According to a Reuter’s article, LexisNexis parent company Reed Elsevier and Wolters Kluwer (CCH’s parent company) are rumored to be in merger talks. Although traders are claiming this is a rumor being spread by Reed Elsevier and most likely will not happen, it is a scary thought for many of us that are already squeezed by a shrinking legal publishing market. The rumors caused both Reed and WK’s stock to jump in European trading by 1.3 and 2.5 percent respectively.

If there is any truth to this rumor, then we’re looking at an even smaller legal publisher market, not just for the US legal market, but for the whole world. How small does the legal publishing market have to shrink before antitrust laws kick in?

Thanks Boss!!

We’ve usually focused on the “negative” when it comes to the Elephant Posts, but this week we wanted to give our contributors a chance to “talk-up” their boss or one of their peers that had an impact on their careers.

What is one thing that you have learned from your boss that has been transformational for you?

This question brought back memories of a job interview I had once, where there was a moment when my potential boss said something to me that he doesn’t remember saying, but I never forgot. Just for fun, I thought I’d do my part this week via video… and a cat… see below to see what I mean. We got a number of responses this week recalling how someone they worked with did or said something that made an impact on them. The Library Perspective Learning To Enjoy The Ride Holly Riccio It is hard to think of one thing learned from my bosses over the course of my career as a law firm librarian, but two things stick out in my mind – one from the beginning of my career and one more recent interaction. The first thing I learned was to be a contributor to the law library community and actively engage with my professional colleagues. This was something I took to wholeheartedly and have never looked back. In fact, before I had even completed my first year of being a professional law, I was running for and then elected to the board of LLAGNY, the Law Library Association of Greater New York. I have continued to be involved in both my local chapter (now NOCALL, the Northern California Association of Law Libraries) and the national association (AALL, the American Association of Law Libraries) and take advantage of as many speaking and writing opportunities as I can find and fit into my life outside of work. It has been one of the most rewarding things about being a law librarian over the years. It has also helped me a number of times in my job, when I have called on a friend or an acquaintance for help finding something obscure or out of my usual realm. It has also provided me with opportunities to hear about other points of view on things or see how other libraries and firms do things and bring those ideas back to my job. The second thing I learned happened more recently and, in some ways, is tangentially related to the first. I was telling a work colleague that I had always had two goals from the moment I became a professional law librarian – one was to be a Library Director at a law firm and the other was to be elected to the board of AALL. I have yet to achieve either of these goals, although I have tried to get elected to the AALL board. (I ran and lost.) I am pretty sure that I will have another opportunity to run, so that one is a work in progress. As for the other goal, the comment I got back when I shared this was unexpected and quite interesting. My colleague started talking about George Clooney’s character in the movie Up In The Air. I haven’t seen the movie, so forgive me if I am not accurate in any of this, but the gist of what he was saying was that very often the thing we most want isn’t all it is chalked up to be once we achieve it, like when Clooney’s character finally reaches the 10 million mile mark for frequent-flyer miles with American Airlines. Now, I do still think that my goal of becoming a Library Director someday is one that will not disappoint me, if and when I am able to achieve it, but I did take something very important from that conversation. What I took from it was an understanding that title isn’t everything and that a lot of what one’s job consists of is what one makes of it. I have always known this, but it really hit me in this moment. What I did as a law librarian at the beginning of my career is so vastly different than what I do today and much of that is in response to how the world of law firms – and law firm libraries – has changed. I have changed as a result and grown and stretched in the process. I have had the opportunity to work on some really wonderful projects and with amazing groups and individuals that traditionally would have been outside of my “library world.” As a result of this conversation, I have resolved that I am going to make the most of any and every opportunity that either comes my way or that I can create and make sure to enjoy the ride a bit more. I am sure that this is where ultimate professional fulfillment truly lies.

Another Library Perspective
Why Do You Want To Limit Yourself To That?

