Sifteo has launched what it calls “The alternative game system for truly hands-on play” with its 1.5 inch computer cubes that play off of each other, connect to your computer and detect motion. It is definitely a different approach to gaming and it will be interesting to see if it takes off. When I watched the video, four thoughts popped into my head:

  1. Is this where Expedia got the idea for those cubes in their commercials?
  2. This is what a 21st Century Rubix Cube would look like (wonder if they’ll invent a holder to make a bunch of them work as a Rubix Cube?? That would be awesome!!)
  3. How long will it be before someone calls the IT Department and asks if someone will come up and install the drivers for it?
  4. I wonder if I could hack it and make it a mini-RSS feed reader??
Now, excuse me while I see if that third cube is stuck between the cushions of the couch…

I know that the Law Librarian Blog gets plenty of traffic all on its own, but I wanted to lead as many 3 Geeks’ readers over to the LLB for an excellent post from Bryan Carson called “Time to Reinstate the FTC’s Guidelines for the Law Book Publishing Industry.” Carson lays out some of the details surrounding the 2000 repeal of the FTC’s Guidelines for the Law Book Publishing Industry (.doc), and how since the repeal, publishers (not just legal publishers) have fallen back to tactics that the Guidelines were specifically set up to prevent.

Carson points out that the “revocation was taken despite the fact that every single comment received by the public cited the necessity of these guidelines and recommended that they be continued.” He goes on to list some of the abuses that were going on in 1969 (via Raymond Taylor’s 1975 article New Protection for Law Book Users) that prompted the need for the Guidelines’ creation in 1975. See if any of these look familiar:

  • Putting new titles and new binders on old materials (particularly looseleaf items);
  • Including the same book in two different series;
  • Overpricing supplements and issuing new editions rather than supplementing;
  • Issuing misleading advertisements (particularly in terms of works designated as “new,” “revised,” or “enlarged”);
  • Using unnecessarily expensive bindings and formats;
  • Putting local names on books that are not truly local;
  • Adding remotely related books to established sets to assure their automatic sale;
  • Failing to advertise prices of major items;
  • Failing to issue supplements for books that otherwise will soon be obsolete;
  • Issuing treatises in looseleaf form; and
  • Failing to put correct printing date on republished books.
Carson calls for a couple of actions steps needed to correct these types of abuses in 2011.
  1. Reinstating the FTC Guidelines for Law Book Publishers
  2. Expanding the FTC Guidelines beyond Law Book Publishers to include other specialized fields such as the medical industry and other fields that have limited choices in their selection of necessary publications
  3. Seek antitrust exemptions for all library organizations and allow them to ban together in order to give “teeth” to their existing guidelines (which, ironically because of antitrust laws, prevents them from enforcing those guidelines through boycotts or other collaborative efforts.)
It is a provocative read, and one in which I ask that those of you that buy materials from law book publishers would step out of your comfort zone and comment upon – either here, at the LLB post, on law-lib, or at a minimum, call or email a colleague to discuss the issue and think about what needs the next steps taken in addressing this issue. Inaction does not make any problems go away.


Well, gang, it is that time of year: tax season.Yeah, I know. There is one big collective groan from those now conscious after the New Year.But let me give you a little motivational story, full of inspiration and good cheer.We are living at the foot of the apex of the computer age.We are, for all intents and purposes, looking at a time in history which mimics the great Industrial Age with leaders like Carnegie, Rockefeller and others.Now, our gazillionaires, Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffet and Crowley, are mimicking their forbearers.Zuckerberg stepped up to the Giving Pledge, an organization created by Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates, promising to pass on the majority of his wealth to charity, joining George Lucas, Steve Case and others.A few days after hearing this news, I heard another story on one of my favorite radio programs: Engines of Ingenuity. Andy Boyd remarked on the “unbridled technological advancement” occurring during the mid 19th century.He asked, “Could society continue on its present course, or were fundamental changes needed?”Nineteenth century social critic Thomas Carlyle penned is response in his work, Past and Present.Yes, they could. By “denouncing their “vulturous hunger for fine wines … and gilt carriages,” they would rise to eliminate the “squalor,… hunger, rage and sooty desperation” of the working classes.I heard that one of the Foursquare co-founders also donated a substantial amount of his wealth (I can’t find the story now; so it is just fodder. But nice fodder).Seeing these young kids do this kind of thing gives me hope. Oh, yeah, I’m sure someone’s going to tell me their conspiracy theory or try slime all over my good feelings. Please. For now, keep it to yourselves. Let me enjoy myself for a moment. There are good people interested in making a better future. It inspired me to do the same in my own geeky way.So give. Give generously. Pick your favorite online charity, give money to Wikipedia or RefDesk or whatever. Heck, I don’t care who you give your money to. Just make sure that this planet keeps on spinning.After all, it could be tax deductible.

