Showing posts with label extranets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label extranets. Show all posts

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Innovative Online Legal Products For Clients

This top-notch panel shared important lessons about ways to use to technology, not to simply improve attorney efficiency, but to actually change the way that law firms deliver legal services.

Formal Title: Should You Create Innovative Online Legal Products for Clients?

Description:

Expert systems, document automation and other online tools have come a long way, and innovative law schools and legal aid organizations are using them to provide “self-help” legal services. Given this explosion in legal technology, we’ll tackle a question looming for law firms: Is it time for firms to consider using innovative legal technologies to create online legal products and services for their clients?

See tweets at #kmpg4 .

Speaker(s):

·         Michael Mills - Neota Logic

·         Meredith L. Williams - Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz

·         Scott Rechtschaffen - Littler Mendelson, P.C.

·         Kingsley Martin - KIIAC LLC

Scott Rechtschaffen introduced the topic.

It's important to learn from failure. Littler attorneys sent 10-15 emails each day about "who knows these labor arbitrators." His group set up an (internal) database about them. It was not a good endeavor. It's best not to be guided by the attorneys. They wanted everything, not reviews of arbitrators of the arbitrations, complete with briefs. They didn't do anything, it required too much of the attorneys.

They later made a database of international employment lawyers. This one did get some use, but you had to remember where it was.

They then turned to Courtroom Insight. It creates a Yelp-like reviews for experts, judges, arbitrators, and mediators, all in one place. People who use it like it very much. Buying it created a lot less anxiety and stress.

They also have a database of 50-state comparisons with 50-60 surveys, which also includes a database of legislation and regulation. They charge clients for access to this. They've covered the cost 3x-4x.

I described the Littler CaseSmart system elsewhere.

The clients love the dashboard on the CaseSmart tool. It has a heat map, the type of charges, and the like. One client caught the impact of a minor policy issue that led to charges around the country through the

They also recently launched the Littler Healthcare Reform Advisor, a tool that runs an online questionnaire and indicates the potential penalties under Obamacare.
Buying off the shelf and adding the legal nuance

Meredith Williams showed dashboards where clients can drill in and see details about their matters. These dashboards wins over clients.

They will help map out the data collection processes for clients using their in-house eDiscovery experts.

They also have an "emerging company institute" extranet that startups are charged to access. They developed 30-40 documents that clients purchase from them and let them create documents via document assembly. They use Contract Express, the same document assembly my firm uses.

These systems stickiness with clients. A relationship partner left and the client stayed with the firm because the extranet had all the documentation they needed and used on the site.

If you try to create an app, use someone external. Baker provided an app with a quick guide to labor and employment law. They also provide compliance education at the staff level via an online service. They didn't want to have that compliance training for executives, since they wanted the attorneys in front of the executives talking to them in person.

Keeping It Simple

Martin--Simple and clear is the best way and is the hardest thing in the world.

Online client systems are the way forward. We may not get a seat at the table unless we start to produce revenue.

In our law firms we have collective experience resulting from millions of hours of experience.

His tool takes a pile of documents, decomposes them into clauses, and aggregates the clauses into one common outline. For example, in employment agreements, what clauses are required, what are optional, and which are frequent or common.

Simplification lessons also apply to the practice of law. We need to simplify and make clearer contracts and briefs that we produce.

A simplified, focused approach might put most frequent clauses up top.

He draws a lesson from Silicon Valley--"Get Going--Build something!"

Analyzing documents might start with clause elements. Organizing documents addresses document structure.

He's released a an app for a non-disclosure agreement. He completed it on the airplane ride to conference. www.kmstandards.com/kmauthor/mobile

The content is HTML, library is JQuery Mobile, presentation by ThemeRoller (lets you drag colors around when you design).

What's out there?

Baker McKenzie has some great apps on global equity. Goodwin Procter has the Founder's Workbench. OMelveny has an FCPA app. Wilson Sonsini has a term sheet generator.

Pointer & Squirrel has an "eForeclose" site allowing clients to generate foreclosure papers.

At a lower end, on the Kimball, Tirey & St. John LLP site you can start a collection case, upload documents and start the case.

This helps law firms be more efficient, because the client supplies a lot of the information lawyers need directly into the system.

How do we assess the viability of potential projects?

Leon Litigator corners you. He's assessed 2000 cases and determined 56 variables that determine the likelihood of success at trial.

His kid sister is a Google engineer who's already written the algorithm.

Always ask:

1. Is there a market for this? Who would purchase it?

2. Do we have any support in-house to build this?

3. Is there a product on-market that does something like this already?

Law firms are not product companies, and online services are products. They do spend time thinking about acquiring lateral partners. Michael Mills would start with what the business purpose is. It may be that revenue is critical.

It requires substantive infrastructure as well as technical. Online resources about substantive legal issues will decline if not maintained. Building a product is a major commitment. Will they invest the effort necessary to keep it up to date?

