July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Continued on page 3

Today’s generation has grown up using search engines like Google that make research seem easy. The challenge for law schools and law firms is to teach their students and young lawyers a more comprehensive process of researching law that yields better results. While new legal databases are powerful aids and the potential for transformational technology exists, they have not yet replaced a thoughtful and organized process of analyzing, identifying, and consulting authoritative primary and secondary sources, in print and online.

Teaching legal research to today’s law students and young lawyers presents a challenge. The current generation is so online-oriented that they have learned to rely on powerful search engines to provide answers to complex questions. The seductive and easy lure of using the Internet for legal research means one never has to leave one’s desk, step into a library, or open a

book. The problem is that too often online research yields superficial results. Also, the vast amount of online information makes navigating to the intended destination a voyage into the unknown.

Experienced researchers and teachers believe that the reliance on electronic resources to the exclusion of print may end up being less efficient. They espouse the idea that sometimes the best

way to start research is to consult a treatise for a general understanding of the legal issues involved. A treatise written by an expert or a legal encyclopedia provides explanation, leading cases and authoritative analysis. After background reading is the time to go online.

Craig Smith, assistant dean for Legal Writing and Academic Excellence at the University of North Carolina School of Law, teaches first-year law students. He finds that one of the problems for students is the excess of information accessible online today. It’s like having to look at the universe through the Hubble telescope. His solution is to show students the economy of a book with a table of contents, index, and annotations. He walks his students into the library and has them hold a casebook, an unfamiliar experience to many. Then he shows them how they can find most of the sources they would need to do research on North Carolina law on just two shelves. On the other hand, when students see text on a screen, they

Teaching Legal Research to the Google Generation

By Janet Accardo, Director of Library Services at Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY

Please direct any comments or questions to either of the editors in chief:

PracticeInnovations

In This Issue EDITORS IN CHIEF

2

EDITORIAL BOARD

Managing Risk Disruption Through Internal Risk Structures: An interview with Donald Caputo, Chief Internal Auditor, Shearman & Sterling

By Elaine M. Egan

Managing risk disruption is much like resumption planning; it needs to be defined, weighed and assigned a high priority within the organization.

Crowdsourcing and Work Synergies

By Elaine M. Egan

Crowdsourcing can offer opportunities for improving the greater sum of an individual’s separate contribution through a distributed workforce by completing complex and discrete tasks on demand.

Law Firm Space Planning as a Knowledge Management Strategy

By Jean O’Grady

The knowledge-enabled productivity and financial rewards of radically redesigning law office space promise to be significant for law firms that have the courage to change.

Paying Attention to the Canaries in KM’s Mineshaft

By V. Mary Abraham

Canaries are the early warning signs of important changes in the environment. We will take a look at some of the canaries in the mineshafts currently populated by law firm knowledge management (KM) personnel.

Teaching Legal Research to the Google Generation

By Janet Accardo

The challenge for law schools and law firms is to teach their students and young lawyers a more comprehensive process of researching law that yields better results.

Big Law: Big Data

By Lynn R. Watson

Big data is impacting the way attorneys practice law, how they manage their business, and how they interact and relate with their clients. William P. Scarbrough

Chief Operating OfficerBodman PLC6th Floor at Ford Field1901 St. Antoine StreetDetroit, MI 48226office: 313-393-7558fax: 313-393-7579email: wscarbrough@bodmanlaw.com

Janet AccardoDirector of Library Services Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLPFour Times SquareNew York, NY 10036-6522212.735.2345email: janet.accardo@skadden.com

Sharon Meit Abrahams, Ed.D.National Director of Professional DevelopmentFoley & Lardner LLP Miami, FL

Silvia CoulterPrincipalLawVision GroupBoston, MA

Elaine M. EganManager, Information Center Shearman & Sterling LLP New York, NY

Ronda FischDirector of Research and Library SystemsReed Smith LLP Pittsburgh, PA

Lisa Kellar GianakosDirector of Knowledge Management Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP Washington, DC

Jean O’GradyDirector of Research Services DLA Piper, US, LLP Washington, DC

Don PhilmleeLegal Technology ConsultantWashington, DC

Kathleen SkinnerDirector of Research ServicesMorrison & Foerster LLPSan Francisco, CA

Lynn R. WatsonDirector of Information Resource TechnologiesHogan Lovells US, LLP Washington, DC

William P. ScarbroughChief Operating OfficerBodman PLCDetroit, MI

Janet AccardoDirector of Library Services Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP New York, NY

Risk Avoidance through Succession Planning

By Ronda Fisch

Effective risk management is an ongoing process that must be consciously managed within an organization.

3Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Teaching Legal Research to the Google Generation — Continued from page 1

don’t distinguish differences; all the text looks alike. In a book or periodical, the pages and formatting make it easier to differentiate among cases, annotations, law reviews, and commentary. In addition, the challenge of identifying reliable sources online is exacerbated by legal databases framing every screen of text with their brand, suggesting all is authoritative, whether from a blog or a primary source.1

Many law schools offer courses in advanced legal research, although not all require them. Those that do, like Yeshiva University’s Cardozo School of Law, aim to turn out graduates who are savvy in doing research and thus more effective lawyers in their chosen fields. Lynn Wishart, associate dean at Cardozo, strives to meet the challenge of training the school’s students. She believes that the problem often precedes a student’s arrival at law school. Students may have lacked a good high school civics course in which they learned how a law is enacted or the difference between statutes, codes and regulations. Without a basic understanding of our legal system and which branches of government promulgate which laws and regulations, students do not know where to look. Another factor at law schools is that the schools themselves pay for Westlaw, Lexis, and Bloomberg Law for their students, and the students don’t see the costs of their searches.2 The incentive to be cost-effective doesn’t impact them until they enter law firms where search costs are either charged as an overhead expense or passed along to clients. Clients will not, and should not, pay for their inefficiencies.

