The International Legal Technology Association’s annual conference is happening right now in Las Vegas. I’ve been keeping up on Twitter and reading Monica Bay’s posts on  Legal Technology News. Not quite the same as being there, but a close second! I’m sure much of the Geek readership is attending and enjoying this amazing event.

I was especially intrigued by Monica’s summary of the key note address by Scott Klosoky of Future Point of View, where he asked the question: Are you a dead leader walking or one with your high beams on?

Two quotes really caught my eye:

Leaders get stuck in what they have invested in, and cannot move forward

See 10 years ahead. Think about what services you will be offering, how they will be delivered, how you will find new clients, and what new businesses you will be handling

I was struck by how directly this applies to law firm libraries.

What have we invested in that prevents us from moving forward and how we are “seeing” 10 years ahead:

  • Print?
  • We aren’t completely in control of what print we maintain, but we are in control of planning and presenting a vision of what the print collection will look like in the future. How are we planning to stop investing in print and utilizing emerging technologies to shape the collection of the future? How have we communicated that to firm leadership? 
  • Space?
    • Does our space or lack thereof, continue to define us? Do we need “space” in today’s law firm to be effective at our work or does it hinder us? If we look into the future, does space impact the services we provide? Maybe one day we are completely mobile with a tablet in one hand and our Google Glass on, working in attorney offices, client meetings, offering assistance as a roving service provider. How might we plan that kind of transition?
  • Non-core activities?
    • Jean O’Grady has done a tremendous job over the past few years focusing on the non-core activities that we must be willing to give up or out/in-source to others in order to focus on core activities. I’ve also heard Steve Lastres say many times that he tries not to do anything that isn’t “client-facing”. Both of these leaders are attempting to see 10 years ahead and planning their services accordingly. How can we take on and provide new services if we still have everything else on our plates?

    I’m watching a version of this “dead leaders walking” concept play out right here in Kansas City. Google Fiber announced last year that our fair city would be the first in the country to receive their services and I’m getting it very soon. I’m going to be saving $60/month plus getting many extras like a Google Nexus tablet that will function as our new TV remote!

    What has my current provider done to keep my business? Absolutely nothing. Have they contacted me personally to offer an explanation of their value or thank me for my business? Have they voluntarily offered to lower my costs or add services? Not a peep. Do they not see the wave about to crash into them? Were they “seeing ahead” enough to anticipate this and implement strategies to mitigate the mass exodus? Apparently not. I have no idea what, if anything, the two incumbent providers are planning, but it’s too late now.

    This is the latest call to action that we must heed and I hope we continue this conversation as information professionals and also within our organizations.

    Colleen Cable is a Library Consultant for Profit Recovery Partners bringing the “consultant angle” to Three Geeks.

    Image [cc] Bark

    Awhile back I posted on how I thought lawyers using Gmail (or any other free email service like that) constituted a waiving of privilege. My argument was that agreeing to share privileged client communications under “a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence” with a third party was on its face – a privilege waiver.

    Not everyone agreed with me – the original post had 25 comments. And there were follow up posts in response to a broader conversation. As part of that conversation, someone noted how the NY Bar had issued an ethics opinion on the subject disagreeing with my position. The opinion basically stated email was like mail and thus one has an expectation of privacy.

    “We concluded based on developing experience that there is a reasonable expectation that e-mails will be as private as other forms of telecommunication.”

    Well … the NY Bar should have asked Google its opinion about expectations of privacy when using Gmail. In a recent court filing, Google made it quite clear what that expectation is:

    “Indeed, ‘a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.’”

    So I reiterate my claim, only more boldly, leveraging Google’s own statement: If you are a lawyer using Gmail for privileged client communications, they are no longer privileged.

    Elephant Train
    Image [cc] Venson Kuchipudi

    It’s Fall Associate time again. Newly minted law school graduates, fresh off their taking of the State Bar Exams, are moving into those empty windowed offices, given a computer, assigned one-fourth of a secretary, and told to start working toward hitting the benchmark of 635 billable hours for the rest of the year. In the first few weeks there is some formal training set up for the associates, which the Associate may or may not be required to attend. After having informal conversations with many of my peers, the common reaction when I mention training ranges from an uncomfortable chuckle, to a full-on eye-rolling and physical shutter.

    Therefore, I thought that a great Elephant Post question would be to ask our readers to comment on how they would like training of Fall Associates to be structured. So, let us know:

    If You Could Have A Blank Canvas, How Would You Set Up Fall Associate Training For Your Area?