AALL is accepting nominations for new products that are valuable to library services. “New Product” is being defined as having been in the market for less than two years, or has been substantially changed during that time. So, if there’s a great product that you’ve brought into your library, you should seriously think about submitting that product for the award. Just off the top of my head, I could think of a few products out there that are worthy of submitting… the Fastcase iPad app (the iPhone app won last year)… WestlawNext… QR Code generators…or perhaps something that not many of us have heard of, but you find useful… like one of my favorite products, InfoNgen… or, perhaps you’ve seen something we’ve reviewed here at 3 Geeks??

Got any other suggestions?? Put ’em in the comments below, and then go fill out the application and submit it by January 31st!!

AALL New Product Award

Have you discovered any great new library products this past year?  If so, let us know! It is time to nominate these products for AALL’s New Product Award.

The New Product Award honors a new and innovative commercial legal information product that enhances or improves existing law library services and/or procedures. New products may include, but are not limited to, printed material, computer hardware and/or software, or other products or devices that aid or improve access to legal information, the legal research process, or procedures for technical processing of library materials. Any product that has been re-introduced in a new format or with substantial changes is also eligible. A new product is one that has been in the library-related marketplace for two years or less.

All AALL members are encouraged to think about the exciting new information products being used in their libraries and to send us their nominations for this award. Interested vendors may also self-nominate their new products.  Recipients of the New Product Award need not hold membership in AALL.  Nominations can be sent by mail to the address below or via email.

To Submit a Nomination for the 2011 Award
Nomination forms can be found on the CRIV website under the New Product Award tab or at http://www.aallnet.org/committee/criv/news/newproductform.pdf. The deadline for receipt of submissions is January 31, 2011.

Librarian Nominations
If you are a librarian nominating a product, please give as much information about the product as possible. The New Product Awards Subcommittee will contact the publisher of the product for any further information required.

Vendor/Publisher Nominations
If you are a vendor or publisher nominating a hardcopy product, please submit the form along with a sample product, if available. If you are nominating a Web-based or online product, please submit the form with all necessary contact information, including URL(s) and temporary login and password information.

For hardcopy products, brochures, and/or any other materials, we recommend that you send four copies for the New Product Award Subcommittee and the AALL Awards Committee.

Please send completed forms and documents to:

Michelle Cosby
Faculty Services Librarian
North Carolina Central University School of Law
640 Nelson Street
Durham, NC 27707
919.530.5241 (Office)
919.530.7926 (Fax)
mcosby@nccu.edu

The deadline for submissions is January 31, 2011.  

