the budget for NARA and the plans that are in place right now:

[Update: From ALA Governmental Information Subcommittee]

New Post: “Update on the National Archives Library Information Center”
By Jessica McGilvray
—— Update on the National Archives Library Information Center
In the last couple of days there has been much concern about the status of the National Archives Library Information Center (ALIC).  The National Archives will be putting out an official statement on the issue, but in the meantime I was able to speak with David McMillen the External Affairs Liaison at the National Archives.  He assured me that the library is not closing and the collection would remain accessible by the public.  There are going to be changes to the library.  Due to budget constraints the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) will be merging library services with other services.  This means that:

  • The library will remain open and staffed and public access will remain
  • The library collection will remain intact (with the exception of the bound serial set being moved because the library has purchased an online version).
  • Like most libraries facing budget cuts, acquisitions will be substantially reduced.
  • Seven positions will be reassigned, not laid off.  Some of those people may be providing library reference within a different unit, but it is too soon to say where people will be assigned.
  • The records management process with the Government Printing Office will not be affected by this merge.

Jessica McGilvray
To view this Post in Connect, go to http://connect.ala.org/node/131094.

It seems reality continues to encroach on the practice of law. Announced this week in the UK is “a bid to create the first solicitors franchise.” The idea is to create a standard platform of back-office systems and services and then franchise that out as a law firm platform to different locations and markets. The initial focus will be on “small private client law firms” which I read as more of a retail-law play.
IT people take note, “that key to the project’s success will be a software package ….” This suggests that technology has to be a key driver of efficient, standardized (read quality) legal services.
I am guessing the Legal Services Act is a driver or enabler of some sort for this idea, as it involves fee sharing on some level.
Good idea? Absolutely. This will drive competitively priced legal services in the market.
Will it fly in the US? Not yet, due to the fee sharing angle. But in my humble opinion, the US should be figuring the whole Legal Services Act idea out and replicating here. It’s either that or let the some other type of provider take over in the market.
I’m just sayin …

Big firm Library Director, Jean O’Grady, launched her new blog “Dewey B Strategic” yesterday, and immediately went after the inefficient processes of legal publishing vendors and says that it is time to shift those costs back to the publishers. Anyone that has ever talked with O’Grady knows that she’s not afraid to step up and point out when something doesn’t smell right. This time around she’s set her sights on some of the basic problems that law firm librarians have dealt with for years, and says that it is time to start billing these time and money wasting processes back to those vendors.

Here’s a list of a few items that O’Grady thinks need to be cleaned-up, modernized, or eliminated:

  • Loose-leaf filing
  • Billing and shipping errors
  • Bill process and coding
  • Forced bundling of print and digital content
According to O’Grady:

Publishers verbally profess their support for the value of law librarians while simultaneously enmeshing our organizations in a host of unsustainable business methods. I find special irony in noting that one major publisher has acquired an LPO business and is selling process improvement to lawyers while its print publishing operation is guilty generating some of the back office inefficiencies afflicting law firm libraries.

I think I heard a chorus of “Amens” from the law librarian pews.

I look forward to seeing more good stuff from Jean and the Dewey B Strategic blog.

[Note: This is part three of a three-part guest-series on Practice Support Lawyers (PSL) and the emergence of PSLs in the United States from our guest-blogger, Ian Nelson.]

PSLs in the US – A Way Forward
So how should US firms adapt and refine the PSL model?  The UK experience has shown that large numbers of PSLs are not the answer.  A team that is too small but expected to create everything inhouse does not have the bandwidth to make a meaningful impact.

The PSL role should be less about creating standard, or generic, resources, and more about focusing on firm-specific materials and expertise.  The ideal situation is for firms to outsource the standard materials, for PSLs to focus on firm-specific materials and expertise and for technology to provide the most efficient way to search for and categorize the content.