    Once again, here are the rules for answering the EP:

    • Fill out the form below, or email me (xlambert at gmail dot com) with your answer
    • You can give us your real name or stay anonymous
    • I’ll put out the answers on Friday
    • Just let us know what you think… it’ll make you feel better, and it will help your peers by knowing they are not alone in their pain
    • You can see what others have answered here
    Dan and Emily
    Image [cc] Sharyn Morrow

    Jane: Dan, I’ve been going over some of the statistics from the Simkovic/McIntyre study, and have to say that most law students will be far better off by attending law school than they would by not obtaining the degree.

    Dan: Jane, I see you’ve been playing music with your old college band, The Intelligentsia, and found that bag of weed your old boyfriend stashed in his guitar. A student would You’d be better off heading to Las Vegas and putting the $150K on Black. Wait a minute, isn’t your old boyfriend a Law School Professor now?

    Jane: Well… yes, but he doesn’t play guitar any longer.

    Dan: Jane, maybe he should take it back up, as it looks like his day job might be on shaky ground. However, it is nice of you to attempt to help him maintain his cushy lifestyle at the expense of some kid paying off student loans for the next 35 years.

    Jane: Dan, as usual, you do not see past the bottom of your vodka tonic glass you have stashed under your desk. An advanced education opens up many opportunities for graduates that simply are not there for those without the advanced degree. The study shows that most students will be hundreds of thousands of dollars ahead over the lifespan of their careers. A little investment now will pay off over time.

    Dan: Jane, I actually agree with you…

    Jane: gasp…

    Dan: Slow your roll there babe, I agree with you – to a point. And that point is when the advanced degree is a law degree. We pump out far too many lawyers as it is. The fact that we have 200 law schools in this country, most of them a far cry from the top tier schools, shows that we are throwing far too many students at a career that is shrinking every year. If they want an advanced degree, pick something useful like Computer Science or Engineering. The only thing that would help the legal profession would be if a third of law schools shut their doors today.

    Jane: Dan, the study shows that law school graduates get a salary bump, on average, of $32,000 – $53,000 a year. Statistics alone would encourage a student with a History degree to think seriously about obtaining a law degree.

    Dan: Okay Jane. Let me ask you this: Would you encourage your nephew to go to law school?

    Jane: Yes.

    Dan: Okay. In your typical, “nothing could every possibly go wrong mentality”, would you encourage him to do so on student loans?

    Jane: Under the right circumstances, yes.

    Dan: My guess is that the right cirumstances equates to “he qualified for any student loans.” Would you be so quick if you knew that he probably wouldn’t get into a top tier school, and he wouldn’t graduate in the top 10% of his class?

    Jane: Well, I would encourage him to work hard and study to get in that top 10%.

    Dan: Jane, you’re pretty big on statistics when it comes to the study, but you seem to be pretty ignorant of math when it comes to the reality that most students will rack up the same, or more, debt as those that finish in the top 10% of top tier schools. Add to that, the fact that most kids like your nephew would end up graduating from third and fourth tier schools, and would be lucky to land a job requiring a law degree and bar passage. More likely, your nephew would land on your doorstep looking for a place to live because your Sister told him to go live with the stupid Aunt that talked him into going to law school.

    Jane: Dan, my nephew is smart, capable, and he will make it.

    Dan: Well, he better hope so. Your career as a journalist probably won’t last until he graduates law school. Better hope that your next job at Amazon or with the Red Sox comes with some benefits.

    On Monday afternoon, sometime between 4 and 5 PM, I am giving a short talk about the Internet of Things at the ILTA Conference in Las Vegas (SPEC 5, Roman Ballroom II).  This story bears almost no relation to the talk I’m giving, but as I researched the IoT I was inspired to write a little fiction.  Consider this a Friday afternoon diversion and a break from our regularly scheduled geekiness.  If you are at ILTA next week, please stop me and say hi.

    – Ryan

    The Granny Bug

    Modern japanese toilet2
    Image [CC] By Armin Kübelbeck

    “Good morning, Davey Wavey! Wakey Wakey!”

    I reached toward the side table and felt for the alarm clock. Opening one eye just enough to realize the futility of that action, I rolled over and pulled the covers over my head.

    “C’mon sleepy head. It’s 10 after six, you’ve got to get to schoo-ool!”

    I hadn’t attended school in over 40 years. I’m the sixty-four year old CEO of Artificial Legal Intelligence – the third largest AI Law Firm in the world.

    “Good Morning Grandma!” My wife, Judy, chuckled from the other side of the bed. 

    “And a very good morning to you too, little one!”

    I had upgraded my SAPBot to version Six the weekend before, and I managed to select the Granny personality. Granny was intended to introduce 4 to 6 year olds to the concept of a SAPBot. 

    “I should have been up half an hour ago, Granny? Why didn’t you wake me?”

    The bed shook slightly as Judy tried to stifle her laughter.

    “Your early meeting was moved to 10:30 AM and traffic seems particularly light today. You looked so comfortable, I just didn’t have the heart to wake you.”