To compensate for these challenges, developers of the most popular search engines and legal databases have been successful in building systems that do some of the thinking for law students and young lawyers. They can surface information that the user may not otherwise have sought out.3 Thomson Reuters’ Westlaw was the first to provide a more Google-like search interface. WestSearch®, the basis for WestlawNext®, was launched in 2010, followed the same year by the LexisNexis counterpart, Lexis Advance®. In a July 2012 article in Practice Innovations, Mike Dahn, senior vice president in New Product Development at Thomson Reuters, wrote about the “Impact of New Legal Research Platforms on Attorney Research.” Mike cited the significant advancements in modern legal research technology that have improved “the research experience by making the interface easier to use, more like navigating the Web.” WestSearch “automatically recognizes the user’s search format and does a global search across a comprehensive and authoritative collection of legal content.”4 The content includes cases, statutes, regulations, treatise material, and

articles, so the user doesn’t have to select a database or run multiple searches in different databases. Brian Quinn, currently senior director of New Product Development at Thomson Reuters, follows the premise that “the current generation of students and recent graduates is used to finding the right path quickly, starting from a simple search.” To accommodate this expectation when retrieving cases and dockets, WestlawNext has a type ahead/autosuggest feature. All the user has to do is type one or two words of the case name without the exact citation, and the case or docket most likely comes up. The user could even have the wrong court and still find the case.5

Thomson Reuters, Reed Elsevier, and Bloomberg BNA are examples of companies that have made acquisitions to increase content in a bid for exclusive use by attendees and attorneys in law schools, courts and firms. Legal information providers aim to win over students in law school so they will be committed for life. In addition, the vendors are integrating content into practice pages where researchers can supposedly find everything they need to research and practice law, from current awareness and drafting tools to forms, treatises, and journals. Law firms are also building practice pages on their intranets so their attorneys can “live on their practice page” and go there when looking for information. They are creating online libraries.

Database finding tools, content groupings and sophisticated search engines are very helpful in navigating the vast universe of legal information, but they are only a start. As one law school librarian said, Google has framed expectations and made research look simple—“automagical”—when it is not. The real solutions to complex legal issues and problems require analysis and thoughtful conclusions. A noted West Coast law school in its mandatory legal research course taught by librarians has found it more effective to focus on a research process rather than sources. The process consists of:

1) conducting preliminary analysis (identify the jurisdiction, key words, branch of government, multiple issues);

2) selecting a good secondary source (treatise, legal encyclopedia, law review, etc.);

3) consulting the best primary sources (opinions cited most frequently);

4) updating and expanding to verify if authoritative (use built-in tools like headnotes, key numbers, Shepard’s, KeyCite, or analytical material); and

4

Article Title | Continued from page 1Teaching Legal Research to the Google Generation

5) repeating the process using new keywords or issues raised in the research process.

The law librarians advise students to select and use three good words, neither too general nor specific, with no connectors, to search. Students are instructed to use the big search box, but then drill down to the right source. They are also advised about using Boolean and proximity operators like within sentence or paragraph and the exclamation point (!) to retrieve variations in root words. These tips are outlined in a template students can consult to organize their research process.6 Teaching “how” rather than “what” is much more effective in the long run.

Fortunate are the students who have had the benefit of courses like the ones at the law schools mentioned. They will be much better equipped when they arrive at law firms as new associates. Sometimes law firms find the level of preparation varies greatly. While most provide orientation for their new arrivals, the average time the programs can devote to legal research training ranges from one to four hours with additional classes on Lexis and Westlaw. In addition, there is usually practice specific training. After the first year, convincing attorneys to attend refresher and update sessions can be challenging.

Librarians and lawyers in firms work in an industry where the client base is seeking to optimize results while achieving maximum efficiencies. We are all under pressures to demonstrate value for the cost of services provided. Most large firms use research monitoring and tracking tools like OneLog®, LookUp Precision®, Research Monitor®, and Westlaw Analytics® to analyze database use and cost recovery. These systems help identify individuals who are incurring high charges and thus could benefit from more training. If a partner is concerned about a large amount billed to a client, the firm can use Smart Recharge or Westlaw Analytics to explain where the inefficiencies occurred. The documentation also can serve as encouragement for the user to attend more training.

Teaching and learning effective legal research methods always have been challenging. Google has only changed expectations. While powerful search engines have made the process seem easier, it really is more difficult. There are so many more places to look. If law school students and new lawyers learn a methodology to follow, they are more likely to become effective researchers. They won’t stop with the first five results and think they have the answer. The best lawyers will delve deeper, consult experts, find the exceptions, and analyze and summarize their findings. They will stay at the forefront of understanding both the law and legal technology, and how to integrate the two. Only then will they excel and rise to the top of their field.

The views expressed herein are the author’s, and are not necessarily the view of Skadden Arps or one or more of its clients.

Sources1. From a May 14, 2014 phone conversation

between the author and Craig Smith.

2. From a May 13, 2014, phone conversation between the author and Lynn Wishart.

3. DiCosimo, Maria, a research solutions specialist at LexisNexis, speaking of Lexis Advance.

4. Dahn, Mike, “Impact of New Legal Research Platforms on Attorney Research,” Practice Innovations, July 2012, v.13, no.3.

5. From a May 16, 2014 phone conversation and emails between the author and Brian C. Quinn.

6. From a May 19, 2014 phone conversation between the author and a research law librarian at a West Coast law school.

Text tk

5Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Paying Attention to the Canaries in KM’s Mineshaft

Every industry has its canaries. They are the early warning signs of important changes in the environment. In this article, we will take a look at some of the canaries in the mineshafts currently populated by law firm knowledge management (KM) personnel.

How do we breathe? What affects our breathing? These are two of the many questions that fascinated John Scott Haldane from the late 19th through the early 20th century when he used his abilities as a physiologist and philosopher to study the fundamentals of breath. Haldane identified the toxic gases that killed miners after mine explosions, created respirators that enabled rescue workers to

provide life-saving assistance after a mine disaster, and found there were two very effective ways of providing an early warning of the presence of toxic gases: a fire safety lamp and small animals. He brought white mice and canaries into mines since their faster metabolisms caused them to show the negative impact of toxic gases well before those gases could affect a human’s slower metabolism. Therefore, as long as miners kept a close eye on their canaries, they would have ample warning of the need to evacuate the mine before they were likely to suffocate.

The Canary of Law Firm RelevanceWhen does the canary of law firm relevance thrive? Any time that canary is present for the important decisions

a law firm makes. And what are the major decisions a firm makes that have the biggest impact on its viability? Making real estate arrangements for its offices, hiring, launching new practices, and pursuing specific client relationships. If you are in a law firm support function and are substantively involved in any of those decisions, then you have lots of oxygen to thrive. The further you are from these important areas of decision-making, however, the harder it is to stay relevant and thrive.

Now take a look at your KM function. Are your skills and resources brought to bear on the major decisions identified above? If not, chances are the canary of law firm relevance near you is running out of breath. How much longer do you have before your function no longer seems as relevant to the firm?

Apologists for law firm KM will say that even if the KM function does not have an impact on decisions relating to office space, hiring, new practices, or client relationships, that is fine because KM supports the practice of law, which is the engine for the firm. Yes, basic KM executed well does support the practice of law. The problem is that this KM support often is buried. It is rarely acknowledged by fee-earners. Further, it can be difficult to draw a straight line from a specific KM activity to firm revenue or documented cost savings.

