One of the best member benefits of a State Bar Association is the ability to access Casemaker or Fastcase (or InCite for Pennsylvania). However, sometimes it is confusing to keep up with which product each state offers. Luckily, the kind folks at Duke University’s Law Library have mapped everything out for us. Many law librarians have been promoting these services to the lawyers that want good research functionality, but don’t want to either pay a high price for an individual subscription, or don’t want to pass any costs along to clients for firms that do cost recovery.

If you’re unfamiliar with any of these products, go sign in at your state bar association and find out more. In some states, even paralegals and law librarians can use these products without actually having to be a member of the state bar association.

Image [cc] fbpa.wayne

In the 19th century one of the big business revolutions was the adoption of a new technology called “Railroads.” Of course when railroads were first proposed, two things happened. The first was a general uprising from the establishment about why this was a bad idea. This push-back came from those you would expect – the ones with a financial interest in keeping things the same way.

Although the first railroads were successful, attempts to finance new ones originally failed as opposition was mounted by turnpike operators, canal companies, stagecoach companies and those who drove wagons.

The second reaction was an “irrational exuberance” over the potential profit to be made and the speed at which change would occur. Mass quantities of speculative dollars were thrown at building rail lines from here to there to everywhere. Which of course resulted in much lost money when change didn’t come that fast.

Obviously railroads did not fail in general. I understand we still use them. But what did happen? It took about 50 years for railroads to fully embed in the US economy. From then on, this new way of doing business was considered business-as-usual. So instead of a quick revolution, change came about incrementally over a much longer period of time.

In the 20th century something similar happened with TV, only the commercial adoption was shortened to about 20 years. This highlights the accelerating rate at which new technologies are being adopted. For tablets, I think it was 3 years – although I just made that stat up.

The obvious conclusion, according to this history and everything I read about BigLaw, is that we have about 10 minutes left before BigLaw collapses and the Phoenix of the New Normal rises. By the time you come back from the bathroom, it will all be over.

For those of you who followed my suggestion and are now back, you will notice my predictions were proven false. Not much has changed.

As an alternative, I suggest the revolution in the delivery of legal services will take a bit longer to occur. Now I am not suggesting it will take 50 years. But I do suggest it will not come as fast as many might predict. We all know things need to change. And many see financial opportunities in that change, as they well should. However, I have been feeling a bit of irrational exuberance lately about how this will all play out.

So don’t look for BigLaw to collapse or for new-style providers to sweep through the market in short-order. Instead watch for steady, incremental changes in the way law firms function and deliver their services. Next generation providers will continue their growth, law firms will merge and things will generally keep changing. Much like the railroads, change will come, just not all at once.

59 cent coffee
Image [cc] sweetmandy

I got a LinkedIn email last week from someone that has taken a path very similar to the one I took twent-some years ago. Same Army M.O.S., same college, same law school, so far, not interested in the library portion. He’s a 3L and about to enter the workforce as an attorney, and he asked if I had some words of advice. Of course, you know I’m pretty easy when it comes to doling out my opinions, wrapped in the guise of advice.

The advice I gave isn’t very unique… in my humble opinion, it is really just common sense. I’m sure there are additional things that could be said (such as “be a good lawyer”), but I thought a few short words would be better than a five paragraph blog post. That said, I thought it would be easy to turn it into a blog post, so here it is:

My advise is to get you foot in the door and do good work. Take the time to build relationships with the folks you work with, and build good relationships with the folks that hire you to represent them.

Never eat lunch alone. Get involved in you community doing something you love, but that affects others at the same time in a positive way.

Don’t be afraid to step out and try something new. Don’t be afraid to ask others for help.

Treat everyone with respect and keep all of the staff members happy and engaged with the work you do.

It’s a tough market out there, but hard work, smart work, and good relationship building will help you succeed when others might not.

Best of luck.

Image [cc] Ozzie Davis

At the recent (and extremely successful) P3 Conference last week, a comment really stuck in my head. There was a panel on Show Me the Practice Innovation and the final question to the panel was to point out any true innovations in legal services over the past 25 years. The panel included three of the smartest people I know: Kingsley Martin, Keith Lipman and Michael Mills.

The consensus from these big brains: What innovation?

Michael Mills from Neota Logic said online legal research was one innovation, which he acknowledged did improve efficiencies some, but it didn’t really change the core delivery model.

So where am I going with this? Not where you might expect.

Many of the next-generation law firms (and non-law firms) hold themselves out as “innovative” and in fact win awards for said innovation. But when you peel back the covers, where is the innovation? Are they using next generation technologies like Neota and KM Standards? No. Are they building out process maps and reengineering how matters are managed and handled? Not that I can see. Are they employing project management people, principles and tools across the board? Well .. some are using them in document review, but otherwise – not so much.