Applications are available through this link

http://www.aallnet.org/committee/criv/news/newproductform.pdf

In the last post in this series on law firm profitability, we examined the implications of shifting from a cost-plus business model to a margin model for law firms. The bottom-line is that firms need to reduce the number of hours it takes to provide a service, and/or reduce the average cost per hour for the same service. For both law firms and clients alike, this means getting more for less – a theme that permeates our world these days.
Part 1 – How to Reduce the Number of Hours
The theme-du-jour for this topic is Legal Project Management (LPM). The basic claim is that project management can drive efficiencies in how matters are managed. This claim makes a number of assumptions, the primary one being that some plan exists. This “plan” will be executed well through the use of LPM. Without a plan that outlines efficiencies and reductions in hours used, LPM gets you nowhere. So … where do these plans come from? Presumably the Project Managers (PMs) will participate as ‘Planning’ is step 2 from PMBOK. PMs will sit down with lawyers and draw up a plan showing how resources will be spent to meet both the budget and legal goals of a matter. Here is where a significant challenge arises. The PMs’ role is not really about process innovation which is an effort to redefine plans. They may play a role, but it is not their focus or skill set. At times they identify problems in a process, however, correcting these problems is only their job within the context of a given plan. Others have addressed this difference via discussions on Six Sigma and other process improvement methodologies. My 2 cents – LPM has enough challenges of just keeping lawyers on a plan , so they won’t have the time (nor expertise) to serve as process improvement people as well. So LPM will only be as a good as the plans and processes lawyers already use. Subject to some tinkering with a plan, LPM will only advance the ball so far. As I like to say, LPM will be necessary, but not sufficient to address this challenge.
One potential exception: Partners could look at PM as a way to re-examine matter staffing. Instead of sending one partner and two associates to conduct a deposition, they could send one senior associate. This approach will cut the number of hours and could easily produce the same, or an acceptable level of service quality. However, I see this outcome as unlikely. What is a more likely outcome from such an exercise is one partner conducting the deposition, if the choice is actually made to reduce the number of hours. It is more likely since comp systems motivate the hoarding of billable hours. It is unsustainable since partner time generates little to no profit. Since partners will be motivated by self-interest instead of firm financial interest (a.k.a. profitability), they will most likely not take full advantage of this opportunity.
In contrast, process improvement and innovation holds tremendous potential for reducing the number of hours used in delivering a service. This effort is about identifying wasteful and/or repeatable processes, and then implementing new processes to eliminate the waste, and automate wherever possible. The business world is awash in ideas for meeting these goals. Six Sigma is a more recent, well defined approach. One firm (Seyfarth) has taken this method on, although it’s outcomes are yet to be seen. To law firms’ benefit, most legal work is handled within a loosely defined process. Of course, some processes are better defined than others. But at a minimum there is usually a process to follow, be it a case (note the rules of procedure) or a deal, following due diligence, negotiating, etc, or perhaps the best examples: regulatory filings. Although, with rare exceptions, most of these processes are not defined as such within law firms. This identifies a valuable role for LPM – building the first process descriptions via the plans they develop.
Eliminating Waste
Wasteful process or effort is that which produces low value results. Lawyers will find this exercise very challenging, since they tend to think all effort is valuable. This is a legacy of the ‘no stone unturned’ education, training and practice they have experienced. It is also the product of the ethics framework of the law. “Representing your client’s best interest” implies an exhaustive search for the truth, regardless of cost. In other words, they tend to think all depositions have the same value, since any one of them could lead to the discovery of the ‘smoking gun.’ In reality, there is a cost/benefit decision to be made for all legal tasks. This mind-set will need to take a more prominent role in defining legal processes. This is how waste will best be identified, then eliminated or reduced, resulting in fewer hours on a matter.
Using Automation
Automation will be the long term, best effort for reducing the hours involved. We have previously posted examples of this idea on 3 Geeks. KIIAC’s tool is one that demonstrates the power of this approach. This system actually displaces time currently spent by lawyers doing relatively menial tasks. This automation effort will also be a challenge for lawyers to accept. Much like the e-discovery world, it will take some time for lawyers to develop trust in the automation technologies. Although this time-frame is accelerating there, evidenced by the relatively quick embrace of predictive coding. Lawyers will also bristle a bit at the thought of technology replacing them, given their self-interest and their role as knowledge workers. However, e-discovery has clearly demonstrated both the necessity of embracing technology and its value in automating tasks. It would be physically impossible for lawyers to review all discovery content today. As well, they would be much less effective than technology, since they cannot hold all of that information in their heads at one time. Bottom-line here: automation will be a highly effective tool for reducing time in legal work. And it will become a necessity as it proves itself out.
Process innovation will be necessary and sufficient in order to lower the cost of delivery of legal services. This will be an on-going, never-ending effort, as most any business can attest to now.
Law firms looking to reduce hours of effort, would do well to; 1) define their processes through LPM, 2) identify wasteful or redundant efforts and reduce or eliminate them, and then 3) explore automation technologies that will enable long-term sustainable reductions in the costs of delivering services.
Part 2 of this discussion will explore reducing the average cost of time. There will be some overlap of ideas, so a convergence of the two will be provided as well.

Back in 2010, the 3 Geeks decided to try out advertising on our blog. Onit, a legal project management provider, was our first advertiser. We were a bit cautious about going down this path. Our initial and on-going intention for the blog was not about getting rich. Mainly we’re having fun exploring ideas in various realms.
So for 2011 we have decided to try something different on the blog. We will be giving select vendors free advertising space on the blog. We will keep the single advertising spot we currently have, but give it free of charge to a select vendor each month. Primarily we want to encourage the growth of smaller, local and regional providers. But we’ll keep an open mind for others.
So if you are interested in taking advantage of the 3 Geeks, send us a note with a request and the reason(s) you think your company worthy of a spot.