By V. Mary Abraham, Co-Founder at Broadli Inc., New York, NY

6

Paying Attention to the Canaries in KM’s Mine Shaft

If you determine that the canary near you is not faring well, what can you do? Think hard about how knowledge resources and KM principles might assist in these major decisions and then bring your solutions to the attention of the decision-makers. Since they do not have your expertise, they are unlikely to know your capabilities and the extent to which KM may be relevant to their work. It is your job to educate them and, ultimately, convince them of your relevance.

The Canary of Client RelevanceFrom a client’s perspective, what are some of its most important decisions? Planning strategy, choosing among business opportunities, day-to-day risk and compliance management, and selecting legal counsel. If you are in a law firm function that has an impact on these critical client decisions, then chances are that the canary near you is thriving. If you are not involved in these decisions, then you largely are invisible to the client and to any lawyer who seeks to influence client decision-making on these issues.

Interestingly enough, it may in fact be easier for a law firm KM support function to obtain access to these client decisions than to some of the law firm business decisions discussed above. For example, KM resources in some firms have been used to populate and manage expertise tools that help clients with risk and compliance issues. Further, information about a robust KM program in a law firm can help a client choose that firm as its outside counsel. These two approaches require varying amounts of effort, but can have an impact on key client decisions.

The Canary of KPI RelevanceA key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric used by a business to determine progress against strategic and operational goals. Depending on the range of goals, there will be a corresponding range of KPIs the business must track and assess. For example, a client-facing business would be wise to track client satisfaction with service, client satisfaction with value for money, and client satisfaction with the quality of its relationship with the service provider.

It should be possible for a KM program that is executed properly to improve the quality of law firm work product. It should also be possible for KM to improve the efficiency of the firm in delivering that work product. Therefore, KM should at a minimum be able to increase the client’s sense of satisfaction regarding value for money. The question to consider is whether your KM function achieves this.

Lessons from these CanariesNow imagine a mineshaft where some of the miners are paying attention to the canary and others are blithely ignoring it. Does that seem preposterous? Take another look. It is the mineshaft inhabited by law firm KM personnel. It is worth studying both sets of miners to understand better what they are seeing and how they are behaving.

The Observant MinersIn an increasing number of firms, KM personnel have seen the distressed conditions of their canaries and are taking steps to improve their situation. They have done this principally by shifting their focus from old-style law firm KM (e.g., focused on documents, databases, and intranets) to newer functions that leverage KM capabilities and resources in fresher ways. These newer functions include assisting with alternative fee arrangements, legal project management, and law firm (and client) process improvement. These firms have also used KM to create new products and services for client use: tailored current awareness, legal and business toolkits, expertise systems, subscription services, and consulting services are a few of the new offerings by KM. In these firms, KM personnel speak about how often they meet face-to-face with clients. They also speak about how their work results directly in additions to revenue. They are no longer a hidden part of overhead; they are a visible part of revenue generation that is valued by client and firm alike.

The Unobservant MinersThe unobservant miners doggedly cling to activities that were once standard KM tasks: maintaining collections (on the intranet or elsewhere), managing taxonomies, tagging documents with metadata, creating model documents and practice guides. While all of these activities have value, some firms have found that their costs do not justify their benefits. As technology improves, tasks such as tagging and document collection maintenance can increasingly be automated. And as the speed of practice grows, model documents and practice guides fall more quickly out of date unless the firm commits additional resources to keeping those documents current. Further, there is a real opportunity cost involved. Time spent manually tagging documents or creating largely static pages on an intranet likely would be better spent improving business processes or supporting an alternative fee arrangement that otherwise will cut too deeply into firm profits.

7Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Paying Attention to the Canaries in KM’s Mine Shaft

These unobservant miners may also be involved in concierge-type activities in which they provide personalized on demand service to individual lawyers of the firm. At a personal level, providing this type of service can be highly gratifying. The KM staff member involved knows beyond a doubt that she has actually helped someone in need. The problem is that this type of assistance rarely is scalable unless the KM department takes deliberate steps to consolidate and share the knowledge. Furthermore, there is an opportunity cost to this work: time spent for the benefit for an individual is time that usually cannot be spent in service to the wider firm.

What’s Next?At the end of the day, each miner has a choice: pay attention to the canary or ignore it. Granted, even if a miner ignores the canary, that miner might still make it out alive provided other miners raise the alert quickly and the mine evacuation plans are good enough to permit the efficient evacuation of all miners before disaster strikes. As we have seen from the frequent reports in the news of mining disasters around the world, sometimes miners simply are not that lucky. Do you really want to risk it?

Take a look at your own mineshaft in your law firm and compare it to those in other firms. Are you close to where the action is—literally and figuratively—in terms of the most vital decisions your clients and your firm make? Is the KM work you do relevant to those

decisions? If the answer to these questions is no, chances are the canaries of relevance are not thriving in your mineshaft. So you have an important decision to make: do you stay or do you go? The question of staying or going is not necessarily about remaining with your firm. It is, more importantly, about remaining in your function as currently conceived. If the work you do does not have an impact on the big decisions, can you take steps that bring you and your work closer to those decisions and the decision makers involved? Can you begin to redraw the boundaries of your work so that its impact on the firm and its clients is clearer? And if you do not believe your firm will assist with or tolerate these changes, is there another firm that would be more supportive?

To be clear, this is not about your competence or performance. In fact, you could be at the top of your game, but if no one in your firm or at your client notices, you may well have a problem. During difficult economic times, you do not want to lose ground in the relevance game. So what should you do? Take a leaf out of the playbook of the observant miners. See how they have used their KM abilities to adapt to the changing environment. And, through this process, keep in mind the sage advice of Yoda: “If no mistake have you made, yet losing you are ... a different game you should play.”

8

The knowledge-enabled productivity and financial rewards of radically redesigning law office space promise to be significant for law firms that have the courage to change.

Law Firm Space Planning as a Knowledge Management Strategy

Just as firms have been grappling with the billable hour for the past decade, the coming decade may be marked by the struggle to redefine the legal workplace. Office rent has been the second largest expense for law firms. Firms outside the US have already made significant strides in developing innovative space strategies. While cost reduction may be the primary

incentive to reinvent the law office, firms should not overlook this as an opportunity to create “knowledge enabling” work environments. Ivan Ross, CEO of Geyer Architects, gave a presentation at the 2013 Janders Dean Knowledge Management Conference in Sydney, Australia, explaining how space planning can be a powerful lever to drive knowledge management strategies and cultural change.1

Technology is Driving the Revolution, but is also Part of the Problem Virtual networks, smartphones, and laptops have created a generation of “road warriors” who can work in transit, at client sites, from a ballpark, from hotel rooms, or from home. Technology has dramatically impacted space needs, and firms have largely responded by consolidating their existing footprint but not trying to reinvent the entire concept of the law office.