Knowledge Management Perspective Hey Good Lookin’ Ayelette Robinson The best professional advice I’ve heard: Make the people around you look good. These words that were passed along to me encompass so much. Doing your job well is not simply about taking care of your job responsibilities or being a good team player. It’s about appreciating the 360-degree view of what you do and how it affects your colleagues, and providing exemplary (though sometimes invisible) service to those around you so that they shine to their bosses and to their colleagues. For example, doing your job is drafting the document you’re supposed to draft; exemplary service is sending it to your colleague in a mobile-device-friendly format so that she can review it between meetings while out of the office all afternoon and send her thoughts to the other stakeholders before the end of the day, without having to wait until she gets home and has access to a laptop. It’s the difference between the Motel 6 and the Ritz Carlton; you get a bed and a shower either way, but the experience is completely different. For those among us who are not completely selfless, making those around you look good has many long-term benefits: you make those colleagues feel good, which probably makes them better co-workers; they appreciate your work, which builds your relationship with them and encourages them to return the favor; and they remember your work, which is bound to enhance your reputation and open up opportunities that you wouldn’t have even imagined. So whether it’s your boss, your peer, or your supervisor, making those around you look good will make you even better lookin’.

Project Management Perspective There’s Only Two Questions You Need To Ask Toby Brown My boss was able to boil down law firm motivations to two questions.. Initially I found them a bit corny and perhaps over-simplified. However, having weighed these questions against law firm decisions over the past two years, I now hold them as gospel. He state that all firm decisions are driven by two questions. If the answer to either question is yes (or a variation of yes), a law firm will not proceed with a project, proposal or any other decision. The questions are as follows:

  1. Will this embarrass the firm?
  2. Will a partner leave the firm because of this?

Beyond the two questions, which I have found to be very useful, this thinking has fundamentally changed the way I approach ideas and proposals. Instead of over-analyzing and trying to understand all the motivations of everyone involved, I can easily weigh the prospects of a project and proceed accordingly. Simple and elegant. Business Development / Competitive Intelligence Perspective Do… Don’t Just Protect Ann Lee Gibson One of the best quotes I’ve ever heard was from Bill Guthner, Nossaman Managing Partner: “Do your job like you’re willing to lose your job!” Meaning, do your job, don’t just protect your job. Work Environment Perspective Working With, and For Others Karen Sawatzky I had two bosses earlier in my career who made a huge difference in the way I worked. The first, Al Tupper, was a forensic engineer, and I worked as his secretary. He taught me the value of “please” and “thank you”. No matter how trivial the action, he always said please and thank you. While I sometimes forget my own manners, I haven’t forgotten the lesson. The second was Ian Cull. Ian hired me to start up a career resource centre. One day he said, “Hiring smart people makes you look smart.” It took me a moment to realize (a) he was talking about me; and (b) he thought I was smart. He gave me the freedom to do the job as I saw fit. And it taught me what was important to me in my work environment. Internet Marketing Perspective Sunny Side Up, Please Lisa Salazar

Smile. Smile all the time. Smile more

One of my very first bosses told me that I did a great job; she couldn’t flaw me for any of my work. But I came across as too stern. I remembered being surprised by this but then realized that it was an opportunity for some real personal growth. As much as we hate to hear this, people judge us by our appearance. And it isn’t just our clothes. It is our demeanor, our attitude, our–je ne sais quoi–joie de vivre. And it is something that I have to practice every day as a marketer. It has been a real lesson for me. And, speaking as a lawyer who is inclined to be extremely serious, it goes against my nature. But when I found myself moving into marketing, the ability to literally “lighten up” has become more and more important. As a project leader who often has to work across multiple departments and gain consensus on a topic that is extremely subjective (what? web site design subjective? You betcha), smiling has become an important tool in my arsenal. In fact, a Harvard Business Journal article solidified this philosophy and taught me that people would rather work with a lovable star than the incompetent jerk. So turn that frown upside-down! Information Technology Perspective Closing the Loop – 360 Degree Customer View

Scott Preston In this context, closing the loop is a simple customerservice technique that accomplishes several things. Closing the loop gives you, the customerservice representative, an opportunity to make sure that you delivered what wasexpected. It gives you an opportunity tomake sure that no other questions or concerns have gone unanswered since youfirst took ownership of the request/task/project. It gives the customer an opportunity toverify whether he or she is indeed happy with the results and it verifies tothe customer that you understood the request, you cared about his or her needsand you saw the request through to the end. All of this is great stuff and well worth the price of admission, however,this is not the transformative part.