A big shout out to everyone that voted for us over the past month.

The ABA Journal has announced the top winners in each category and we Three Geeks of Online are floored by the love and affection that you have bestowed on us.
I can’t tell you how amazing it is to see how something that started off on a whim after a whiney lunch with colleagues has turned into such a fun, rewarding and spectacular showcase for some of the brightest minds in the business.
I have nothing but admiration for my fellow Geeks.
GEEKS RULE!!!

I have a few questions to ask AALL members that are inspired by both the SLA project I wrote about yesterday, and from Joe Hodnicki’s post on New Year’s Day that takes AALL to task about using blogs to get information out more quickly to its membership. Hodnicki specifically focuses on the Committee on Relations with Information Vendors (CRIV) and the Executive Board – which I will join as a member in July. I’ll point out a couple of issues that he makes, but I encourage all AALL members to read Joe’s post, and contact me directly on what you think AALL and/or CRIV should do to better serve the membership of the organization.

Here’s a snippet of what Joe thinks about why AALL has “failed” in using blogs as a method of consumer advocacy:

It is a fair assessment to characterize 2010 as the year AALL failed to use the blogging platform for consumer advocacy after the example set by many law librarians in this web space, as if an example even needed to be set.
… the only reasons I am left thinking that AALL officialdom does not want to or has no intention of creating a “home base” for the vendor-buyer relationship in the blogpshere must be because either (1) they simply do not want to frankly address these matters which are important to the membership or (2) their inability to produce substantial results behind closed doors will come to light by addressing them publicly when no response is forthcoming from vendors.

And here’s what Joe thinks a “CRIV-Unleashed” Blog could accomplish:

CRIV is sufficiently large in membership and stable in the duration of membership terms to keep a Vendor Relations group blog going as a long term collaborative effort informed by the opinions of many, not one. Of course, it needs to been more representative of all major market segments. Assuming that, if CRIV-Unleashed regularly publishing content that matters to institutional buyers in a timely manner is the objective, it will acquire an audience and will become a “home base.”
… Our major vendors will read a CRIV-Unleashed blog. Perhaps vendors should be invited to guest write posts on topics CRIV requests them to address. Most vendors have an official policy of not commenting to individual blog posts directly very often. Perhaps they will after too many “vendor X could not be reached or refused to comment” when queried about the topic of this post before its publication.

Now one of the things that I think that even Joe would have to admit is that logistically, it is pretty easy for an individual to snap off a blog post about a current event… it probably isn’t quite a simple for a representative body like CRIV, or whoever talks for “AALL” as a member organization. However, this doesn’t mean it is impossible to do. For example, CRIV puts out the CRIV Sheets on a monthly basis. Could that be changed to a blog format that would allow for faster dissemination of information, along with a comments section that the members could use to ask questions or give their own testimony on an issue? The AALL President releases a monthly email to the membership. Could that be expanded to a blog format as well? Should AALL have a blog similar to the SLA Future Ready 365 blog, that could work as a platform that the members could use to discuss a topic of interest to the organization?

Here are the questions:

  • What are your thoughts on a member-organization like AALL using the blog format to disseminate information, solicit feedback, or be used to enable group discussion of a topic? 
  • Would the Executive Board, or AALL Administrative Staff, or special groups like CRIV use of blog platforms be something that would interest the membership? 
  • Would you read these blogs? 
  • Would you comment on these blogs? 
  • Would you contribute and write on these blogs?

Let me know what you think.

I met with current SLA President, Cindy Romaine, a couple months ago and she told me about her project to launch a member-written blog for SLA members. The goal of the blog is to run for 365 days, with 365 posts describing what individual members are doing to prepare for the future of their industry. I have submitted my own post for the SLA Future Ready 365 blog, and suggest that if you are an SLA member, you should also contribute to this year-long project.