What they appear to be doing is hiring BigLaw trained lawyers and utilizing significantly lower overhead. Some do it via onsite client secundments. Others do it with less expensive office space. All seem to do it with lower lawyer compensation. But this is merely doing it the same way – only cheaper.

Is this approach a smart idea? Absolutely. Many times I kick myself and Number 1 for not thinking of it first. But is this approach a real transformation to the way legal services are delivered?

Judge for yourself.

There has been a lot of discussion in Law Library Land lately about the use of the term “Librarian” to describe the staff that curates and researches in a private law library. The discussion, which has taken place in both blogs (Here is an excellent post) and on AALL listservs, has been lively and interesting. 

As a brand, the term is unparallelled in its universal recognition.  However, the connotations associated with the term may not be of a dynamic and forward-thinking professional. Just try telling someone you’re a librarian at a social function and watch their eyes immediately glaze over from boredom. 

As proud as I am of being a Librarian (note the capitalized first letter of the word), I am at heart pragmatic when it comes to my career and have no problem with labels like Research Specialist, Research Analyst, Information Manager, Technical Services Specialist, Director of Information Services or Lord Emperor of Research (cue the Darth Vader music).   My self-worth isn’t tied to a label. I’m sure that the Librarians of Ancient Babylon were not called Librarians.   Labels and professions evolve over time and, just as in Darwinian evolution,  those who can adapt will succeed and those who can’t will be left behind.  In the end, I will do what I need to in order to succeed. How successful I am is shown by being the go-to person people turn to when they need assistance.  A label doesn’t affect that one way or another. 

Some of us have noticed a vacuum in the space where the prolific Law Librarian Blog once stood. Anyone that has been in the law librarian profession, and hasn’t lived under a rock, is familiar with the posts that come mulitple times a day from Joe Hodnicki and Mark Giangrande (well, mostly Hodnicki). The blog went dark after the September 3rd post of The (Un)Availability of Tribal Law. I thought this was a pretty strange ending for the blog that is known for not holding back the punches when it comes to legal publishing vendors, or AALL Board Members (myself included.) Never fear, it just seems to be an offshoot from the Law Professor Blogs Network change in ownership when Joe Hodnicki sold his share of the LPB to Paul L. Caron.

Starting October 1st, Hodnicki and Giangrande move over to the blog “Law Librarians” with the subtitle “Thinking Out Loud in the Blogosphere.”

I’m sure the post entitled “Test” is simply just a test… if fact, I’m pretty sure that we’ll see some of the same ole’ Joe firing off posts on a daily basis starting tomorrow.

Welcome back Joe!!

“Better Call Saul!”

I’m watching the Breaking Bad marathon last night when a commercial comes on mentioning a familiar company. Although I couldn’t find the 30 second spot telling me to go to BringAClaim.com, I did find the 2 minute video from the firm behind Bring A Claim, San Antonio based, Watts Guerra, LLP, that describes the settlement agreement that entitles, “more than 100 million Americans who could be entitled to statutory damages of $100 to $1000 for each proven willful violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.”

It seems that Lexis wasn’t just having a problem with this issue, but according to KrebsOnSecurity, was hacked by a serious cyber criminal organization, along with Dun & Bradstreet, and Kroll Background America, Inc., where millions of social security numbers and business information were stolen and sold. The KrebsOnSecurity report, based on a seven month long investigation, reports that the Lexis breach seems to have been one where someone on the inside installed a program called NBC.exe in order to gain access to the system and download the personal data.

Perhaps the most alarming thing that Krebs’ reports is that there are over a thousand “customers” (AKA, Bad Guys) going through the hacked data:

The database shows that the site’s 1,300 customers have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars looking up SSNs, birthdays, drivers license records, and obtaining unauthorized credit and background reports on more than four million Americans.

Seems that Walter White wasn’t the only one having a bad year. But, remember, you may be entitled to damages, so you better call Saul… er, Watts Guerra.

The race for state bar partnerships between Casemaker and Fastcase took another step toward Fastcase this morning. New York, which has been somewhat of a holdout on the free access to legal research benefit, is partnering with Fastcase to provide its members with free access to the product via the Bar’s website, www.nysba.org. I believe this brings Fastcase up to 25 state bar associations, and puts the momentum squarely on Fastcase’s side.

The formal announcement will go out in a few minutes from Fastcase and NYSBA.