“The transformativepart is the idea that by closing the loop you please the customer and getcredit for the work you have done.”

Many times all the workthat goes into providing the solution goes on behind the scenes. The customer has no idea the effort taken tocomplete the task. You might havediscussed the necessary resources when the project started, but that was anestimate. When closing the loop, youhave a perfect opportunity to share the amount of effort that was given onbehalf of the customer. For even thecrankiest customers, this amount of effort is reassuring.
By closing the loop,you get confirmation from the customer that his or her needs have been met andthat you made sure it happened. Youbuild a stronger relationship and you are seen as a caring customerrepresentative that understands the business.

We are all good atgetting three quarters of the way there, but are we getting the entire 360degree experience? In IT, by the time wehave delivered the solution we were moving on to the next project. This is understandable given the number ofprojects we handle. What is notunderstandable is the lost opportunity to get credit for the work completed. This simple idea has a transformative impacton the delivery of services.

Information Technology Perspective Vision & Opportunity Mac Oparakum Over the years, I’ve come to value one very important lesson – perspective. Charles G. Koch once said “Our vision controls the way we think and, therefore, the way we act … the vision we have of our jobs determines what we do and the opportunities we see or don’t see.” During my days as a support technician, I managed computer-learning labs for several school districts. They had their own culture, technology preferences, policies and budgets. When the State Education Board sanctioned a new learning lab program, I was faced with installing a new solution and implementing the accompanying AppleTalk, EtherTalk, Ethernet or Token-Ring network. Noticing my apprehension, I remember the day when my boss reminded me the end goal was to educate students. I needed to tune the solution to help the students, teachers, and schools leverage new technology towards that goal versus focusing just on the amount of work ahead of me. She was right. As a volunteer at my local church, I lead the visual media team. I recall the day we were hosting a band touring across the United States. Near the end of rehearsal, a passing thunderstorm caused an electrical blackout. When power returned, most of our equipment lost their settings. The leaders of the event gave us “the show must go on” speech because 1000 people were heading our way. We scrambled to reconfigure equipment and the concert continued without a hitch. We made the best of the negative situation and the effort lead to an opportunity to run the control booth with professionals. Earlier this year, my CIO called a meeting to discuss the realities of the New Normal and our need to understand the impact of disruptive technologies. He asked us to read Why the New Normal Could Kill IT (hyperlink: http://bit.ly/d0tNgY) before the meeting. I was enlightened and my CIO’s insight made it clear we need to change the ways we do things. The game changed but my head was still down looking at the playing field. I now raise my head more often to confirm I’m playing the right game. When challenges cross your path, a change in perspective may transform you. Next Week’s Elephant Post Question: We’re going to have some fun with next week’s Elephant Post question, so you’ll need to follow along with my thinking on this. In the movie The Princess Bride, there is an exchange between Vizzini and Inigo Montoya. Vizzini keeps saying “INCONCEIVABLE!!” and Montoya calls him on it:

Vizzini: HE DIDN’T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE!! Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

We’ll modify this somewhat and ask this:

“I think you need to look up the meaning of ________. I don’t think it means what you think it means.”

Share with us your story of someone (a vendor, a colleague, a friend… an enemy) that uses a word, phrase or concept that doesn’t mean what they think it means. If you have such a story, then send me an e-mail to discuss getting it ready for the next Elephant Post.