Martin--lawyers do want to monetize the experience that they have. The two pieces are expertise and software development.

Williams--they've had most success when they partnered with outside vendors who had the development expertise, they provided the “legal gloss.”

Incentives & Maintenance

You also need the incentive systems to align. Product building is different from the billable hour. Firms may not have the right structure to incentivize attorneys to contribute to online services.

Expanded revenue fund program. Meredith has a laundry list of projects, with lists of people who would do the work. They set up client-matter numbers for the projects, people bill their time.

They get 75% of the credit, so that they have an investment in the success. The "Developers" get a coupon from the firm, they get a percentage of the sale.

Once you start handing over services to your client, you develop a real responsibility. If you can't sustain it, it's better not starting at all.

Attorneys regularly churn out articles for potential clients. If they are willing to do that, shouldn't they be willing to give content to developers who can productize it?

A reputation for being innovative doesn't help. What helps is delivering value that helps clients in very specific areas. Helping lawyers gain business in particular areas, capturing some of the business development activities and redirecting that energy, is useful. It's more useful to clients because it's direct service.

Clients are coming to firms are asking for things at lower cost or for free. Online products are one way to do that.

Does it skew the analysis when a client asks you to develop an on-line service? Maybe, if it's a high-level client as a percentage of revenue.

Development of online products should be considered a part of the essential business of law firms. They are perceived as completely different worlds from traditional concerns like practice area development or opening offices.

The first stage involves some benefits to "first movers."

A second level is systems that create client "stickiness."

The third level is to move to revenue generating services. The big concern is how to scale. Each app currently used is focused on a very narrow area.

How do you take the Founder's Toolkit and move to licensing?

Michael has seen great examples of client stickiness developing from building excellent online services. It makes clients less portable.

"Our employees are so used to what you have, we don't want to replicate that somewhere else."

How do you assess a market?

Market research is an outside expertise for most lawyers, but there are people in firms who do that kind of work. You probably have good market research people. There are also services you can subscribe to.

The trick is how to estimate revenues or sales on something that hasn't been sold before. The business analysis looks for competitors.

They'll start small, offering something to a client and seeing the interest. You have to be willing to pull the plug.

The Shark Tank is a great way to hone your idea. Think of standing in front of the people who will pay for it. "Kawasaki, the art of the "

The questions Meredith gets are around the economics.

Who does it?

Williams--She brings together developers, IT Project Management people, a representative from the attorney group that's asking for it, and a knowledge management attorney. They may also bring the marketing team to the table. They keep the lawyer population to just a few people. Lawyers tend to add unnecessary bells and whistles.

Kingsley--He's been able to involve clients as well. Develop in an agile matter. Set parameters, a lot of things will take care of themselves. Set quality metrics for what you aim to do. For instance at Cassels they set a target for a level of plain English with a specific metric. It really hones the result.

Develop the "minimal sustainable product."

Mills--The front end of these systems are pretty simple. There are mock-up and prototyping tools that let you set up something, and start showing it to clients.

Insourced or Outsourced?

Williams--Do we have the expertise? They don't with app development.

Time constraints also come in. Internal resources may have significant internal demands already.

Mills--Most projects need aspects of both. The Contract Express tools, for instance, can't be reproduced by a law firm. Law firms are talking to clients all the time, and may be good at getting feedback from clients.

Which Idea? What if something that looks better comes along?

Martin--Kawasaki would say, set you milestones and stick to them.

Williams--Don't be distracted by the shiny object (like the dogs in "Up" distracted by squirrels). Think about what you might be losing in what you've already invested. The economics come into play. Look at it as a business decision, not a technical one.

Products and projects have constituencies.

How do you convince partners that they should invest in the future?

Martin--The business of law has one of the lowest budgets for research & development of any industry. What if law firms spent 0.25% of revenue on these new services?

He's tried to convince them that this is an extraordinary opportunity. You could take advantage of the growing tsunami. It's hard to pick the winners. He admits his pitch didn't work.

Mills--It is a year-to-year decision, and the way firms are organized financially. Firms do make huge decision like opening an office, these are small change by comparison.

Williams--It's easier today because they've had success with retaining and obtaining clients.

She scenarios out how it works. She spells out what will happen if we invest or if we don't. Boards are bottom-line driven.

Rechtschaffen--There's a false assumption that an hour spent on direct client service is more assured than an hour spent on product development. Each hour is speculative, albeit in different ways.

What's the future of online services? Will law firms be the providers of online legal services?

Williams--As long as a product is viable and has a legal spin, then we have an area we're going to firmly hold onto.

Martin--The future must involve the delivery of online legal services. Law firm websites will enable the delivery of legal services.

Buyers don't modify a market. They vote with their money, but they pick winners. A lot of this will be driven by vendors.