 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 25, 2013
New York State Bar Association Partners With Fastcase
to Provide Free Access to Legal Research Library
Access to Smarter Legal Research Tools Now Available for State Bar Members at No Cost
Washington, DC (September 25, 2013) – The New York State Bar Association and legal publisher Fastcase today announced a partnership to provide 76,000 members of the association with free access to the New York libraries in Fastcase’s legal research system.
The nation’s largest voluntary state bar association is offering access to online legal research for its members in New York, 49 other states, Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico and 113 countries.
Beginning this week, members will gain free access to Fastcase’s New York libraries by logging on to www.nysba.org, going to Practice Resources and clicking on Fastcase. The free benefit includes judicial opinions from New York State courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court. It also offers access to New York State Consolidated Laws; New York Codes, Rules and Regulations; and the New York Constitution. 
As part of the benefit, members may subscribe to the nationwide Fastcase premium subscription for $195 per member per year—which normally costs $995 per year, a discount of $800. In addition, a specially tailored benefit will help new attorney members gain professional and financial footing during their first two years of practice. They qualify for free access to Fastcase’s entire federal and 50-state library, which will be available to them in October.
“We are pleased to provide the Fastcase online legal research library as a benefit to our members,” said New York State Bar Association President David M. Schraver of Rochester (Nixon Peabody). “The legal community has been conducting legal research online for decades. Now we are able to bring our members unlimited access to one of the largest law libraries in the world as a member benefit.”
This member benefit provides NYSBA members with access to one of the largest law libraries in the world, training webinars and tutorials, and free reference assistance. The member benefit is unlimited – with no restrictions on time or number of transactions, unlimited printing, unlimited reference assistance and unlimited customer service included for free.
“This is the new normal, when New York firms are absorbing their legal research costs as overhead, and firms of all sizes are looking to add a nonbillable ‘house account’ for legal research,” said Fastcase President Phil Rosenthal. “This partnership makes the NYSBA and Fastcase a better value than ever for New York firms, because they can reduce the costs of legal research and they can do so with the world’s smartest legal research tools.”  
Over the last few years, 24 state bar associations and scores of the nation’s largest law firms have subscribed to Fastcase, which now has more than 600,000 subscribers.
Fastcase has gained very strong momentum in the legal research market and continues to challenge traditional legal publishers. Fastcase was voted #1 in Law Technology News’s inaugural Customer Satisfaction Survey, finishing first in 7 out of 10 categories over traditional research providers Westlaw and LexisNexis. The American Association of Law Libraries named Fastcase for iPhone the 2010 New Product of the Year. In 2011, Rocket Matter named Fastcase’s apps for iPhone and iPad the Legal Productivity App of the Year, and Fastcase was named to The Best of Legal Times in multiple categories in 2012. Three times the company has been listed in the EContent 100, the most influential companies in the digital economy, alongside Google, Apple, LinkedIn, and Twitter.  And the 2013 ABA Tech Survey reports that Fastcase’s mobile apps are by far the most popular app for lawyers, more popular than all other legal research apps combined.
“When bar associations subscribe to legal research for their members at a volume discount, everyone wins,” said Rosenthal. “One of the most valuable bar memberships in the country just got better.”
About the New York State Bar Association
The New York State Bar Association, with 76,000 members, is the largest voluntary state bar association in the country. The organization has been serving the legal profession and the community since it was founded in 1876. To learn more about the NYSBA, visit www.nysba.org.
About Fastcase
As the smarter alternative for legal research, Fastcase democratizes the law, making it more accessible to more people. Using patented software that combines the best of legal research with the best of Web search, Fastcase helps busy users sift through the clutter, ranking the best cases first and enabling the re-sorting of results to find answers fast. Founded in 1999, Fastcase has more than 600,000 subscribers from around the world. Fastcase is an American company based in Washington, D.C. For more information, follow Fastcase on Twitter at @Fastcase or visit www.fastcase.com.

###
Media Contacts:
For Fastcase:
Jennifer Brand 202.731.2114
For the NYSBA:
Lise Bang-Jensen
518-487-5530

It was 1987 and I was in my High School Freshman English class. We were asked to pick a partner and jointly write a paper on The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,
Washington Irving’s tale of a headless horseman who terrorizes a small
New England town. The assignment was to “be descriptive”.  The teacher
wanted as many adjectives and adverbs as we could use to describe the
story, the characters, and the setting.  The kid sitting next to me scooted his desk next to mine and we started
writing. Everyone else turned in a page or two, but we wrote eight or
nine pages and still probably had fewer sentences than any other team. I
bet that was the worst and the most painstakingly descriptive paper ever written on the subject, but we got an A.

I
was reminded of that incident recently when a colleague forwarded a
vendor’s email.  The email was so full of jargon as to be comical. 