A recent post from Eric Elfman got me thinking about the ROI of process improvements versus project management for lawyers. Much attention is being given to legal project management (LPM) these days as the savior for attaining efficiency in a legal practice.
Eric’s point is that process improvement will bring more value to lawyers. In his words:
“Most of these (legal) processes are manual, paper intensive and cumbersome but they are effective on the margins. But why couldn’t they be better with technology?”
In one of those odd coincidences, on the heels of Eric’s post I read the updated intro to Susskind’s paperback version of his End of Lawyers? book. He suggests lawyers employ a “legal process manager” with two duties; “legal process analyst and legal project manager. He lists the ‘process’ role as primary, lining up with Eric’s suggestion.
My old rule kicked in: Hear it once – it’s interesting. Hear it twice – pay attention.
At the risk of upsetting the LPM crowd, I am going to side with Eric and push the envelope a bit. Two points:
1) Lawyers already project manage, just not with discipline and to a budget.
2) Within these ‘projects’ there are numerous repeatable processes that are highly manual.
Admittedly improved project management will bring value. But I see this as doing things the same way only better. Marginal efficiencies will be gained.
Whereas process improvement and automation will drive changes to the way things are done. By definition, process improvement means change. I will concede that at some point the ROI on process automation levels out, but there is a lot more air in this bag than the project management one.
My advice: If you’re in KM or IT, watch for process automation opportunities. One example we have already mentioned here at 3 Geeks is the KIIAC product from Kingsley Martin. This is one example of how dramatic a process change can be.
I look forward to more dialog on this subject.

If the plan was to get you to undelete an email from your “junk” folder, the marketing staff at Thomson Reuters’ ProLaw found the perfect one–two email combination to get you to do just that. Here’s what some of us received in our email boxes this morning:

First email subject line:

For a Limited Time, Get an iPod shuffle by Viewing a ProLaw Demo

Second email subject line:

Apologies from ProLaw, a Thomson Reuters Business

Seeing the second email not only made me want to go back and read the original email, it also got me emailing my friends to see if they had seen this ‘goof’ from ProLaw. Some had, some hadn’t, but guess what we’re all talking about this morning??

Now, obviously, this was just one of those SNAFU’s that happen in marketing campaigns from time to time, and it wasn’t ProLaw’s intent to send out the first email to such a wide audience only to have to send out an apology email retracting the offer. However, the fact that it wasn’t intentional doesn’t keep us from poking fun at the mistake, or pointing out that there were some unintended consequences resulting from this error that caused many of us to actually go back and read the first email.

So, for anyone that is marketing a product, and you know people are probably ignoring your emails, perhaps ‘accidentally‘ offering a free iPod in one email and then retracting the offer in a second might be a way to get some eyes back on your product. I’m not saying that it is a ‘good’ way to do it… but it does seem to be effective!!

Side note 1: Everyone I talked to about this was a little disappointed that ProLaw was apparently offering us the old iPod shuffle instead of the snazzy new version. As one geek told me “that is so three months ago!”

Side note 2: Now that I’ve re-read the emails (posted below), I’m wondering if this was more than just marketing using the wrong email list… it seems they have upgraded the SNAFU to a privacy issue rather than just a “we used the wrong mailing list” issue. hmmm…

Second email:

THE SOFTWARE FOR EVERYONE IN YOUR OFFICE
Earlier today, we mistakenly sent you an email that was not intended for you. We sincerely apologize for this error and any confusion or concern that we may have caused you. We take your privacy seriously, and we are putting in new methods to prevent this error from happening in the future.

Thank you for your understanding.

The ProLaw Team, a Thomson Reuters Business
Thomson Reuters. thomsonreuters.com

Original email:

THE SOFTWARE FOR EVERYONE IN YOUR OFFICE
Every firm looks to work more productively. And it can with ProLaw®, the only integrated software solution built from the ground up in a single database to automate the practice and manage the business of law. ProLaw puts all key functions in one place for everyone in the office. If you see a demo by 12/1/10, we’ll send you a FREE iPod shuffle®.
What makes ProLaw unique? Integration with Microsoft® Outlook®, Excel®, Word and Westlaw®, so you can coordinate cases and contacts, documents, email and calendar, docketing, records, accounting, time and billing, collections, and reporting.
View a demo and get a FREE iPod SHuffleOne of our specialists will call you soon to discuss how ProLaw can benefit your firm. Have the specialist schedule an online demo for you, and if you see it by 12/1/10, then we’ll send you a FREE iPod shuffle.
Discover how ProLaw’s “Front Office. Back Office. One Office.®” solution can boost productivity across your firm – and improve your bottom line.
While supplies last. Limit one per firm. Actual prize may differ from product shown. Prizes will ship 4-6 weeks after live online demo. Offer expires 12/1/10. In accordance with regulations, government employees are not eligible for this special offer.

Thomson Reuters. thomsonreuters.com
Ambrogi: Bloomberg Law is
a “luxury yacht only partially constructed”

There was a flurry of “breaking news” around the legal blogosphere yesterday surrounding the announcement by Bloomberg Law that former LexisNexis CEO, Lou Andreozzi has joined as its CEO, and former LexisNexis COO, Larry D. Thompson was also added as Bloomberg Law’s chief operating officer. You have to hand it to the marketing team that Bloomberg hired on this as they were smart enough to put this information in the hands of prominent legal bloggers like Bob Ambrogi, Monica Bay, and Joe Hodnicki, along with quite a few others – including an email sent to some of us here at 3 Geeks – and the news got disseminated quickly around all the social networks with great interest. [NOTE: For legal vendors launching a new product, or making a major announcement, you might want to steal a page from this play book.] Reading most of the initial blog posts, the news was seen as a positive step for Bloomberg Law.

Despite the cleverly crafted claim that former Bloomberg Law CEO Constantin Cotzias “played a critical role in shaping Bloomberg Law’s development and the introduction of the platform to over 90 percent of the top 100 U.S. law firms”, most law firms haven’t exactly been blazing a path to replace Lexis or Westlaw with Bloomberg Law. Perhaps I’m being a little nit-picky here, but getting firms to take on a ‘free trial’ of the product isn’t exactly the same as getting them to actually sign on to the product once the trial is over. In fact, the last time I watched a presentation of the Bloomberg Law product, I walked away with the impression that it was being pitched as a competitor to PACER more than a competitor to either of the Wexis products.

While I’m still in “nit-picky” mode, let me also point out that there seems to be a belief that it was a big coup for Bloomberg Law to get two big-wigs away from LexisNexis, but if you look closely, Andreozzi left LexisNexis in 2005, and Thompson in 2006. So, although they were big-wigs at LexisNexis, this wasn’t exactly a lateral move straight to Bloomberg Law. Despite the half-decade apart from Lexis, however, landing  the tag-team of Andreozzi and Thompson is a good “first-step” in getting Bloomberg Law on track.

With the Lexis Advance for Solos release coming in at $175 a month, I’m wondering how Bloomberg Law and its $450 a month pricing for a very similar product plans to compete in this smaller market? If WestlawNext is also pressing into the smaller market at under $450 a month, then I can’t see a scenario where Bloomberg Law has a chance in the small law market. Lexis Advance is supposedly launching mid and large law firm market products in 2011, and WestlawNext is pressing hard to move existing clients over to the new product (for a modest-premium, of course), so Bloomberg Law is going to have a fight on its hands in the mid to large firm markets as well.

It looks like Andreozzi and Thompson have a challenge laid out before them of bringing in a new product into the legal market at the same time that that duopoly are also launching new products. From what I’ve heard from others in the market in the past 24-hours, these two love a challenge. If that’s true, then they are going to feel a lot of ‘love’ in their new positions at Bloomberg Law.

I had a great time last Friday presenting with Barbara Fullerton from Morningstar, and Scott Riggins from Houston-based Social Mobility at the SLA Texas annual meeting held at the University of Houston. We had a great time going over some new – and some not so new – apps and mobile devices called “Pardon The ‘App’ Interruption.”