Tech savvy lawyers, intuitive software, voice mail, cell phones, and anytime and anywhere access to clients have dramatically reduced secretarial staffing ratios. Aisles of secretarial stations and walls and rooms of file storage are receding from the landscape. Digital research resources have reduced the footprint of libraries. Administrative functions such as Human Resources, IT, and Accounting can be moved to locations across town or across the country to save money.

Diversity initiatives have encouraged law firms to accommodate flexible work schedules and to allow lawyers to work from home.

It is estimated that on an average day 30 to 40 percent of a firm’s lawyers are not in their home office. The chronic mobility has compromised mentoring, skill building, and face-to-face relationships that are the basis of knowledge sharing and the glue of firm culture.

Technology as Both Enabler and Impediment to Knowledge SharingTechnology has enabled the sharing of explicit knowledge through the development of knowledge bases, clause banks and expert systems, virtual networks, intranets, and extranets. Technology and pervasive mobility have impaired the sharing of tacit knowledge, the indefinable expertise held by each individual lawyer. A study by the Herman Miller Company describes tacit knowledge as knowledge that can’t be stored in a database. It is “acquired without the use of language, by observation, imitation, and practice.”2 If you were to ask most lawyers

By Jean O’Grady, Director of Research Services, DLA Piper, Washington, DC

9Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

where knowledge was stored at their law firm they are likely to say “in people heads.” What’s a law firm to do?

Impediments to ChangeStatus. The single most important driver of law firm design has been “status.” The proverbial large, private, corner office with solid walls and a closed door guarded by “gatekeeper” secretary is not a model which invites teamwork and knowledge sharing.

Focus and Confidentiality. Lawyers legitimately fear that more open environments will impair their ability to focus and compromise client confidentiality. Innovative law firms, collaborating with expert architects and designers, have already designed more open models and design elements that address these concerns.

The architectural and design firm Gensler recently released a report on law firm space planning “Substance over Status: Justifying Change.”3 One of the key findings is that: “Legal teams are replacing individual stars. Clients judge law firms by teams not just one lawyer. Law firms have to recognize the importance of teams in supporting large complex matters across multiple time zones.”

The Key Concepts of Gensler’s ReDesign Law InitiativeGensler, in collaboration with Thomson Reuters and other organizations, debuted an innovative “Law Office of the Future” at the 2014 Association of Legal Administrators Meeting in Toronto.

The ReDesign Law Concepts are:

1. Less is more. Smaller offices, more interior offices.

2. Build more variety and choice into people’s work environment. Gensler’s workplace study indicated that there is a 12 percent increase in productivity when people have workspace choices.

3. Future-proof your environment. Create space that can expand, contract, and be reconfigured as needed.

4. Ubiquitous technology enhances collaboration and mobility.

5. Connect the Dots. Face-to-face interactions still build social capital.

6. One size doesn’t fit all. Find the workplace strategy that works for your firm.

Concepts for Knowledge Enabling Design4

Open Plan. “Open plan” is the generic term describing any floor plan that makes use of large, open spaces, which may include high and low

partitions and minimizes the use of private offices. A properly designed open plan office can foster ambient awareness and teamwork.

Universal Office Size. Single size offices not only offer dramatic cost savings, but they communicate collegiality and de-emphasize status, which in turn supports a culture of knowledge sharing.

Hoteling. Lawyers and staff can reserve specific locations in an open plan office.

Hot Desking. Lawyers and staff don’t have dedicated workspaces. They choose from available offices or workstations when they arrive. This assures continual exposure of lawyers and staff to other lawyers working on new issues with different work styles and expertise.

Offices Moved to the Center. An alternative to “open plan” is moving offices away from the windows into the center of the floor. This creates common collaboration areas between the offices and the windows. Moving partners to the middle automatically makes them more accessible which enhances knowledge sharing.

Glass. Transparent walls and doors immediately communicate valuable information about whether a lawyer is in the office, on the phone or in a good mood. Glass implicitly encourages more interaction and suggests a more open culture.

Studios. Groupings of two, four, six, or eight attorneys or team members who benefit from working in proximity to each other.

Quiet Rooms. Small rooms in an open plan environment designed for temporary relocation for private phone calls or focused work.

Media Stations. Democratized teleconferencing stations which accommodate small groups and provide a wall of screens showing participants in other locations.

Pink Noise. “Pink noise” is an acoustic technology that creates an ambient sound, which drowns out distracting noises such as phone conversations.

Genius Bar. A concept taken from the Apple Store which provides a dedicated workstation where lawyers can receive training or have a face to face consultation with a technology or research expert.

Flexible Furnishings and Walls. Easily expand and contract based on staff and project needs.

Coffee Bars and Commons. High traffic, informal social spaces designed to facilitate chance meetings and casual face-to-face contacts, which build relationships and enhance knowledge sharing.

Law Firm Space Planning as a Knowledge Management Strategy

10

Law Firm Space Planning as a Knowledge Management Strategy

US Firms Gearing Up to ReDesign Law Firm SpaceGensler’s Steve Martin reports that while US firms are still largely resistant to a full “open plan” design, some firms have begun to break with some traditional conventions of law firm design. One Am Law 100 firm has merged some public and private spaces. Rather than meeting alone in a conference room, partners have the option to bring clients in to an appealing public café type space that includes a fireplace within the firm where they can have their meeting. The ambience of this space facilitates casual introductions to other lawyers. The firm reports that this has enhanced cross selling opportunities and that some clients now request to meet in the café rather than the conference room.

According to Martin one of the unique challenges in designing law firm space is providing the right balance between private and collaborative space. The knowledge enabled productivity and financial rewards of radically redesigning law office space promise to be significant for law firms that have the courage to change.

Sources:1. “Designing Physical Spaces as a Knowledge

Management and Collaboration Tool,” Geyer.

2. “Making Room for Collaboration,” Herman Miller Company.

3. “Substance over Status: Justifying Change,” Gensler.

4. “Knowledge Management Feng Shui: Designing Knowledge Sharing-Friendly Office Space,” By Marc Steinlin, KM4Df Journal; 1:108-112.

5. “Nowhere to Hide,” The Lawyer, February 6, 2012.

UK and Australia Out in FrontAccording to a survey conducted by The Lawyer, more than one-third of UK law firms have already moved to open plan space.5 Open plan firms report a variety of benefits depending on the redesign features and cultural expectations of the firms.

The law firm Eversheds adopted the studio concept and reports that by placing new lawyers in close proximity to lawyers with various levels of seniority, they absorbed a greater range of perspectives and skills.