SLA Future Ready 365 Blog Press Release:
Introducing the Future Ready 365 Blog
As leaders of SLA, you’ve all undoubtedly heard about my Future Ready initiative. But how do we turn the initiative into action?
One of the many answers is the Future Ready 365 blog. The idea behind the project is captured in the title: a daily blog post throughout the year of 2011 about how we are an adaptable, resilient, future ready force of information professionals. For a sneak peak visit: futureready365.sla.org.
To make Future Ready 365 a success, we need your collaboration. Your perspective is unique and valuable. We’d like to hear from every corner of the SLA community and beyond. As leaders of SLA, Future Ready 365 needs your contribution for a strong beginning.
How do you contribute? It’s simple.
We need you to provide answers to any of the following questions:
  • How are you Future Ready? What are you doing to provide just what your client needs now and in the future?
  • If you are not ready for the future, what is getting in the way? If you feel stuck, and can identify the issue, we’d like to hear about it. It’s probably something that’s tripping up other members. 
  • Do you have an idea or example from your job of how you’ve become Future Ready? Give yourself a shout out! 
We will launch January 1st.
So far, we have commitments to post for almost every day of January. Your leadership and participation will push us over the top. By committing to one 250-word post, you’re making a world of difference and turning an idea into something tangible. Maybe you’ve got a few blog posts’ worth of ideas? Maybe you’ve got some other forms of media—videos, podcasts, links to articles you’re referring to? Even better!
For now:
  1. Think of ideas that might warrant a Future Ready 365 post.
  2. Ask members to offer their perspectives on becoming future ready information professionals.  
If you’d like to sign up for a certain date, please e-mail your suggested post to futureready365@sla.org at least one week in advance of the day you’ve chosen. Don’t wait, reserve your blog spot for 2011, and start thinking about what you’ll post to Future Ready 365. Join the “Future Ready Begins Today” subgroup of SLA on LinkedIn, and look out for the blog to appear on the SLA homepage on January 1st.
Collaboration means success!
To read share this information with your colleagues, go to: http://slaconnections.typepad.com/leadership_connections/

Happy New Year! It’s the time of the year when everyone is optimistic. When we reevaluate who we are and what we’re doing and almost universally decide that it is not good and it must change. But still, no one says, “this time next year, I’ll be fatter, uglier and make less money”. We all assume next year will be better. It’s also the time of year that pundits publish lists of the great things that happened last year and predictions of the even-greater things that will happen this year. Sure, you occasionally get a Gloomy Gus like this guy, but for the most part predictions are positive and exciting and we are filled with the wonder and possibility of things to come. I’m here to tell you that this year all of the predictions you’ve read, the increased dominance of social media, the new must-have gadgets, and the “I cant believe I was ever able to get any work done at all before I installed these” super-productivity tools, will all come to pass. More or less. Ok, they won’t all exactly come true, but they will all be true in one sense – and here’s where I go out on a limb and make my big prediction for 2011 – this time next year the technology landscape, from gadgets to games, corporate to consumer, will have somewhat changed. What? Not the revelatory prognostication you were hoping for? On the contrary, this is the most exciting news you can imagine. This time next year the techno-verse will either be slightly different than it is today, or wildly different than it is today, but it will not be exactly as it is today. In the face of the CorpTechPocalypse (it is going to happen), this is the single greatest reason for geek optimism. If you are a member of the Tribe Geek, or the Clan Nerd, or (for those fans of Science Friday) the Peabody Gang, then you, my friend, are a Changeling. We live on change. We thrive on change. We are agents of change, explainers of change, and advocates for change. We are change dealers in a world of change junkies. Technology is the medium of change and Changelings are the high priests and priestesses of technology. It is our ability to innovate and our willingness to adapt to change that sets us apart from the rest of the population and makes us indispensable to those who desperately crave change, but are so frightened of it. And this is not a new phenomenon. We are directly descended from the prime geek, Australopithecus Geekerensis, who was the first hominid to slam a rock onto a nut to open it. She didn’t keep this information to herself, she shared it with the less change-loving members of her troupe and soon they were all cracking nuts with a rock. Eventually a younger, somewhat socially awkward, adolescent discovered that placing another rock below the nut before the slam was even more effective. He too shared his discovery with the tribe and the cycle of change had begun with the advent of technology. Bigger brains, better posture and iPads all follow from our proto-geek’s initial fearlessness in the face of change. So my reason for optimism in 2011? It will be different than all the years that came before and the need for Changelings will be greater than ever, in fact, the need for Changelings will never diminish. In the future we may be reallocated or redistributed. We may work for different companies or in different industries. We will most likely be doing something in the future that we can’t even imagine right now. But our particular skill set will always be needed. We are Change. We are Legion. And now that most of our social interactions can be accomplished online, we are finally ready to take over the world. Happy 2011!