Of course, many firms have stories of trying to create standard resources.  However, most partner feedback I’ve heard is that these projects fall apart when deals heat up and it is difficult to get senior lawyers to dedicate the necessary time.  Without a sufficient number of professionals dedicated to this on a daily basis, the reality is that it won’t get done.

The ideal PSLs are senior attorneys who are known and respected by their practice group that act as knowledge brokers and thought leaders.  The attorneys have someone to whom they can download their deal knowledge and the PSLs are able to recognize what’s worth recycling back around to the group. The PSLs can also identify the best memos their group is preparing and turn these into enduring products for the group.  Ultimately, the PSLs sit at the heart of the group they support.

Summary
The PSL role is growing in importance in the US as the old way of doing things is gone forever.  To maximize the success and efficiency of the PSL, US firms should take a close look at the UK model and how it developed to apply those lessons from the word go.

We’ve all probably sat through those “60 Apps in 60 Minutes” programs at a conference and watched as a bevy of applications flew past us on the screen. Those are cool, but what how many of those do we actually use when we get back to our office? So, we’ve asked you to share with us any apps you use for work and why it helps you do your job, and you didn’t disappoint!

We have suggestions for Blackberry (which is probably still the “standard” mobile tech for lawyers these days, iPhone, iPad, and Androids. So, get your mobile devices ready for some new apps to try out and let us know if we missed a good one or two.

Next week’s Elephant Post question is at the bottom of this post, so make sure you take a look and share your perspective with us.

Lawyer Perspective
Dropbox for Blackberry plus Docs to Go

I use this so that I can sync documents that I may need to look at on the road.  Documents to go gives a more readable format to many of these documents.  While the BB screen is still small, as a solo, I can’t be totally out of touch when out of the office so the combination of Dropbox and Documents to Go is great.

Lawyer Perspective
Twitter’s App

Twitter lets me keep up with science websites.  Since I can no longer devote the time scouring journals, this is a great way to stay somewhat informed and access the articles I am specifically interested.

CCO Perspective
Email

Scoop of chocolate, Scoop of vanilla. Email is still the most important mobile app.
The bulk of business communication runs through email. If you can’t get email on your mobile device, you’re not leaving the office. It’s why blackberries are still so prevalent. They have a great email app.

Online Marketing Perspective
AT&T Code Scanner

Well, I wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t use all the usual suspects but I thought I would mention my latest favoritest: AT&T Code Scanner.
Used to read QR and datamatrix codes and 1D bar codes found in print publications, it links me straight to the related web site.
Totally cool, I have to credit Mr. Robert Downey, Jr. and Esquire magazine for turning me on to this coolest of the cool features. See my post “Are You Ready to Augment Your Reality?”

Doctoral Candidate in Legal Informatics Perspective
Omnifocus

The Omnifocus app allows me to keep track of my tasks and sort them according to teaching, researching, writing reports, supervising thesis, blogging, etc. By using different views or perspectives, I can present the task according to my whereabouts and deadlines, so I am not constantly overwhelmed by the amount of to-do’s.
In addition, I can sync all tasks between my iPhone, iPad, iMac and MacBook which allows me to access them anytime and anywhere.

KM Attorney Perspective
Mindo

Mindo is an iPad version of common mind-mapping tools.  A consultant on one of my projects started mind-mapping a conversation we were having one day and I was shocked at how useful it was to see our thoughts being displayed as inter-connected nodes on a screen and moreso how often I refered back to the map in the coming days. Since then we have instituted mind-mapping as part of standard project planning process.
Mindo is great because it mimics most of what the desktop applications do, but of course, is mobile. Ideas and concepts can be color-coded, shaped or linked across the map.  Whole sections can be relocated and bring their related concepts along with them. As ideas come to me on my commute, waiting for a flight, or late at night I can jot them down and then map out how certain things are related to each other, where dependencies lie or missing pieces need to be filled in. Mindo can then output your map as an image, a pdf or in the common mindmap file forms used by the much more expensive desktop solutions. It is Dropbox and email friendly from within the App. All this for $7.

