Page 105 - Leaders in Legal Business - PDF - Final 2018
P. 105
The limited reuse value of work product led lawyers to try to develop precedents. They
quickly discovered, however, that creating precedents requires dedicated resources. Good
intentions notwithstanding, busy lawyers lack the time to convert client-specific documents into
more general precedents. To address this gap, law firms hired professional support lawyers
(PSLs) whose job includes creating precedents. PSLs also monitor legal updates and perform
other functions.
PSLs are expensive and typically only partially billable. This led to rise of commercial
services from Thomson Reuters, LexisNexis, and Bloomberg Law, which serve as centralized,
outsourced PSLs. Of note is that U.S. law firms hire fewer PSLs than the U.K., Australia, and
Canada. Few law departments have PSLs.
The explosion in the volume of email has challenged the document paradigm, and not in
a good way. Many lawyers now dispense advice via email. Furthermore, too many lawyers use
email software such as Outlook as a way to manage documents instead of using central
document management systems. Capturing and reusing the advice rendered in email turns out to
be even harder than doing the same with documents. Approaches to managing email are still
maturing.
KM Evolves from Documents to Experience
Even when lawyers can find relevant documents, precedents, or email messages with
good content, these materials have less reuse value than expected. The context in which they
were originally used is key to understanding and reusing them; rarely, however, do documents
convey that context.
An example of capturing context — and immediate learning — is the U.S. military’s
“after action reviews” (AARs), a technique to debrief after an action (typically at least daily) and
capture the learning from it. A few firms and departments do engage in AARs, but that is the
exception.
Consequently, KM emphasis shifted from finding documents to finding experts. The
expert could both identify useful documents and explain their context and use. Early expertise
location efforts relied primarily on self-rating. These attempts almost always failed because
lawyers would not participate and, if they did, they typically under- or over-rated themselves. As
discussed below, search systems initially and now, specialized systems help manage and locate
experience.
Other, bigger forces also shifted the emphasis from documents to experience. The 2008
economic crisis spawned many changes in law firms: First, marketing and business development
grew in importance. Second, firms hired pricing professionals to set budgets and alternative fees.
Third, management started analyzing profitability by matter, client, partner, and type of matter.
And fourth, lateral partner movements markedly increased.
These new initiatives require accurate information about both a lawyer’s experience and
the matter’s area of law:
Winning Pitches Require Presenting the Most Relevant Experience. Companies want
lawyers with proven expertise to solve their problems. Proving expertise — whether
in formal, written proposals or informally in discussions — requires assembling a dossier
showing the firm’s relevant experience and best-fitting lawyers.
91
quickly discovered, however, that creating precedents requires dedicated resources. Good
intentions notwithstanding, busy lawyers lack the time to convert client-specific documents into
more general precedents. To address this gap, law firms hired professional support lawyers
(PSLs) whose job includes creating precedents. PSLs also monitor legal updates and perform
other functions.
PSLs are expensive and typically only partially billable. This led to rise of commercial
services from Thomson Reuters, LexisNexis, and Bloomberg Law, which serve as centralized,
outsourced PSLs. Of note is that U.S. law firms hire fewer PSLs than the U.K., Australia, and
Canada. Few law departments have PSLs.
The explosion in the volume of email has challenged the document paradigm, and not in
a good way. Many lawyers now dispense advice via email. Furthermore, too many lawyers use
email software such as Outlook as a way to manage documents instead of using central
document management systems. Capturing and reusing the advice rendered in email turns out to
be even harder than doing the same with documents. Approaches to managing email are still
maturing.
KM Evolves from Documents to Experience
Even when lawyers can find relevant documents, precedents, or email messages with
good content, these materials have less reuse value than expected. The context in which they
were originally used is key to understanding and reusing them; rarely, however, do documents
convey that context.
An example of capturing context — and immediate learning — is the U.S. military’s
“after action reviews” (AARs), a technique to debrief after an action (typically at least daily) and
capture the learning from it. A few firms and departments do engage in AARs, but that is the
exception.
Consequently, KM emphasis shifted from finding documents to finding experts. The
expert could both identify useful documents and explain their context and use. Early expertise
location efforts relied primarily on self-rating. These attempts almost always failed because
lawyers would not participate and, if they did, they typically under- or over-rated themselves. As
discussed below, search systems initially and now, specialized systems help manage and locate
experience.
Other, bigger forces also shifted the emphasis from documents to experience. The 2008
economic crisis spawned many changes in law firms: First, marketing and business development
grew in importance. Second, firms hired pricing professionals to set budgets and alternative fees.
Third, management started analyzing profitability by matter, client, partner, and type of matter.
And fourth, lateral partner movements markedly increased.
These new initiatives require accurate information about both a lawyer’s experience and
the matter’s area of law:
Winning Pitches Require Presenting the Most Relevant Experience. Companies want
lawyers with proven expertise to solve their problems. Proving expertise — whether
in formal, written proposals or informally in discussions — requires assembling a dossier
showing the firm’s relevant experience and best-fitting lawyers.
91