Reynolds Porter Chamberlain reports that after they moved to “open plan” the number of emails dropped by 40 percent. Lawyers suddenly found it was easier to talk directly to their colleagues and to call impromptu meetings.

The Manchester firm George Davies, after moving to open plan, mandated that partners can’t sit in the same location two days in a row. This strategy forces partners to interact with a larger group of lawyers and gives younger lawyers the chance to observe and interact with a variety of partners. They also noted that in the open plan environment lawyers stopped “dabbling” outside their practice areas and referred more work to colleagues with greater expertise.

Brisbane law firm Gadens moved partners to the middle of open plan workspace as a reflection of the friendly open culture of the firm. They allowed firm culture to drive an open design. Even though many partners gave up window offices with spectacular views, the redesign has been embraced as an overwhelming success.

A common theme in each of these anecdotes is that each firm developed a unique and culturally appropriate strategy to encourage knowledge sharing after they moved from traditional offices to the open plan environment.

Text tk

11Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Crowdsourcing and Work Synergies

Crowdsourcing is a very real business concept. Definitions vary, but essentially the idea is to tap into the broader collective intelligence of a cohort or group to perform needed services, develop ideas, and create content through contributions in the social community, thus eliminating the need for traditional employees or suppliers. The success of Wikipedia is a perfect example. Why hire writers and editors and invest in an infrastructure when you can give a crowd the ability

to develop an online encyclopedia, some say the most comprehensive encyclopedia in the world?

But what does that mean for the way we work? It seems this change will be radical in the near future. What we know, who we know, how we gather information, and utilize resources influence our everyday work life. Therefore, it isn’t any surprise that volunteer-based crowdsourcing has turned into an industry of crowd workers. This type of work has a wide range of skill, pay levels, and hierarchies. Anyone with access to the Internet can contribute to a task through a myriad of crowd working platforms, such as Amazon’s

Mechanical Turk® or a more professionally oriented crowd work platform such as ODesk®.

Not all jobs or projects are ideal for this concept, but usually there are segments of a job that can be distributed to the crowd. As crowdsourcing becomes more commonplace, people are beginning to understand the basic idea of giving tasks to the masses who are interested in participating and shaping the outcome of a project. But there is the potential of crowd work diminishing outcomes through the loss of communication channels, nontraditional workspaces, trust, intellectual property rights, stagnant and undeveloped skills, and lack of motivation.

In corporations or formal work environments there is very real opportunity to open the power of crowdsourcing internally. Corporations with millions of employees have the most at stake in work efficiencies yet still seem hesitant to embrace this work model. Historically, these work environments were leaders in efficiency work models such as the adoption of Frederick W. Taylor’s The Principles of Scientific Management, focusing on job fragmentation and time and motion theory. But today it is nontraditional organizations driving the value of work models like crowdsourcing through social and entrepreneurial channels.

Crowdsourcing can offer opportunities for improving the greater sum of an individual’s separate contribution through a distributed workforce by completing complex and discrete tasks on demand. This article touches upon the business values and challenges of crowdsourcing and crowd working generally, while highlighting how the practice of law may secure value and understand underlying risks.

By Elaine M. Egan, Manager, Libraries and Information Centers—Americas, Shearman & Sterling, LLP, New York, NY

12

From a practical standpoint, crowdsourcing can be deployed within an organization’s internal business “social” network by leveraging flexible workforces, systematizing related work, and scaling up or down throughout a project. Internal project owners would invite individuals or groups to participate in projects they would like to work on, thereby encouraging employees to learn new skills and to contribute beyond their current roles. Value systems and task hierarchies could be applied to each task and project, contributing to organizational productivity, and stretching assignments for team and individual advancement.

Since social networks fuel crowdsourcing, can it gain inroads in the legal industry where legal ethics regulators are paying close attention to what legal professionals are doing with social media? After all, crowdsourcing involves seeking input or advice from a large group, relying on their collective wisdom and experience.

Even the most experienced lawyer can be overwhelmed by the amount of research, case law, and the number of tasks required to manage a client matter successfully. A good argument can be made that the increasing commitment to knowledge management, experience management systems, and legal project management are based on this very idea of crowdsourcing. The prevalence of collaboration in the legal industry is aligned with the openness of crowdsourcing. By harnessing the power of social sharing, the rigor of research and problem solving, crowdsourcing allows new lawyers to tap into the wisdom of a seasoned attorney.

Combining these aspects in the legal industry to good effect are two examples of social legal disruptors. Mootus® (www.mootus.com) is a social platform developed by Adam Ziegler and Jeff Schneller whose primary message seems to be “legal research should be iterative, not redundant.” Mootus users submit issues for argument and the crowd then determines if citations are “on point” or support the argument. It is a way for law students and lawyers to practice effective skills in arguing their case. Casetext (www.casetext.com), developed by Jake Heller and Joanna Huey and launched in 2013, is unique for its content, but users can also add descriptions and annotations to the cases.

The legal industry, like any business considering the long-term ramifications of crowdsourcing, will need to review privacy, security, reputation, and intellectual property concerns, not to mention decide what might constitute legal advice by the crowd. But harnessing the power of the crowd in any organization develops a culture of collaboration, unlocking knowledge, creativity, potential, and efficiencies that deliver a competitive advantage.

Crowdsourcing and Work Synergies

Text tk

13Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Big Law: Big Data

Big Data is all around us; we all experience it and we all contribute to it whether we realize it or not. Law firms are no different, and in many ways are being impacted more than it appears on the surface. Big data is impacting the way attorneys practice law, how they manage their business, and how they interact and relate with their clients. Although big data can be leveraged and used as a differentiator, in some respects, it also has the ability to level the playing field as the free flow of information leads to greater transparency in the field of law.

need to document, store and share nearly every moment of their lives. If you take a minute and reflect on your own personal practices, you’ll inevitably find some of the traits lurking within yourself. Undoubtedly, you have accounts with a multitude of sites for everything from retail and travel to social and financial, including several personal email accounts, plus:

• Facebook®

• Twitter®

• Instagram®

• Box® or Dropbox®

• Amazon®

• iTunes® or GooglePlay®

• Evernote®

• Netflix® … You get the idea. You log in and you tweet and retweet, search, read, comment, email, save files, tag photos, check-in, and stream. You’re connected, and all the time, via your PC, laptop, smartphone, and tablet. And with cellular data plans and Wi-Fi hotspots, your ability to connect is ubiquitous.

“The statistics are stunning: about 90% of all the data in the world has been generated in the past two years (a statistic that is holding roughly true even as time passes). There are about 2.7 zettabytes of data in the digital universe, where 1ZB of data is a billion terabytes (a typical computer hard drive these days can hold about 0.5TB, or 500 gigabytes). IBM predicts that will hit 8ZB by 2015. Facebook

alone stores and analyses more than 50 petabytes (50,000 TB) of data.”