The audience got a chance to participate by holding up cards with “Like”, “Fail” or “Meh!” to show what they thought of the product we were discussing. It made for an enjoyable interaction with the audience (and caused us to run over our alloted time… no big surprise there!) I have to give some love to Google Docs for allowing the three of us to work on a presentation from three different locations (and for somehow keeping all of the formatting from becoming garbled as I went in and out of PowerPoint to G-Docs and vice-versa.)

Here’s the Google Docs version… enjoy!!


I’ve been watching a disturbing trend. More and more people are laconically letting the likes of Facebook, Google, Amazon, Twitter and FourSquare taking over their lives.

I admit. I am as much a victim, perhaps even more of a victim, than you are.

My excuse is that it’s my job.

But what about the rest of the world?

Have we become so used to the entertainment value of being connected to the internet that we have forsaken our right to privacy? Are we so driven by “ease-of-use” that we are willing to let the likes of eBay, Continental and Amazon into the privacy of our homes? Will we, as a nation, place so much value in our desire to be connected to one another that we are willing to forfeit what many perceive to be an inherent right?
But first a history lesson.

The right to privacy is not in the U.S. Constitution. Nor is it in the Bill of Rights or the Declaration of Independence.

Yep, its true.

The right of privacy didn’t make its way into our collective conscience until Justice Brandeis issued his ground-breaking dissent in the 1928 case of Olmstead v. United States. This criminal case swirled around the admissibility of a wiretapping. In a somewhat prophetic analogy, he compares the act of wiretapping to the act of tampering with someone’s mail and says, “the evil incident to invasion of the privacy of the telephone is far greater than that involved in tampering with the mails.”

You’re thinking to yourself, “well, I’ve got mail. Tons of mail. An inbox full of e-mail.”

Brandeis goes on to talk about the peril of not subjecting our government to the same rules of conduct that we expect of our citizens.

I suggest we take Brandeis’ point one step further: we should hold our corporations to these same rules of conduct.

We could be taking these companies like Twitter, Facebook and Google to task for spreading our likes and dislikes to the four corners of the winds and ads are chasing us from online store pillars to online posts.

But the real problem is those darned EULAs.

In our rush to gain access to our Gmail and one-click ordering on Amazon, we have clicked through those end-user agreements without even reading them. GASP—yes, I, a lawyer, don’t even read the fine print.

Daily, we are forfeiting our right to privacy. Incrementally, injudiciously and surreptitiously, we are handing the biggest companies in the world our personal information.

And we don’t even care.

Have we become so comfortable in this Oprah-confessing world that we have no problem baring all before God and man?

Have we decided that there is no shame in ripping off the fig leaves from Adam and Eve?

Are we comfortable letting everyone know what we think, feel and believe?

And is this such a bad thing?

I don’t know.

Maybe the right of privacy only exists in my imagination.

But then isn’t that really the crux of it? That privacy is a concept that we created in our own minds—that nothing is truly private once a thought is created, vocalized or expressed?

For I see that if we do let go of our right to privacy, the next right to be abandoned would be the right of creation.

Yes, the rights of intellectual property.

So with that, dear reader, is where I will leave you. I have no answers. Only my muddling mulling.

And, so at least for today, I would tell Virginia, “yes, there is a right to privacy.”