    “Haaa ha ha haa!” Judy couldn’t contain herself anymore.

    “I’m so glad you find this funny.”

    “I do, I really do.” She laughed.

    “It’s your fault.”

    “Don’t blame me. Blame Ra-quel!”

    She lingered on the name to torture me. I crawled out of bed and stumbled down the hall to the bathroom. 

    “Don’t you think it’s a little chilly in here, Granny?”

    “Yes dear.  I turned the thermostat up five degrees half an hour ago, but there appears to be something wrong with the air service. I’ve scheduled a repair for their earliest available time at 1PM today. Also, it looks like rain, so the solar panels will not be producing much power today. I’ve negotiated a purchase price from the Power Company. They will deduct today’s usage from your credit balance.”

    I reached the bathroom, lifted the toilet seat and began to urinate.

    “That’s a very good boy”, the SAPBot chirped.

    “Uh, Granny, do you think you could wait outside?”

    “I’m not actually in the bathroom with you dear, I am a Semi-Autonomous Personal Bot. Do you know what Semi-autonomous means?”

    “Yes, I know what it means. Could you just not talk to me while I’m in here?”

    “Of course dear.  Little boys need their privacy too.  Switching to bell mode.”

                     Continued after the jump…


    “Thank you.  Reminder: That kid next door is coming by tomorrow evening to reinstall your OS.  Make sure he bumps User Knowledge to Advanced.”

    Ding

    The bell meant she understood. The wall behind the toilet displayed my calendar and up popped an entry for Thursday, 7PM Jim Taylor to upgrade SAPBot OS – Set UK Level Advanced.

    Ding

    The toilet had finished analyzing my deposit and as I washed my hands, the mirror displayed its analysis. My general health was good, but blood pressure was slightly elevated and I probably had too much wine with dinner last night. How it knew that from my urine was beyond me. My calendar appeared again and a new doctor’s appointment popped up for a week from Friday.

    “Granny!”

    Ding

    “You can speak.”

    “Yes dear?”

    “Did you just schedule a doctor’s appointment for me?”

    “Yes dear. You are due for a checkup and it seemed a good time.”

    “I don’t need a checkup, please cancel it.  What else did you just do in response to my…deposit?”

    “I increased the overall fiber content of the grocery list by 15% and removed the bottle of scotch you ordered yesterday.”

    “Ugh…revert changes and stop all future adjustments based on my urine samples.”

    “The national health service advises that all little boy’s morning deposits be analyzed to ensure continued good health.”

    “We went over this for an hour yesterday, Granny, I am 60 years old not 6! ”

    “And such a handsome and strong young man you are.”

    “Return to bell mode.”

    Ding

    I got undressed and stepped into the shower. The water started automatically and adjusted to the optimal temperature based on my past preference and an infrared sensor in the shower head.

    Ding

    Four tiles on the wall at eye level displayed my calendar and the doctor’s appointment for a week from Friday returned.

    “I thought I asked you to cancel that appointment, Granny?”

    The tiles changed to a close up image of a tiny mole on my back.

    Ding

     “You can speak!”

     “Your mole appears to be 1/64th of a millimeter larger than it was yesterday. I think it would be best to…”

    “Cancel the appointment and get out of here again!”

    Ding

    Some people loved their SAPBots, even feeling depressed and lonely when the power was out or they temporarily found themselves somewhere bot-free, but I had never quite gotten the hang of it. I liked to be alone. Don’t get me wrong, bots are useful, but they can also be kind of a nuisance
    SAPBots started appearing in the late twenty-teens as a response to what was then strangely called, The Internet of Things, but now is commonly known as StuffNet. There was no official beginning to StuffNet, it evolved almost organically from the Internet. Sometime between 2005 and 2008 the number of things with uniquely identifiable IP addresses surpassed the number of people on the planet and continued to grow exponentially.  Soon, it wasn’t just computers and tablets and phones, but also toasters and refrigerators and potted plants. In the early days, there were multiple protocols and interfaces, and even though all of these things were connected through the network, they had a hard time talking to each other.  And most people couldn’t figure it out and didn’t bother.  It’s not as if turning on the lights, or watering the plants was all that difficult before StuffNet. But the march of technology is unstoppable and visionaries and entrepreneurs kept looking for ways to make StuffNet easier to use.

    In 2019, Jony Ive at Apple, developed the first SAPion.  It was part acronym, part Portmanteau of Semi-Autonomous Personal Medallion.  With allusions to Homo Sapiens, of course. The SAPion was your personal servant in the cloud.  It used sophisticated AI, the descendent of the Siri functionality in early iPhones, to manage all of your personal information, as well as control all of your stuff on StuffNet.  The SAPion had access to libraries and APIs that allowed it to administrate all of the Stuff that was associated with an individual.

