KM Tools Lawyers Love #ILTAG128 #ILTACON

Session Description:

Knowledge management (KM) professionals often design and implement tools they are certain their lawyers will love, only to have them fall flat and quickly slip into oblivion. Sometimes KM and IT launch a tool expecting lawyer pushback or disinterest and are pleasantly surprised by immediate adoption. Let’s focus on the KM tools lawyers love as we learn about some of the KM tools practicing lawyers have found most helpful and easy to incorporate into their practices. Whether you are just starting out with KM, looking to refresh a long-standing KM initiative or operating with a tight budget and limited resources, come learn which projects will be the quickest, be the easiest and win big points with your lawyers.

Takeaways:

  • Develop a better understanding of the practicing lawyer’s priorities and concerns
  • Gain insight into how lawyers think about their practice and work with their clients and each other
  • Leave with a short list of winning projects to take on when starting out with KM, refreshing KM or performing KM on a tight budget
  • Establish a check list of things to consider when deciding which KM or legal IT projects to pursue and which to postpone or even ditch

Speakers: Patrick DiDomenicoPatrick DundasSally GonzalezMeredith Green

[These are my notes from the International Legal Technology Association’s 2017 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • What is Knowledge Management?
    • KM 1.0 = Improving client service delivery (plus, in the UK: current awareness, professional development, sharing knowledge with clients)
    • KM 2.0 = Winning more business — experience management, knowing the client, business development activities
    • KM 3.0 = Improving processes
    • KM 4.0 = Leveraging AI
  • How do you measure success? A tool is successful if
    • it is used by the lawyers themselves — they don’t delegate its use to others
    • lawyers call you immediately when the tool is down
  • Tools that help GENERATE WORK PRODUCT.
    • Schulte’s Forms Project
      • Know-how: forms stored in iManage folders
      • WARNING: a forms project is extremely time-intensive and effort-intensive. So do not begin the project unless you know for sure that there will be sufficient use of the form. In addition, creating it is less useful if you can’t/won’t keep it up-to-date.
      • Whee there is a business need, these forms will help make the practice of law more efficient.
      • At Schulte, the put drafting instructions in footnotes. They use MS Word’s commenting function to explain the reason why certain language is being used.
    • McGuire Woods uses an external provider such as the Practical Law Company (PLC)
      • PLC provides forms and practice notes
      • For junior associates, this was a godsend — especially since the firm did not have a vast bank of current forms
    • Ogletree has model/form docs, augmented with Lexis Practice Adviser
      • they have homegrown “cream of the crop” model/form documents that their practice support lawyers maintain
      • these materials are collected and available in their Knowledge Resource Center in their intranet, in the document management system (DMS) AND via enterprise search.
      • they use Lexis Practice Adviser to fill in the gaps
  • Document Automation.
    • See the article by Patrick Dundas in the recent ILTA KM white paper
      • Documents drafted using the Schulte document assembly platform (HotDocs) results in substantial reductions in cost and effort
    • At Ogletree the have both internal-facing and client-facing document automation. They did a large-scale document automation process for a multinational client. It resulted in substantial savings of time and costs. And the work product was more consistent. The client was so delighted that they awarded a bonus for this work.
  • Finding what you need.
    • Ogletree uses Recommind. (They are transitioning to Handshake search.) Enterprise search was the most important tool they have implemented to help lawyers find what they need: content, people, matters.
    • McGuire Woods is just starting their KM program so enterprise search is a bit too ambitious for them right now. They have deployed Lexis Search Advantage (LSA) to help lawyers find content in the DMS and in the Lexis collection. They can also tag content with established tags or new tags you create yourself. In their experience, LSA is more intuitive than their DMS native search.
    • LSA does a great job of classifying content. At Ogletree, they have discovered that some of the LSA filters are better than the filters in their DMS.
  • Client/Matter Pages.
    • Lawyers love these types of pages because they give easy access to critical information.
    • These pages provide on demand, instant access to information that was previously buried in PDF reports generated by underlying systems like the time and billing system. Therefore, they do not have to step away from their work to ask someone to generate a special report for them. They can stay “in the flow” of their work.
  • Cara by Casetext. This tool is a great asset for litigators. It allows you to drag a brief into their web interface. Then the tool identifies what cases are relevant to that brief but were not cited by the brief. You can use it to check your own briefs; you can use it to identify the holes in an opponent’s brief.
  • Harvesting PTI. “Pardon the interruption” emails are commonplace in law firms. While they may surface in-the-moment assistance, the content is usually buried in private email threads.
    • In response, Schulte has set up a shared iManage folder to harvest these emails and permit later search and retrieval. As a result, it saves time and money, and causes fewer interruptions. Plus, it costs nothing to implement.
    • Ogletree also has an iManage folder. In addition, because it is stored in the DMS, it is retrievable via enterprise search. Therefore, the lawyers do not need to check the shared folder; all they have to do is run a search in the enterprise search system.
  • CRM Systems. Valuable client information is stored in the client relationship (CRM) system. However, while the Marketing Department might be able to manage the CRM interface, it may not be as easy for lawyers.
    • If you make the data stored in the CRM system accessible via the enterprise search system, then the lawyers can find it without having to tangle with the CRM interface.
  • Experience Management. There are some focused experience management tools.
    • An alternative approach is a simple grid in an MS Word document that details the breadth of legal experience/competencies across the lawyers of the firm.
    • You can also do this via a simple database. However, chances are that the lawyers won’t like the interface of that database.
    • With enterprise search, you can search time entries and matter profiles to infer experience
  • Document proofreading tools. Wordrake and EagleEye are very popular with attorneys.
  • What tools have been less successful in their experience?
    • Task Management System
      • lawyers like a resource that helps them organize themselves, but the lawyers are unwilling/unable to dedicate the time necessary to maintain the system.
      • Baker Donelson is using K2 to provide task management support
Share