—Charles Arthur, The Guardian

That’s a Lot of Data!Gartner attributes the exponential growth described above to what it calls the “Nexus of Forces:” the convergence of social, mobile, and cloud information. Although these factors have facilitated the growth, it’s the “Always-on Generation” that is actually spurring the data explosion.1 The common identifying factor of this new generation isn’t an age bracket, but rather, their

By Lynn R. Watson, Director of Information Resource Technologies, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Washington, DC

14

Big Law: Big Data

Big Data from Individual to OrganizationHere are a few quick facts by which you can gauge your contribution to the big data explosion:2

• People send more than 144.8 billion email messages every day.

• There are more than 340 million tweets sent every day.

• Google receives over 2 million search queries a minute.

• 100 TB of data is uploaded daily to Facebook.

• YouTube users upload 48 hours of new video every minute of the day.

Aside from the data that people are consciously generating, there is a wealth of information that companies like Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook are collecting in the background. With every visit, they store information such as your device and operating system, your ISP, your location, the date and time, your search terms, your browser, your email address, your click-throughs, your IP address, other IP addresses you may have visited, etc. Even small organizations can easily obtain and store these same types of data points using a myriad of tools available for collecting “machine data.”

In addition to collecting data that directly impacts their front office operations, many organizations are leveraging these same capabilities to collect data that they can leverage to streamline their back office operations. For example, companies are collecting data such as invoice and payment information, on-time statistics for supply chain partners, product and sales information, performance metrics, etc. Companies have discovered that by leveraging big data, they can directly impact all aspects of their business, and the concept is quickly spreading across all industries.

Legal Industry and Big DataThere is a level of irony to law firms and big data: traditionally, law firms are not huge generators of data,3 and conventionally, they are not at the forefront of technology, but law firms are getting hit with big data from all sides. Big data is affecting how attorneys practice law, how they are managing their firms, and how they are interacting with their clients.

Effects on the Practice of LawIf anyone has felt the immediate effects of big data, it’s the firm’s e-discovery attorneys. All of the emails and data being collected and generated by corporate

clients is potential fodder for a case. A single matter can potentially bring in terabytes of data that need to be sifted through, sorted and analyzed. To help manage the process, the expectations, and to instill a sense of reasonableness, the US Federal courts instituted Rule 26 of the FRCP which includes the required meet and confer between parties in the early stages of the engagement.4 This meeting is meant to set the ground rules for how discovery is going to be played out. During this phase, the parties collaborate to determine who the relevant custodians are, what timeframes are relevant, how the information should be collected, how it should be produced, and when. In order to effectively engage in these negotiations, the attorneys need to have a real understanding of the relevant data stores and the underlying technologies. They need to know that the data is just as likely to be sitting in the cloud as on a local hard drive, and they need to know that it’s possible that relevant facts may be in an email, or may be found on a social networking site like Facebook. Furthermore, relevant data may not be data that was drafted or created by the party in question, but it could be something stored that was generated by a machine—such as the device that was used or the OS on the originating system.

And it doesn’t end there. Once you’ve collected the data in question, the next step is to review it and to produce it. Assigning 20 attorneys to review the data in a closed case room for a week is no longer an option. To deal with these new volumes of electronic data, often a hybrid approach is necessary. Early Case Assessment tools are used to cull the data to a more manageable set so that people with expertise can take over and focus on the most relevant data that remains. Of course, the underlying understanding is that you are protecting your client’s data and their privacy by securing the data in question throughout the life cycle of the case.

There was a time when attorneys would start this review process rolling, hand the reigns over to Litigation Support, and back away until they were handed documents for review. However, according to the recently revised Model Rules of Professional Conduct put forth by the ABA, it’s no longer an option to plead technology ignorance. Attorneys now have an ethical obligation to their clients to keep up with technology relevant to them and their representation, and they also have a commitment to protect the client’s information.5 Attorneys and firms now personally assume the risk associated with how technology is employed when handling their cases.

15Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Big Law: Big Data

Of course, big data is also providing new opportunities. There are a myriad of legal issues swirling around big data and its management. There are privacy and security concerns, consumer protection issues, compliance requirements (both in the US and internationally), information governance questions, risk management concerns, etc. Assimilating the disparate data points from their data stores, companies are led to practices that walk a fine line and introduce issues such as consumer profiling, which could lead to questions of discrimination. Furthermore, if a company compiles the data but the veracity of the data comes into question, what are the legal issues and potential consequences? Given that big data is permeating all industries, the real question is whether or not these are questions left to a specialized few, or are these areas of concern that all attorneys should be versed in?6

Effects on the Business of LawIt’s an opportune time for firms to begin leveraging the potential of big data. The recent recession has taken its toll, and the existing business model of most law firms is unsustainable in the new marketplace. In order to succeed going forward, law firms need to take a few leads from their corporate counterparts. Gone are the days of unstructured billing arrangements based on unpredictable billable hours and ever increasing hourly rates. Law firms are now confronted with new mandates from their clients to provide accurate billing estimates, alternative fee arrangements, and proof of adherence to legal project management principles and practices. In order to successfully engage on this new playing field, firms need to have a solid understanding of the resources and costs involved in undertaking different types of client work and they need to be able to attain new levels of efficiency.7 Some of the required information can be harvested by analyzing existing data sets, such as the firm’s accounting system, the time entry system, perhaps the metrics from the document review system, etc. By being able to marry pieces of information together from disparate systems regardless of the format, attorneys can leverage some of the same technologies as their corporate counterparts, and in doing so, they can start to learn a lot more about their business. For example, the firm can better assess the human resources required for a case, the work breakdown structure by required level of expertise, the potential profitability of a case, and other metrics based on past cases of a similar size and nature. It is worth noting that for most firms this is currently a very difficult proposition because of the state of the historical data that has been collected.