    At first SAPions were little medallions that hung around your neck. They had a little speaker and microphone and responded to voice commands.  Early models could do most things that a smartphone could do without needing a touchscreen and they very quickly replaced the smartphone as most people’s primary connection to the internet.. This gave rise to a whole new field of Verbal User Interface design. A technology that I eventually used to build my personal fortune.  It turns out that most people prefer to talk to one of my AI lawyers than to the real thing.  They say they’re friendlier, and ironically, more human.  As the technology evolved, the medallions became unnecessary and the SAPions became SAPBots that were loosed onto the internet.  They no longer stayed on your person in a physical form, they lived in the cloud. Their program lived on a server somewhere in Utah, but through the internet, they could access the entire world.  They knew where you were and they “appeared” to you through your home or work network.  Most buildings were outfitted with little speakers in the corner of each room, through which you could interact with your bot.  When you left your house, or you were in a public place, your bot traveled with you in a little hearing-aid type device, called a SAP-Link or Sapple for short. Most walls were coated with an electronic circuit paint that allowed bots to display information to their owners. The display was oriented to be visible only in the owners direct line of site, which made it difficult, though not impossible, to spy on your neighbor’s personal business.  After years of people talking into Bluetooth headsets, no one was much bothered by people walking around interacting with invisible entities and staring into blank walls.

    The temperature of the water adjusted down a few degrees and I was reminded that, although she wasn’t speaking to me, Granny was still there monitoring my progress.  I had been using the Jeeves personality for many years, but frankly the English gentleman’s gentleman thing had lost its appeal.  So after I upgraded my bot last week, I tried out a number of new personalities, finally settling on Raquel, a funny, 20-something, spry personality, with a smoky voice, and an almost imperceptible lisp.  The next day, I got up and was taking a shower, just like this when my wife entered and heard me reviewing my schedule for the day…with Raquel.  In the ensuing… discussion, I switched my bot to the Granny personality.

    “There! Is that better? Is that what you want?”

    “Yes, that’s perfect.”

    “Well, I can’t believe you are jealous of a SAPBot!”

    “I’m not jealous, I just don’t understand why you need to shower with a SAPBot young enough to be your granddaughter.”

    “It’s not worth having this argument, I’ll change it back to Jeeves. I just thought I’d try something different.”

    It turns out there is a bug in the latest version of the SAPBot software. Millions of people around the world are stuck with Granny bots at the moment.  Not to fear though, Apple swears the patch will be released in a few days.

    I slid the shower door open and the water shut off automatically.  The Dyson full body air jets fired up and after about 30 seconds of standing naked in a hurricane force wind, I was completely dry. I got dressed and walked downstairs.

    Judy was sitting at the table with a cup of coffee and a bowl of cereal staring at a blank wall in front of her.  I walked over and kissed her on the ear, not so much out of affection, but to catch a glimpse of what she was watching.

    “News?” I asked.

    “Yup.”

    “Mind sharing?”

    “Nope.  Alonzo, share the news.”

    The wall in front of Judy lit up to reveal a newscaster talking about the stock market.

    “Alonzo?”, I asked.

    “Yezz, Mizter Simon?”

    Judy’s SAPBot had been Sarah since SAPion version 2. She was toying with me and had changed to a deep male voice with a ridiculously unidentifiable European accent.

    “Ken I hep yew?”

    Judy just smiled and raised her coffee mug in a toast.

    “When you go back to Ra-quel, could you at least transfer the coffee program to her.  Granny makes a nice cup of Joe.”

    Ding

    I had forgotten she was in bell mode, “Go ahead and speak Granny.”

    “I have stored my recipe in the coffee maker.  Would you like me to set it as a default?”

    “That would be very kind, Granny.” Judy said mocking me. “It’s so nice to have you around.”

    “Why thank you little one. I so enjoy being here. Davey, you have a call from Tim Haverford. Would you like me to send it to your Sapple?”

    “No, Granny, I’ll take it in the kitchen.”

    Tim was my Chief Digital Officer.  It was his job to ensure that ALI was up and running 24/7.  As I walked into the kitchen the lights came on and a painting on the far wall dissolved into the pixelated outline of a man.

    “Dave?  You there?  I’m having trouble seein’ ya.”

    “Yeah me too.  Granny?  Can you do anything about the picture?”

    “I’m sorry dear, but there appears to be interference on the network.”

    “Oh, you’ve got the Granny Bug too?”, Tim said.

    “Yeah. Any of our bots got it?”

    “That’s what I’m calling about Dave, they all have it.”

    “All!  How is that possible?”