KM in Reality: Tools & Techniques #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Title and Description:  KM in Reality: Tools & Techniques

Our speakers look at using KM fundamentals, concepts, leadership, and processes to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of planning, problem- solving, decision making, collaboration, continuity, knowledge capture and sharing, innovation, and learning. From using knowledge repositories/ forums on SharePoint to maximize learning to the use of chat, online meetings, OneNote, etc., to enhance knowledge sharing, and after action reviews, they illustrate how to transform knowledge-intensive activities into knowledge processes with related goals and objectives supporting the organization’s mission and vision.

Speakers:

Shellie Glass, Chief Knowledge Officer, United States Southern Command
Peter Barcelo Jr., Knowledge Management Officer, United States Southern Command

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • The United States Southern Command (“SC”)
    • Website: http://www.southcom.mil/Pages/Default.aspx
    • Area of Responsibility:
      • Central (excluding Mexico) and South America, as well as the Caribbean.
      • They protect the southern approaches to the United State
      • They carry out humanitarian missions in their area of responsibility
      • They manage Guantanamo
      • Their commander’s mantra: “Fast, Flat and Agile.”
  • SC Knowledge Management Structure.
    • The KM Office reports to the SC Chief of Staff (a two-star Air Force general)
    • They have a KM Working Group — it involves each of the functional groups within SC.
  • KM Principles.
    • They use the 12 Army Knowledge Mangement Principles
      • built on a foundation of People and Culture
      • Then a layer of process
      • Then a layer of technology
      • Then multiple columns (like the Parthenon) — see first slide
      • All under the “roof” of a Culture of Collaboration
  • KM Hands-On Tools & Techniques.
    • Emphasized use of:
      • Chat — this proved to be very fast and effective during their Hurricane Matthew response. They used WhatsApp to good effect — it allowed them to connect with other government departments and NGOs working in Haiti.
      • SharePointCollaboration Site — SharePoint is the authorized vehicle for the DoD. It was the “landing area” for posting, finding, searching.
      • All partner access network (APAN) — see Hurricane Matthew Response site
      • Video teleconference (VTC)
      • Sharing, collaborating, transparency
      • continuous battle-rhythm
      • Senior Leader Engagement
    • Deemphasized (whenever possible) EMAIL = a single point of failure
      • they found that email traffic decreased significantly during the operation
  • Knowledge Processes.
    • Knowledge Management Institute Model
      • Acquire information/knowledge
      • Produce knowledge — collaborate, refine, create
      • Integrate knowledge — publishing, structuring, instructing, presenting
    • SECI Model
      • by Nonaka & Takeuchi
      • Socialization — collaboration / share knowledge
      • Eternalization — capture knowledge / write reports
      • Combination — build knowledge / transfer best practices
      • Internationalization — learning by doing
Share

Avoid a Darwin Award

Charles Darwin The stories are awful, but you’ll find it’s hard to pull your eyes away the text. In fact, each story seems worse than the one before. After reading them, you can’t help but ask yourself: Can anyone really be that dumb?