“…we are a global customized research solutions provider. Since 2003, we have worked with a number of law firms in US
and Europe – supporting decision makers tasked with responsibility for their firm’s growth – with quick and insightful research on key initiatives relating to business development, client
retention or strategy execution.
“Our offshore research model
with
350+ analysts based in India – pioneered by McKinsey and now used by
many professional services firms
– allows us to cost-effectively service both urgent or
quick turnaround research requests as well as in-depth
market or competitor intelligence assessments.
[Our company] is a knowledge partner of choice to several Fortune 1000
companies and SMBs in
the US, Canada & Europe. We have executed
research assignments in more than 80 sub-sectors entailing analysis of
market and competition dynamics in 50+ countries, using a judicious
blend of secondary data sources and primary
interviews with industry stakeholders.”

I know what all of the words mean, but…

Why
do people write this way? It’s not easy to read or understand. It
doesn’t make you or your company sound more impressive. If your
marketing materials read like my freshman English paper, I would really
hate to see what your research looks like.  Try this…
“…we are a global [ ] research [ ] provider. Since 2003, we
have worked with a number of law firms in US and Europe – supporting [people with] responsibility for their firm’s growth – with [research] relating to business development, client retention or strategy execution.
“Our [business
model,]
with 350+
analysts based in India – [DELETED Irrelevant] – allows us to [ ] service [] urgent [DELETED
Redundant]
research requests as well as [ ] market [and] competitor [ ] assessments. [Our company] is a [vendor] of choice to several Fortune 1000 companies and SMBs in
the US, Canada & Europe. We have [helped
companies]
in
more than 80 [industries] in 50+ countries, using [ ] secondary data sources and primary interviews with [people in each industry].”

Now, I’m not saying that’s the greatest copy ever written, but at least I can understand it without rereading it four times.

It has been said that those who can’t do teach and those who can’t teach criticize.  I have always aspired to be a literary critic and Mitchell Kowalski has finally given me that opportunity in Avoiding Extinction: Reimagining Legal Services for the 21st Century. To my great adolescent joy, there is much to criticize in this book; from the title before the colon, which I feel promises something very different than the book delivers (though the title after the colon is spot on); to the multi-faceted and yet, somehow still stubbornly two dimensional characters; to the long monologue of new-wave legal philosophy punctuated by descriptions of lunch utensil management. However, these criticisms tell you infinitely more about my literary snobbery than they do about the value of this remarkable little book. Kowalski may not have delivered unto the legal world a literary masterpiece, but he has given us something much more valuable and useful, a destination. 

The book presents Bowen, Fong, & Chandri (BFC), a new kind of law firm, through the eyes of three people with three very different perspectives: Maria, General Counsel of a large corporation evaluating outside counsel; Mark, a new lateral attorney going through the BFC onboarding process; and Kim, a new member of the BFC independent Board of Directors attending her first meeting. The only character in all three parts of the book is Sylvester Bowen, CEO of BFC. Bowen is Kowalski’s version of Howard Roark, an idealist fighting against tradition and conformity. Unlike Roark, Bowen is remarkably successful in his quest and has managed to build a firm that any of us who struggle with the conservative and backward-looking nature of law firms would jump at the chance to work for. BFC is what Google would be if they practiced law. In fact, BFC is actually the main character in the book. Bowen is merely there to give the firm a face and a voice.

Primarily through Bowen’s philosophizing, we learn all about BFC’s unique approach to practicing law.  They don’t hire students or junior attorneys. They don’t have Partners. They don’t bill by the hour. They use Project Management extensively. They evaluate and compensate attorneys based on how they contribute to Knowledge Management. They run their own LPO out of India. Most employees work from an open and modern satellite office in a converted warehouse outside of the city center, while their smaller office downtown consists of conference rooms and temporary hoteling spaces. They use SaaS solutions exclusively. They provide only temporary and emergency technology, otherwise attorneys are given an allowance to purchase their own. They have no IT staff. Each of these points, and many more, are explained and justified throughout the book in a style that is emphatic, but never quite crosses the line into preachy.

I suspect that anyone who has been paying attention to the trials and tribulations of the legal services business over the last few years, on this blog and elsewhere, will find very few unfamiliar ideas in this book. But Kowalski has managed to do something that I haven’t seen anywhere else.  He has put all of the pieces together in a way that creates a convincing and compelling picture of what a law firm could be.

There’s a joke about a tourist in Ireland asking directions from a local farmer.  The farmer’s response is “Well, if I were you, I wouldn’t start from here.” I’m afraid that Avoiding Extinction will do little to help existing BigLaw firms avoid extinction. The amount of change required to morph a typical BigLaw firm into BFC is probably beyond the capacity of any BigLaw firm to actually change. But Reimagining Legal Services for the 21st Century provides a possible destination for any firms willing to undertake the difficult journey, or more likely, for any new firm rising from the ashes of those that fail along the way.