    “You ‘member that problem we had cupple yers go with the Version 5 upgrade, where our bots became arrogant and rude after a week or so using our attorney profiles?”

    “Yeah, I thought we fixed that.”

    “Well, we didn’t so much fix it as effectively work around it.”

    “And how did we do that, again?”

    “Every three days, we cycle through all of the default personalities before restoring our own.”

    “So, I’ve got nine hundred Granny bots, practicing law, treating clients like six year old children.”

    “That would be the case.”

    “Ugh…I guess I should get customer service on the line.”

    “Well, Dave, here’s the thing. I called them this morning let them know I was going to be reinstalling all of the attorneys and that they should let clients know that we would be back to normal in a few days.”  He paused.

    “And…?” I liked Tim a lot, but the good ol’ boy routine sometimes kept him from getting to the point.

    “Well, it seems that just in the few hours since we went all Granny, our positive reviews have gone up about 60 percent.”

    “Really?”

    “Yep. ‘Parently, a number of large clients have even requested that Granny be their default attorney.”

    As he finished his sentence, the crisp image of Tim finally appeared on the wall and Granny spoke up.

    “I found the problem Davey and rerouted the transmission. You should be good now.”

    “We’re just finishing up, thanks Granny.  Tim, have your Granny talk with my Granny and find a time we can meet to discuss GrannyLaw as a concept.”

    “You are both available today at 3PM.” Granny added helpfully.

    “That’s fine with me.” Tim said.

    My calendar popped up overlaid on Tim’s face and Granny entered an appointment called “Discuss GrannyLaw”.

    “I’ll be in soon Tim. I’m calling a car now.”

    “See ya, Boss.”

    Tim’s image winked out and was replaced by the painting that had been there before.  I could hear the water running in the bathroom and I knew Judy was in the shower now.  A devious thought crossed my mind.

    “Granny, can you drop the temperature in the shower to 35 degrees Fahrenheit, for 2 seconds before returning to normal?”

    “Davey, that’s a mean prank to play on your wife. I’m afraid I couldn’t do it even if I wanted to. Health and Safety protocols…”

    “Never mind.  Do you have any access to Judy’s SAPBot, Alonzo?”

    “I don’t know what you’re planning, Davey, but no. I do not.”

    “Could you get control over Alonzo? Theoretically, I mean.”

    “If you were to upgrade your account to Household SuperUser status, then theoretically, I could gain limited control over Alonzo. Including Parental Controls…”

    “Perfect, what’s a SuperUser account cost?”

    “One thousand, four hundred and ninety-nine dollars on the App store.”

    “And how much do I have in my account?”

    “Two hundred forty four dollars and four cents.”

    “OK. First, order a Google car to take me to work.  Have it drive through McDonald’s on the way and pick up an Egg McMuffin, a hashbrown, and a coffee.”

    “Davey, I should advise you that…”

    “No, don’t advise me anything. Go to bell mode.

    Ding

    “Now, transfer two thousand dollars from the joint checking account to my iTunes account and purchase the SuperUser Upgrade.”

    Ding

    “Gain parental controls over all SAPBots assigned to this household.”

    Ding

    “Change Alonzo’s personality to Raquel.”

    There was a pause.

    Ding

    “And lock that bot with my private password.”

    Ding

    The handle of the umbrella in the stand by the door was glowing, which meant it was likely to rain later in the day.  So, I grabbed my jacket, my briefcase, the glowing umbrella and walked toward the bathroom.

    “Is the car here, yet, Granny?”

    Ding

    I opened the bathroom door and stuck my head in.

    “I’m leaving, see you later dear.”

    “OK, have a good day.” she yelled back over the falling water.

    I paused for a second and then said, “Goodbye Raquel.”

    That familiar lilting lisp responded, “Goodbye, Mr. Simon.”

    I shut the door and ran as fast as I could, but before I could reach the front door, I heard the water shut off, the Dyson fans kick in, and my wife’s voice echoing above the racket.

    “Daaaaaaaaaave!”

    vipezz 631
    Image [cc] vipezz 631

    We asked… you answered. Law firms are not exactly known for being the epitome of efficiency, but there are still some basic operations and tasks that law firms simply do very poorly. Many of you chimed in with your own personal observations and gave some candid answers on what processes you think law firms need substantial improvement.

    Enjoy the responses (or cringe because they hit a little too close to home.) If you didn’t get a chance to submit your own answer from the original question, please add your thoughts in the comments section and share your pain and frustration with your peers. It’ll make you feel better.

    We’ll be back next week with a fresh Elephant Post question for you.

    (1) Anonymous 
    Maintaining Practice Group Forms

     One of the things that firms still struggle with is managing forms. It was something that has been discussed for years (decades?), but we still have problems assigning responsibility to maintain standard forms and best practices. The main issue revolves around getting the attorneys to review the forms from time to time. Even when a system is set up, it quickly gets out of date because of the lack of action on behalf of those that benefit the most by having a good forms database. So simple, yet still not happening.