Although not typically producers of big data, law firms are in a position to benefit from big data and big data analytics that can be provided by third parties. Thomson Reuters’ Peer Monitor® is one such offering. This product leverages data that would not otherwise be available to individual firms: competitors’ billing and expense information straight from their billing systems. Using Peer Monitor, firms can get a sense of how they’re performing in the market among comparable firms and use the information to help set billing rates, assess productivity, and review expenses.8

Of course, just as law firms have access to data, so do clients. Clients, especially corporate clients, are quite adept at collecting and analyzing data. When companies spread their legal work among 10 or 20 firms, it is easy for them to start to collect data and begin to analyze it. Which firms am I paying the most to? Which firms are more likely to provide me with partner level versus associate level attention? Which firms are more efficiently able to handle this type of matter and/or have been more successful in handling this type of matter in the past? In addition to the data they are collecting on their own, clients also have the option of leveraging data provided by third parties. Lexis has a product that is part of Lexis Advance called Counsel Benchmarking® which they are marketing directly to clients. With this tool, clients can compare rates between firms, review firm productivity, compare rates between partners, associates, and paralegals.9

Facing Big Data Head OnFirms are getting hit with big data from all directions: from clients, from within, and from vendors. Clients are using big data to negotiate better rates and to determine the real viability of a case before sinking time and money into it. When they do opt to move forward, they are holding firms to the same standards as any other business partner: firms need to have insight and control over their internal processes. Once the client’s business has been secured, the firm has the responsibility of collecting and managing the volumes of data associated with the case, securing and protecting that data, and quickly reviewing and analyzing it. When properly understood and managed across each of these areas, big data is a potential differentiator among firms, and as such will determine which firms secure business in the future.

SOURCES1. Mellink, Bart. The Nexus of Forces. Tech. Gartner

Consulting, 6 June 2013. Web. 20 Apr. 2014.

2. Conner, Marcia. “Data on Big Data.” Web blog post. Marc!a Conner. 18 July 2013. Web. 01 May 2014.

16

Big Law: Big Data

3. Walton, David J. “How Lawyers and Law Firms Operate in a Big Data World.” How Lawyers and Law Firms Operate in a Big Data World. InsideCounsel com, 11 Apr. 2014. Web. 10 May 2014.

4. Supra, note 3.

5. Supra, note 3.Supra, note 3.

6. Supra, note 3.Supra, note 3.

7. Harris, Derrick. “How New Tech Can Help Lawyers Rethink Their Jobs in the Big Data Age.” Gigaom. Gigaom, 31 Dec. 2013. Web. 4 May 2014.

8. Ambrogi, Robert. “2 New Tools Allow You to Compare Major Firms’ Billing Rates.” ABA Journal May., 2014 (2014). ABA Journal. American Bar Association, 1 May 2014. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.

9. Supra, note 8.

Text tk

17Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Organizational risk not only focuses on regulatory and ethical issues but risks associated with the loss of knowledge capital and internal controls. Managing risk disruption is much like resumption planning; it needs to be defined, weighed and assigned a high priority within the organization.

Managing Risk Disruption Through Internal Risk Structures: An interview with Donald Caputo, Chief Internal Auditor, Shearman & Sterling

Effective risk assessment (ERM) is increasingly important to the success and sustainability of any business. As firms begin to evaluate their long-range goals, risk disruption related to internal controls has been elevated. Donald Caputo, Shearman & Sterling’s Chief Internal Auditor with 27 years of experience in audit and compliance, stresses the importance of systematic assessment as a foundation for evaluating events, processes, systems, employee conduct, and knowledge capital.

How do you define the role of an internal auditor?I see the internal auditor role as historically defined: an independent, objective, and ethical resource designed to improve an organization’s operations by following a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluating, assessing, and improving effectiveness through risk management, control systems, and governance processes. My global responsibilities remain keenly focused on control, risk, safety, and soundness, including providing an established audit presence in each of the firm’s worldwide offices.

Because risk is inevitable in any business, proactive thinking and planning are essential. Placing a “stop sign” after an accident occurs is reactive and detrimental to business flow. This applies to all levels of partnerships and financial service organizations. By performing routine examinations and risk assessments, an internal auditor provides reasonable assurance that all aspects of the organization’s internal control structure are sound.

How will internal risk evolve in the future? I recently read that internal auditors will likely focus less on internal controls and more on risk management and governance. I completely agree. With the ever-increasing threat environment a firm faces, it is essential for auditors to strike a balance between verifying strong controls and paying attention to risk management, which invariably leads to the need for a particular control. Strong internal controls are a means to an end and should be kept in perspective. I further agree with the prediction that we could see a shift in the reporting structure for internal auditors, as audit committees become risk committees or a type of hybrid.

Can you walk us through your process? For example, how do you approach an internal audit with operational units so vastly different in scope, let alone global cultural nuances, and keep an effective cycle of review in process?

By Elaine M. Egan, Manager, Libraries and Information Centers—Americas, Shearman & Sterling, LLP, New York, NY

18

Article Title | Continued from page 1Managing Risk Disruption Through Internal Risk Structures

I approach an internal audit as a consultative process. An audit isn’t an evaluation, but rather an independent assessment of risk and strength of controls. I have found that, through this approach, I can be regarded as more of a resource, a consultant who can collaborate more effectively in finding workable solutions to improve the business. Audit reports summarize real action items with recommendations that are practical and constructive to the organization or operational unit. I structure each audit with the goal of developing an entrenched mindset and maintaining a robust control structure and attention to risk, each becoming a learning experience and an exercise in improvement. The larger and more global an organization, the more difficult it is to cycle audits all at once, so I have developed a cycle based on a risk matrix and other factors aimed to provide efficient coverage. In a multinational organization, an internal auditor must also acknowledge that there often exist silos of information and processes that, while not practical at the organizational level, are, in many cases, a local business necessity. Being sensitive to these local practices as well as cultures and traditions is essential to obtain a value-added result.

Once you identify a risk, how do you partner with management to address it? Once an audit is completed, a report of recommendations for improvement, including a respective assessment of associated risks, is submitted to management for a response. As internal auditors are not responsible for the execution of company business plans, they should be a catalyst for timely attention to audit findings and recommendations and ensure that management memorialize detailed corrective actions, including setting reasonable time frames and prioritizing risk. Material weaknesses, fraudulent or substantial risk disruptions are naturally addressed more directly through a very collaborative and hands-on dialogue with senior management.

Where does knowledge capital and knowledge management fit into the risk scenario?In my risk-assessment scenario, knowledge capital management is given a high priority, particularly as part of high-profile succession planning. If left unchecked, lack of management could lead to a serious disruptive risk to an organization. Determining a risk’s priority requires a comprehensive audit risk matrix specific to an organization, which, for instance, identifies a risk score within specific risk categories (finance, technology, governance etc.), thereby defining a priority of importance. Notwithstanding anything illegal, unethical, or fraudulent, these identified business risks

are generally a subjective assessment; however they also take into account industry standards, individual corporate cultures and prior audit reports.

Take for example an organization’s knowledge management or internal control environment as an identified risk category. I’ve designed my assessment using a weight scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being a critical risk to the organization, and a risk scale from 1 to 3, with 3 being defined as a high risk. I calculate a risk score for this category as it applies to its importance in each business process, department, or office. By assigning these individual scores to each category, I achieve an overall risk score as it applies to each auditable entity, thus allowing me to prioritize and ensure I’m giving the highest risk routine coverage and further provide assurances to management.