Photo by woodleywonderworks

I reviewed Fulbright’s Litigation Trends Survey Report for Alternative Fee Arrangement (AFA) findings and came up with the following analysis.
It’s clear from the Report that clients have a significant focus on reducing legal costs. It is also apparent that the focus on reducing costs will not be decreasing any time soon and is expanding in various markets. The result is a growing adoption of AFAs in the market.
AFA Highlights from the Report:
I – Who is using AFAs?
51% of those surveyed are using AFAs
Larger/Public companies are almost twice as likely to be using AFAs as small companies
(61% vs 37%)
II – Primary Reason for using AFAs:
78% said “Lower Costs”
18% said “Predictable/Fixed Costs”
Smaller companies are more cost sensitive – with 84% stating “Lower Costs”
The US Energy industry shows 83% choosing “Lower Costs” as the reason
III – Estimate of the percentage of your billings done via AFAs:
78% say that more than 10% of their billings are under AFAs
18% said that “50% or More” of billings are under AFAs
However, there are numerous regional and industry adoption variations.
IV – What types of AFAs are currently in use?
Fixed fee is #1 at 55%
In the US fixed fee use is a bit higher at 58%
In the UK – 74% report using contingency/conditional fees
Smaller companies appear to favor blended rates – 50%
The Energy sector prefers using fixed fees – 66%
V – Are the use of AFAs going up?
Only 1% expect a decrease in AFA use
37% expect their use to go up
45% of larger companies expect the use of AFAs to go up
Interestingly, the answers to the general, opened ended questions on the survey also touched on the AFA subject. These are were broader questions about the state of the industry. Two of the quotes from these answers sum up the sentiment.
“An intense drive to lower legal costs.”

“I think alternative fees will become the norm, not the exception.”
These survey results bring strong evidence that things have changed and will not be changing back. The strong consensus on cost savings and the expanding use of AFAs reflects this.
Given what I do for a living (AFAs) these findings do not surprise me. Based on what I am seeing now in the various AFA deals I handle, I expect this trend to continue into next year’s survey results.

Well, Facebook?? Do You??

If there is one thing that social media has helped amplify, it’s the fact that stupid people do stupid things, and love to tell everyone about it. Case in point – Scott Harris of Staten Island, NY.

Seems that this 31 year-old man decided that shooting a .38 caliber pistol out the second floor window of his father’s house at 4:30 AM – after a few shots of liquor – would be a great idea.  (Yes, ladies, he’s 31 and lives with his dad and apparently is available…) One of his neighbors heard the shot and dialed 911 and alerted the police that they heard a shot (the news report doesn’t verify this, but I’m assuming the shot was prefaced by Harris’ repeated yelling of “YOU TALKIN’ TO ME??“)

In the good old days (read: pre-Facebook), the police would have canvased the neighborhood, looked for shell casings, interviewed some neighbors, and may or may not have found out that Harris was their drunken shooter. However, social media (combined with a severe case of the dumba**) has made investigations easier. Harris took the time to update his Facebook status about the “good idea” he had about shooting toward the swampland out his Dad’s window (just how is this guy still on the market??) The police found the Facebook update, tracked down Harris and he confessed to being the drunken–facebook–status–updating–shooter.

Long story short… Guns, Liquor and Facebook don’t seem to mix very well — especially if you’re an idiot.

Consultants say that your job should be outsourced because of __________. Are they wrong?

The downturn in the economy has amplified the calls from management of “justifying your worth” to the firm. Many of us fear the “efficiency experts” (think “The Bobs” in the movie Office Space) coming in and suggesting that the work we do could be consolidated, downsized, outsourced, flat out eliminated. So we thought that for this week’s Elephant Post, we’d see what you’d say about justifying your worth.

We have perspectives from the Information Resources Center, the IT Help Desk, and Information Technology on the justifications they mention when the consultants come calling.

Once again, don’t forget to take a peek at next week’s Elephant Post question (it asks about your boss!!) at the bottom of this post, and send me your thoughts to share with everyone.

Information Resource Perspective

It’s Not About “Cheap Service” – It’s About Great Service That Watches the Bottom Line
Carol Bannen

The Information Resource Center staff here is made up of information specialists that not only get requests from anywhere in the firm for information but we are also proactively participating in practice group meetings to offer help and information relevant to the projects they are working on and didn’t even think to ask about.

I am not sure that outsourced library/research services would be able to offer the same proactive service that we are able to do by attending these meetings and interacting with the attorneys face to face.  In the Great Recession we have not only maintained our staffing levels but also greatly increased our billable hours.  I believe this is a direct result of our IRC Liaison program and the marketing of our services.  We offer services that go directly to the firm’s bottom line.  I don’t see any outsourcing company doing that.