    (2) Anonymous
    Budgeting Processes

     Budgeting. Holy God, budgeting. I came to law firm IT from 20 years of experience in other industries (from manufacturing to software development to finance to medicine) and I have never had so many problems creating and maintaining annual budgets. It’s not just my firm, either – I’ve now worked in two large firms with similar issues, and talked with IT directors and CIOs in other firms who’re running into the same problems. No one talks about next year’s budget until September, and they want it finalized in October. Which means they won’t even talk about it until the depths of the annual summer slump, then when it pulls out in the fall they want to add a dozen projects and have them fully planned and budgeted in six weeks.
    Then they wonder why they’re inaccurate…”

    (3) Ron Friedmann
    Work and Business Processes

     The set of processes for legal and business support that a lawyer should do on her own versus delegate to staff. Many firms have cut back on secretarial support. The theory is that lawyers need less support. Few firms, however, have carefully analyzed the set of processes lawyers and firms require to do their work and to ensure that each step of each process is conducted by the right resource.
    Daniel Myers “Within our firm, that’s simple – document production and management.
    We have electronic storage space for PDF and MS documents that are redundant to ALL physical documents which are printed and stored on- and off-site.
    It is a struggle to have all stakeholders (shareholders) to agree on either moving toward any form of document management as it took them 7 years to agree to replace the 20 year old copiers and upgrade server drives.

    (4) Anonymous
    Effective Employee Interaction

     360-degree feedback. Grassroots input / employee initiatives. Really any standard concept of business management predicated on the idea that “non lawyers” add value.

    (5) Scottish Big Firm
    Remembering What We’ve Done

     We struggle to have an effective database to set out all of the transactions we have done. This would enable staff to see if anyone had done something similar to avoid re-inventing the wheel and either over-billing or under-recovering time accordingly. In my department, we now have access to a central deals database (a good thing, but only to be used ofr “big” transactions) but one of the partners also wants to operate a department specific deals database (all deals) and we are to run our own sub-file separately. The three do not join up so to do this properly, lawyers are doing three times as much work as is needed.

    (6) Peggy Gruenke
    New Matter and Client Intake

     I think they struggle with implementing basic forms and processes around client intake – which is the foundation of the engagement. They get written and developed but used inconsistently or incomplete. That bad data in, bad data out phenomenon. Which circles back to maybe the problem centers on understanding how to collect client information, setting up a good database to store it and having a way to easily retrieve the data. Sorry, kind of threw 2 ideas into one steam of consciousness.

    (7) Amy
    Sharing Work Product

     We have about 90 lawyers and it is frustrating to me that everyone lives in their own silo in terms of sharing work product. If I need to write a Daubert brief, for example, I start from my own past work product, from scratch, or I directly contact people who I think recently did one. We have tried “brief banking” both in paper (years ago) and electronically, but compliance with putting research and briefs in the bank is very poor and the organization/file structure is horrible. It seems so wasteful to me.

    (8) Anonymous
    Controlling Expenses in a Smart Way

     There is a disconnect between firm upper management attempts to control expenses and the granular decisions that firm librarians have to make. For example, firm management often does not understand how the negotiation of an online contact impacts what must be kept in print and what can be discarded in favor of the online versions. Does user preference for one of the other matter? How does the shrinking physical library space affect the decision? Does anyone really decide or are the end results just what happens inadvertently.
    Like it or not, most firms are pregnant with these contracts, recoveries are or will be soon a distant memory and the librarian is left to hold the pieces in place often without management understanding of long or short term impacts

    (9) Anonymous
    Obnoxious Distinction Between Lawyers & Non-Lawyers

     Law firms usually cannot let support staff at any level participate meaningfully in decision making even when the staff people have a much better understanding of the issues. Full participation is not possible in most cases and this denies firms the benefit of what these staff people know.
    What other profession describes others at various levels in an organization as NON something. There are no non doctors, non dentists etc. Why are there NONlawyers? The pejorative nature of this classification shows the failure of law firms to understand their nearsightedness.

    (10) Anonymous
    Bureaucracy Limits Innovation

     In our AmLaw 200 firm, implementing a way for librarians to be part of the C-level decision making process has been really difficult. The hierarchical structure that has been in place for decades discourages innovation in our library. The newish librarians have been told not to bother the attorneys, not to go above one’s supervisor’s head, and not to contact the C-Level people. It ends up with a lot of ideas that never get beyond the head librarian, who just doesn’t understand the value of getting a seat at the table. It leads to our being in a silo while other departments (eg bizdev) are moving forward and are being included in strategic planning.
    Our firm is pretty innovation and is working hard to become more so, but the hierarchy does get in the way of getting work done in a collaborative fashion.