What stories are these? They are reports of the exploits of the recipients of the annual Darwin Awards. To win a Darwin Award, you must have done something truly spectacular — spectacularly stupid, that is:

In the spirit of Charles Darwin, the Darwin Awards commemorate individuals who protect our gene pool by making the ultimate sacrifice of their own lives. Darwin Award winners eliminate themselves in an extraordinarily idiotic manner, thereby improving our species’ chances of long-term survival.

So what qualifies for a Darwin award? Here is a sampling of the feats that have justified an award:

  • juggling live hand grenades
  • jumping out of a plane, to film skydivers, without a parachute
  • crashing through a window and falling to one’s death in an attempt to prove that the window contains unbreakable glass

One would be hard-pressed to come up with a comparable list for knowledge management professionals. There isn’t much in the KM toolkit that is life-threatening. However, there is something we often fail to do that makes it harder for our work to reach a more highly evolved state. What’s this common lapse? We too often fail to conduct an after action review.

What’s involved in an after action review? Start by asking three basic questions at the end of every project or phase:

  • What worked well?
  • What didn’t work well?
  • What should we do next time to improve our process and results?

By focusing on constant improvement, by eliminating the incorrect or unnecessary, you approach the Darwinian ideal of survival of the fittest. By failing to take this step, you threaten the upward trajectory of your work. It’s that simple. Yet for many of us, taking the brief moment to review and revise can seem too hard.

The next time you’re tempted to skip an after action review, ask yourself the following question: If there were Darwin Awards for KM work, would any of your projects win?

[Photo Credit: Shehal Joseph]

Share

Knowledge Sharing Toolkit

The ICT-KM program of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research has created a Knowledge Sharing Toolkit that provides guidance and resources for organizations interested in developing knowledge sharing among their employees and constituents. Nancy White at Full Circle Associates asks that readers take a look at the Toolkit and send in their feedback. They are particularly interested in feedback from nonprofits, nongovernmental organizations and international development organizations. But even if you work outside those areas, it would be well worth your time to consider the materials provided by the Toolkit. You’re sure to find information on tools and methods you haven’t yet tried in your organization.

Share

KM Library: Tools, Techniques and Case Studies

Hat tip to Caroline de Brún at Talking Knowledge Management who found this UK government site sponsored by the Improvement and Development Agency (I&DEA), KM Library: tools, techniques and case studies. It provides overviews on a wide range of KM tools including:

– After Action Review
– Case Study
– Communities of Practice
– Gone Well, Not Gone Well
– Knowledge Cafe
– Knowledge Exchange
– Knowledge Marketplace
– Peer Assist
– Rapid Evidence Review
– Retrospective Review

According to I&DEA, these “knowledge management tools and techniques are designed for use in everyday work to improve the way we find, use, create, manage and share knowledge.” As with some of the other KM resources I’ve mentioned before (e.g., Dare to Share’s Knowledge Management Toolkit), I pass this along with the suggestion that you take a look to see if you find a tool or technique you haven’t tried before that might be appropriate for a KM problem or opportunity you are facing.

Share

Dare to Share: Knowledge Management Toolkit

KM4Dev recently featured Dare to Share’s Knowledge Management Toolkit. Beginning in April 2007 and running until December 2008, Dare to Share will highlight one proven KM and/or learning technique per month. Thus far, they have focused on:

– After Action Review
– Collegial Coaching
– Yellow Pages
– SWOT
– Good Practice
– Knowledge Fair
– Exit Interview
– Storytelling
– Experience Capitalization
– Mentoring
– Visualization
– Peer Assist
– Briefing

For each technique there is a definition, followed by a brief description of how to implement the technique. Dare to Share also provides a link to a much longer discussion of the approach for readers who want to delve deeper.

Not every one of these techniques will work for you or your organization. Even still, this is a great resource if you’re looking for new ways to expand knowledge sharing and learning with your colleagues.

Share