I emphasize that there is a great deal of subjectivity to assigning risk values and weights that align with business and strategic goals, and each must be ideally tailored to the business culture. As classifications of priorities shift with business trends, and process improvements modify the formulaic outcome, a robust risk matrix should also be fluid and be reworked or reassessed at least annually.

How would you advise a manager or director to approach a departmental risk structure audit?a. Identify key roles in your department

and assign risk values.

b. Name your top assets; identify, and classify what is important to your operations.

c. Assign weights and risk scores to those assets specific to your business and efficiency level of your control structure.

d. Communicate a sustainable, actionable plan and ensure controls and processes are in place to mitigate the identified high risks and begin planning for lesser risks.

e. Review at least annually.

Internal risk structures can effectively reduce financial, operational, legal, and reputational risk. Effective risk management is an ongoing process that requires continuous oversight and top-down support within an organization. If a culture of risk management is unclear or poorly communicated—or for that matter never communicated—an organization is exposed to the loss of intellectual capital, operational inefficiencies, damaged reputation, and financial loss. Effective risk-based internal controls produce powerful benefits and strategic competitive advantage.

Text tk

19Practice Innovations | July 2014 | Volume 15, Number 3

Effective risk management is an ongoing process that must be consciously managed within an organization. In the prior article, Donald Caputo discusses how knowledge capital can present a highly disruptive risk. Given the normal succession of employees through a workplace, succession planning in a law firm library presents a knowledge capital risk on two fronts: while library staff possess the know-how to keep the department running, their work also serves to safeguard the intellectual capital of the firm. While departmental documentation in pursuit of succession planning is surely unglamorous, service departments, such as libraries, abstain at their own peril. The following interview by the author with Sarah E. Lin, Library Systems Librarian at Reed Smith LLP, illustrates how internal documentation and planning facilitated a smooth transition during technical services staff changes at their firm.

Risk Avoidance through Succession Planning

Why is documentation important in the area of technical services?From a compliance standpoint, documentation is needed so auditors can review and determine what procedures, if any, pose a risk to the firm as a whole. From a service standpoint, internal and external clients should feel minimal disruption from an unexpected

leave of absence, a reduction in force, or the outsourcing or insourcing of work duties. Succession planning can smooth over changes in staffing: when new staff have their duties laid out before them, they get up to speed faster, resulting in less time lost in the transition and less stress to the rest of the team. So many staffing changes are implemented with little time to prepare; succession planning allows a department to move forward through those changes without losing momentum.

Did you already have a succession plan, and, if not, what caused you to develop one?The Reed Smith libraries learned the importance of succession planning when their library systems staff was almost completely outsourced in 2012. Managing the library collection is not a client-facing task, yet without it, the work of the library and the attorneys would grind to a halt. When the decision was made to reassign current library staff and outsource their duties, we had only a few precious months to prepare. Up until that point, we had departmental procedures, but they were extremely task-based. When faced with the introduction of a dozen new workers with unequal amounts of experience into the heart of the library, we knew we needed to take our documentation to a higher level.

Can you explain the steps you took when you initiated the documentation process?We tried to codify, to the fullest extent possible, the entire job that was being outsourced, not just the individual tasks (although we still needed that documentation). We needed to ask several questions related to the new positions:

By Ronda Fisch, Director of Research & Library Systems, Reed Smith LLP, Pittsburgh, PA

20

Risk Avoidance through Succession Planning

a whole. The adverse effect of failing to manage risk disruption actively, would arguably have been worse than the initial disruption itself.

Had Reed Smith been content to use the existing documentation to manage this succession, the outcome would have still been negative from a client perspective. We did not have the full job description articulated; only certain functions were expressed in our documentation. For example, we had detailed visual instructions on how to process new materials for check-in within our integrated library system. With this documentation, we could have been assured that materials would get from the library to the attorneys who need them. What were missing from these instructions were our internal protocols for assuring that all purchases are approved by library managers and fit within the library budget. Without that extra information written down as part of the department procedures, the library ran the risk of financial mismanagement, with far-reaching implications.

Do you have any suggestions for librarians embarking on a succession planning project?In order to create adequate succession planning documentation that took into account procedures such as financial approval, it was important to step back and view these positions with a fresh eye and broad perspective. That is the first step we would recommend to other libraries seeking to actively manage risk avoidance through succession planning. Secondly, detailed description, while tedious, is the only way to create reliable documentation and get institutional knowledge transcribed for the benefit of others. Our third step was to gather feedback from many parties, to review the documentation by many different staff members and seek to fill in gaps in the written knowledge. And while it might be comforting to think the work ends there, our fourth step is to constantly revisit the documents and edit as circumstances change. In this, our work will never be complete.

Staff successions create real risk for law firm libraries, but planning and preparing for those disruptions reduces the risk and lets everyone focus on client service. Managing the library collection and the firm’s intellectual capital without interruption is a critical function; procedural documentation ensures that when events occur beyond the library’s control, the quality of service remains unchanged.

Conducting a departmental risk structure audit is time-consuming and might not be the most exciting project. However, the benefits far outweigh the time invested especially when finding workable solutions to improve the business operations.

• What tasks will they perform?

• How are the tasks to be accomplished?

• What idiosyncrasies or office-specific procedures must be included?

• What does Reed Smith staff do, and how will they interact with the contracted vendor?

From here, we had to evaluate our current documentation to see where there were gaps that needed to be filled. Regardless of the new staff member’s previous library experience, we needed a comprehensive manual that they could read thoroughly and refer to as they went about their duties. Not all locations they would be employed at had Reed Smith library staff in residence, so we could not use in-person training as a replacement for inadequate documentation.

With respect to outsourcing technical service functions, were there any specific risk avoidance issues?Another risk avoidance measure that was particular to having staff employed by an outside vendor was taking into account how existing procedures needed to be changed to secure the physical and intellectual property of the firm. Having outside personnel inside the firm on a regular basis is a risk we took care to address. Two questions were important to answer:

• With restricted computer access, how will they access the software and documentation they need to do their job?

• With restricted physical access, how will they perform all of the contracted duties?

As our relationship with our new vendor progressed, the documentation was crucial to answer questions about what Reed Smith expected and how to bring new staff up to speed whenever the outside vendor experienced its own staffing changes.

How has succession planning benefited the library?The amount of preparation we did enabled us to have a smooth transition and minimal disruption as a result of a very major change to our department; but what if we had avoided this succession planning exercise? If we had had no documentation at all, the library materials would surely have been engulfed in chaos. The skill levels of the workers hired varied considerably, and the distance between our offices meant that there was very little overlap between workers geographically. Clients would most certainly have felt a negative impact, reflecting poorly on our department and the firm as