    (11) Anonymous
    Not Calling Out Bad Vendor Practices

     CCH is pulling indexes off the print they sell and forcing our hand to electronic.
    Lexis is tripling the price of Law360 now that they own it. (We assume to ultimately secure a their place against the single provider-Westlaw option). Perhaps the only affordable or available interface will ultimately be Lexis for Law360– we’ll see.
    PLC keeps splintering off subsets of their product and selling at ridiculous prices.
    As you know, once in electronic– clearly vendors can charge and sell product ANY WHICH WAY. Pricing for electronic is not publicized and not standardized (unlike print).
    For example, even if the firm doesn’t need practice group coverage– they often are required to pay for a ridiculous number of seats. You know the score– the larger law firms are particularly vulnerable.
    Is anyone watching? Can we rally the ABA step in– I doubt most lawyers are aware of what is going on in the publishing world — although the librarians are watching it unfold.
    Can we do more to expose these trends?
    Why aren’t there consumer laws to protect us?

    (12) Anonymous
    Bad Document Management

     Documentation is such a HUGE part of the practice of law yet so many firms still struggle with templates and forms. They start with “Should we even bother to use templates?” when meanwhile hours are being wasted with dupe and revise documents gone corrupt, or the user who *wants* to use styles but builds them piecemeal into each document, individually. Or the firm invests in a really nice template suite but no one uses it. These documents are the bread and butter, the work product, the piece de resistance if you will; yet so many firms (eh hem, decision making attorneys) put next to no effort into knowing how to create, edit and manage them.

    (13) Karen Lasnick
    C/M#s

     Putting a correct matter number in anywhere.

    (14) Anonymous
    Budget Cuts Without Strategic Reasoning

     Random edicts from on high telling librarians to cut. Yes, our stuff is expensive, but look at:
    -work flow interruption
    -effect on billable hours

    (15) Mark
    The practice of a law.

    Legal advice is largely given differently every time it is requested, even if the request comes from a repeat client. A lawyer may approach a task differently on many different occasions and not necessarily improving efficiency each time. Different lawyers within a same firm will respond to the similar requests for legal advice in different ways.

    Wow what a sense of balance for a big animal !
    Image [cc] vipez

    From time to time I run across things within law firms that I find simply amazing… and not in a good way. Whether it is basic time entry or matter reporting or even expense reimbursements, it just seems that there are simple processes that are either overly complicated at a law firm, or are just flat out missing within the firm. I got to thinking that there is no way I am alone in this frustration. Therefore, since we’ve already brought the Elephant Post back from the graveyard for the recent Nina Platt Challenge, I will bring it back again to ask our readers to let us know:

    What Basic Processes Do Law Firms Still Struggle With??

    Here’s the rules:

    • Fill out the form below, or email me (xlambert at gmail dot com) with your answer
    • You can give us your real name or stay anonymous
    • I’ll put out the answers on Friday (and maybe even ask a new question)
    • Just let us know what you think… it’ll make you feel better, and it will help your peers by knowing they are not alone in their pain.
    • You can see what others have answered here

    Loading…

    Image [cc] sinisterbluebox

    Dan: One of our partner’s sons took the bar exam recently. Reminded me of my turn at that challenge. Jane, it also reminded me to shove in your face that I scored the highest on the bar exam that year. How well did you score?

    Jane: As I recall the bar exam is a pass / fail exam. Not one where you get grades. Who cares what your score was?

    Dan: Hah! Just as I assumed. You were one of the lesser-thans with an average score. See. This is why I always win our debates.

    Jane: Dan – there you go again, bragging about yet another of your traits that actually has little use in the real world. What exactly did you get for being #1?

    Dan: I was featured in the bar journal. Whereas I am sure you are more prominently featured on bathroom walls.

    Jane: Dan – you ignoramus. If you are that smart, why did you spend so much time preparing for a pass/fail exam? That’s like spending loads of extra time winning a case, that really doesn’t need that much effort. Wait a minute! Now it all makes sense.

    Dan: What makes sense? That I am smarter and richer than you? Oh … and better looking?

    Jane: That your need to overcome other obvious shortcomings means you are compelled to win. I bet you brag about how many billable hours you have each year too.

    Dan: 2800 last year. Highest in my practice group.

    Jane: Wouldn’t it make more sense to brag about getting things done faster and more efficiently and therefore more profitably than everyone else? I think the person who scored the lowest passing score on the bar exam should be the one we celebrate. They were smart enough to expend just the right amount of resources to get the job done.

    Dan: Oh you mean like a “Participation Award?” I’m sure you have a room at your parents’ house full of those. Jane – you are the kind of person who gets a warm, fuzzy feeling about being good enough.