HelpDesk Perspective


It’s all about value
Gene Hamilton
So, I’m the HelpDesk person that refuses to be outsourced. Not me. It’s not entirely about *money*, it’s about *value*.
In short, if I can deliver what my customers want for a comparable (or even slightly higher) dollar cost than my competitors, I’ll remain. What do my customers want in their support guy?

  1. The right answer. Provide the answer they need. Take the time to understand the business and the process so that you understand the need, not just the expressed desire du jour that comes over the phone or email.
  2. The right answer, at the right time. The first time is always the right time. If not the first time, a mutually agreed upon interval that hopefully demonstrates my knowledge of what the right answer should look like (see prior point).
  3. The right answer, at the right time, delivered by the right person. What good is it being in-house if I don’t leverage my knowledge about the personalities and conditions from an insider perspective? Being the right person means a genuine interest in others that they can recognize and appreciate.
  4. Do the decision makers know what a swell person I am? This isn’t just a schmooze maneuver. I need to make sure that important people know that I’m contributing to the bottom line by keeping things moving. I can’t expect anyone else to be clairvoyant about my contribution any more than I can be about the resolution to their problems.
Though simple, these are what I use as touchstones: Am I known to be a great person, delivering the helpful information in a timeframe that’s actionable? If those points are done well, then I’m a confident employee. If someone else does these better than I do at a similar cost to my employer, I’d better be taking lessons very quickly.
IT Perspective
Consultants say that IT jobs should be outsourced because of cost, efficiency, expertise and/or customer service.  Are they wrong?
Mac Oparakum
There is no categorical right or wrong answer to this statement. In the Information Technology (IT) community, outsourcing has a home and it doesn’t plan on moving anytime soon. Can the outsourcing express roll through the district and evict residents? Yes. I contend, however, outsourcing need not be the obnoxious neighborhood pest. It can be the friendly neighbor that mutually benefits the subdivision.
My organization redirects the Helpdesk hotline to an outsourcing service during the night shift. This fulfills a gap in one of our customer service objectives by providing human operators to answer Helpdesk calls. Before this change, our low call volumes scarcely merited the need for a night shift operator and calls to the Helpdesk would roll to voice mail.  Outsourcing provided the means of fulfilling one of our customer service objectives at a reasonable cost.
At my organization’s smaller satellite offices, we are unable to justify an IT position. Establishing a relationship with local outsourcing services extends our coverage to these offices in an efficient manner.  The time and material arrangement provides positive ROI and offsets the cost when the situation calls for staff to travel to the satellite offices.
These outsourced services examples are arguably long-term fundamental IT responsibilities. Does this mean I can someday be outsourced? Yes. However, I think the more an IT position provides value to core business needs, the less likely that position will be outsourced. I favor this adage, “If you are not an asset, you are a liability.” 
My organization is highly dependent on IT for email, document management and financial services. Will these core business needs be outsourced? Probably not. In contrast, we have less expertise and more elasticity with audio and web conferencing technologies. These services are outsourced. 
I think the recession brightens the spotlight on business values. The call for moral and ethical standards is clear in Ben Horowitz’s blog . While the blog focused on Hewlett-Packard’s dismissal of former CEO, Mark Hurd, the message of “… people working together to deliver value …” is true for all ranks of an organization. Outsourcing, after all, is still about human resources. The more a person increases his or her value, the more valuable the person, position and department become to the organization.
How’s your value proposition?
Next Week’s Elephant Post:

We’ve usually focused on the “negative” when it comes to the Elephant Posts, but next week we want to give you a chance to “talk-up” your boss or perhaps some peer that has been influential in your career. 

What is one thing that you have learned from your boss that has been transformational for you?

This question brought back memories of a job interview I had once (I didn’t get the job), but there was a moment when my potential boss said something to me that he doesn’t remember, but I never forgot. I’ll explain more next week in my contribution.
We encourage our readers to step out from the anonymity of reading 3 Geeks and contribute to next week’s Elephant Post. If you have a story about how your boss, or someone you worked for did something that transformed the way you thought about your profession, then send me an e-mail to discuss.