Information Pro Perspective
Chromemarks Lite
David Whelan

Chromemarks is an Android app that synchronizes my Google Bookmarks to my phone.  Since I use Chrome on multiple computers, I can keep my bookmarks sync’d up between browsers on Google Bookmarks.  Chromemarks extends that so when I’m away from my PCs, I can still quickly get to bookmarked information.

Knowledge Management Perspective
TripCase

TripCase is a great (and free!) travel app – it keeps your travel itinerary in one place; automatically tracks your flights and sends you alerts; updates your gate and baggage carousel information automatically; when you input a hotel it automatically pulls in the contact information, check in & check out times, and other key info; provides weather, maps, and directions; allows you to enter information for flights, hotels, car rentals, activities, meetings, restaurants, and more; and allows you to send copies of your full itinerary to others. I’ve noticed a few limitations (can’t remember what those are right now), but I find the UI very simple and appealing, and most importantly — I’ve found it to be more up-to-date and accurate with flight delays and gate information than the airlines’ websites or even announcements at the airport!

IT Perspective
iThoughtsHD

The coolest app I use for work is called iThoughtsHD which is basically MindMap for iPad.   iThoughtsHD is a very powerful tool for getting ideas out of your head and onto “”virtual paper””.  MindMapping is great way to  brainstorm and we use all the time to flush out ideas.  The iPad version is simple to use and very effective.  You even have the ability to share your maps via DropBox, email, wifi, mobileme, etc.

Lawyer Perspective
Twitter for Blackberry

I use Twitter for Blackberry to keep up with my tweets while on the go.  It has helped me network for our firm, get media coverage and exposure for our cases and legal issues we are experts on, and has helped me start to promote my own business Stacey E. Burke, PC (site to come).

Next Week’s Elephant Post

What Legal News Resources do you read to keep up with industry news that affects your profession?

I have the wonderful job of researching dozens (maybe hundreds?) of different legal rags everyday. There are definitely some good legal news resources out there, and we thought we’d let you share a few of your favorites with us. For example, I enjoy the Osmosys Legal Industry Monitor for generic legal news (plus it is FREE!!) So, let us know what it is that you read when you sit down at your desk each morning. We try to make this easy by embedding the form to fill out, but of course, you can email me your answer, or DM it to me in a 140 characters of less. (really, just fill out the form below and make it easy on  me!!) If you need to see the form in another browser window, or see what others have answer, then you can click the links below, but really, just  fill out the stinkin’ form!!

Yesterday, I was skimming through my RSS reader and came across the post from Thomson Reuters’ Legal Current blog entitled “The Game” stuns attendees at legal marketing awards program. The more I read and watched, the more my mind was blown. The folks at Legal Current do a great job of describing, in detail, what the Dutch Law Firm of Houthoff Buruma, along with Ranj Serious Games, are doing in “The Game”, but basically, it is a way to test the mental agility of the players when confronted with a complex international legal issue. Houthoff Buruma even brings in some of its client’s in-house counsel to compete against its associates in a friendly battle of wits.

“The Game” was awarded the Excellence in Legal Marketing Award by Thomson-Reuters and Hubbard One in co-operation with the Hildebrand Institute, but is seen as recruiting and training tool as much as it is seen as a marketing tool. Gretchen De Sutter, at Legal Current, gives some pretty high praise to Houthoff Buruma when she says, “Firms in the US are in general ahead of European law firms when it comes to marketing approach. It’s nice to hear the enthusiastic jury report of how they visualize that “The Game” should even be applied to Law Schools.”

Here’s the video that describes “The Game,” it is well worth a watch to see how the concept of interactive training can enhance the ability to train and test attorneys (although you don’t have to be an attorney to play it), and the possibilities that are out there to test potential recruits on how quickly they can think on their feet.