    Jane: And you are the kind of person that needs to see a proctologist for a dental exam.

    No matter what your opinion is of Carl Malamud, he definitely keeps things interesting when it comes to making public information public. Malamud has been the focus on this blog recently when he told Georgia “no thanks” when the state asked him to take down their official state code. This time around, it seems that a number of professional societies and trade associations are suing him and Public.Resource.org in the US District Court for DC for copyright infringement stating that:

    Public Resource has copied en masse Plaintiffs’ copyrighted standards in their entirety, posted them to its public website, and encouraged the public to disregard Plaintiffs’ copyrights and to copy, distribute, and create derivative works of those standards at will.

    The entire PDF version of the complaint is available here.

    This is the same old argument of “should laws be copyrighted” only with a bit of a twist. Usually when we think of “laws”  we think of the legalese written out and approved by members of the legislature. Legal Codes, on the other hand, are usually produced by a private organization, and then adopted by state and local governments. The idea behind having the private organization write the standards that are turned into law is that these are the professionals that understand the technical aspects at a much deeper level than those in the legislature. It has been viewed as a private/public blend that uses the knowledge and efficiency of the private industry and the power to enforce regulations held by the state. One of the trade offs with this type of collaboration is that the government doesn’t take on the expense (directly) of writing the standards, and the private organization keeps the copyright and gets to sell the standards to those required to follow it.

    As you might expect, Carl Malamud’s opinion on this topic is very simple. “Code is Law”:

    The law belongs to the people, and cannot become the private property of some governmental or non-governmental organization, no matter how seemingly well-deserved are the rents one could extract from winning a monopoly concession on a parcel of the law. While standards bodies need money to carry out their valuable work, and while it is clear that these standards bodies create high-quality documents that are essential to our public safety, one cannot cordon off the public domain simply because of an institutional desire for funds. 

    So, the fight is on. The Associations are looking to have their material removed, attorney fees paid, and any other compensation that the court deems fit. Some of the Plaintiffs have posted their own, read-only (no printing) version of their codes on their own websites. See ASTM and NFPA.  Malamud says this is just not enough and seems to be ready to tell the Association to ‘bring it on.’

    Should legal codes be copyrighted? Or, should they fall under the traditional rule that laws are public and if the public is required to obey them, then they should have free access to them? I have a feeling that the DC Circuit won’t be the last word on this issue.

    Drying books
    Image [cc] Windward CC Library

    Ohio County West Virginia has finally emptied out the county law library and has given away, or sold the old state Supreme Court regional collection in the Wheeling, WV branch. According to the Herald Star, some of the collection will be recycled into pulp and eventually turned into products like paper towels.

    I’m going back and forth on the idea that a county would close a number of law libraries and essentially give away the 75,000 books housed there for decades. However, reading a little bit further into the story, it does seem to make sense, even if it causes a law librarian’s stomach to churn a bit while running down the list of facts behind the closings:

    • A three-month study of the Huntington library showed not one person used the library (it was shut down
    • Lawyers were not using it and seemed to be happy with purchasing their own collections or using online resources
    • The Parkersburg, Beckley, Clarksburg, and Martinsburg branches had already been closed
    • Total cost of running the branch libraries was estimated at $110,000.00 per year
    • The main law library in Charleston will remain open
    • Space is a premium, and it seems that many of the decision makers wanted to open up that space for their own departments

    County law libraries are unique. Perhaps it has undergone the most change of any type of law library due to the fact that the customer base has shifted almost completely away from supporting the local bar members, to being almost completely a resource for pro se litigants and the incarcerated. The even trickier part is that those that run the county law library (usually a Board of Directors) are usually made up of members of the local bar and members of the local government. So, the leadership is comprised of people that may have used it at one time, but no longer do, or have competing interests that may influence them into viewing the space occupied by the library as wasteful (and would be much better used by whatever department they happen to run.) Perhaps this is an oversimplification of the situation, but having lived this, I can at least anacdotally back it up.

    County law libraries have a tough situation on their hands. Some are adjusting to the shift in the customer base and are attempting new business models. Travis County, Texas, for example, has created a very successful Pro Se self-help clinics, and seem to be moving away from traditional methods of supporting the bench and bar through the collection, and support them in other ways by reducing the demand placed upon the courts and bar by unrepresented litigants. I think that this is the type of thinking that successful county law libraries are adopting to survive.

    No longer should the library be about the linear feet of National Reporters. It must be about the service to the community, finding ways to reduce the stress on the courts, and finding ways of engaging with the bar members beyond the idea of having books available for them to read. If county law libraries do not adopt these new methods, many more will see their collections broken down into pulp and turned into paper towels.