LexMachina is analyzing and creating data around all patent litigation.

Mills-Some publishers are starting to behave like lawyers. Users don't want search results any more, they want answers.

eDiscovery is an online service. It's managed in the cloud by people who for the most part work directly with clients. Why shouldn't the rest of legal services delivery follow?

Williams--If you aren't in this space, you need to be in this space. The biggest request from clients is for these type of services?

Martin--Online technology will disrupt the $260-270 billion market. Institutional VCs are showing some interest in changing the market.

Take technology you've used to create reputation or stickiness and move into products.

Monday, August 27, 2012

ILTA Session: Beyond Extranets: What Clients Really Want

This is the first session of the Knowledge Management Peer Group track (I am a member of the KM PG Steering Committee). The following are my notes on the session (updated 8/28 with format improvements).

This session comes with a one-page outline prepared by the panelists in advance. It lays out ideas about what law firm clients might be looking for from law firm km, namely, assistance with precedents, current awareness, technology implementation, professional development, KM, matter management, and on-line legal advice. It also lays out a few approaches for km teams that might want to get started.

The panel is very distinguished. 2011 KM Distinguished Peer Scott Rechshaffen is joined by 2010-2011 ILTA Conference Co-Chair Meredith Williams and DuPont general counsel Lynne Simpson.

Mary Panetta is moderating the panel.  This was a very impressive example of two law firms taking innovation to the next level of adding client value and firm profitability.  

Panetta

Eight to ten years ago, extranets started to take off.   She would have expected that innovative extranets would have developed further.  

Experts here have innovated in client-facing KM.

What is the alignment between what law firms are offering and what law departments need?  This may vary a lot and there may be different opportunities at different clients and firms.

Meredith Williams

A lot of what the keynote presented can be implemented through extranets.  Challenge the norm.  What's beyond the extranet?  What do our clients not know they need?  What are they asking for?

BakerConnect is a whole new Online Services Initiative that forms a collaborative base with clients.  Some clients have a "post-it note" type problem where they don't know what they need yet.

In contrast to much traditional KM work, it's not about delivery of information, it's about delivering function.  Functionality and information are not the same--it's about what you can do on the extranet.

Baker's hospital client system was driven by workflows around litigation holds. 

KM became a profit center. These systems are also being used to sell to and acquire new clients.

She gets $ every year for attorneys to bill time to KM-related projects ($650,000 / year) in a Venture Fund Program.   

There are three modules of the OSI:

--an LPM Platform
--Practice sharing via a collaborative farm
--practice toolkits

Baker wanted to be able to share tools or systems with clients, so their SharePoint 2010 is accessible to clients.  They have one environment, one "collaboration sharing farm."  Every practice area can share precedents, news, or vendor information with clients.

One example of what they are sharing is a "quick and easy guide to labor and employment law" that is essentially an expert / guided guidance system.

They have 10 or so toolkits.  They've developed them with the lawyers in the firm, trying to match up what clients needed with what lawyers could provide.  Clients in a beta program got it for free, they had to sit down and discuss what the clients needed and what they hated.

The toolkit also allows clients to maintain their own information on BakerConnect, for instance, using a Baker-provided document assembly system, with the client's lawyers creating the work product.

There's a video of Meredith demonstrating one of the toolkits on BakerDonelson.com .  

They use Contract Express, and "DocMinder" for a date licensing system.  The client doesn't know who the vendor is.

Some of the biggest clients are also provided data mapping. They offer a lot of compliance training to clients, along with tracking for that.

Risks

They are almost acting like a software company for the client.

They have to have licensing discussions  because these may not be ordinary uses of the tools.
Client data may not be work product.  It may not be covered by typical insurance.  They obtained "cyberlaw insurance."  They asked what it would cost to notify people in the event of a breach ($250-500/person).  

Each client has a separate collection.

Encryption and security must be addressed with industry-specific standards, such as securities regulations, HIPAA, and so forth.

They are creating a subsidiary to manage the compliance training.  That way non-clients can access & pay for compliance programs.

They are looking at automating site provision, and also are rolling out a mobile platform in February.  Clients are asking for it.  

Scott Rechtschaffen

Littler's CaseSmart program was addressed last year at ILTA.  In Labor & Employment a lot more of the work is being commoditized.  They took on administrative charge work for a big client and developed an alternative staffing and information management system.   It includes automated document generation and tracking of what people were doing.  

They thought the value was in the technology.

What clients really were interested in was the dashboards.  They could look at efficiency metrics, but they also got actionable intelligence about the type of cases they were having and where.  If law departments did this type of work themselves, it wouldn't be privileged.  
Dashboards were driven by what the clients were looking for.  In one case they are helping in-house counsel drastically reduce the time required for compliance and auditing reports.

Clients also want access to "on-demand" information.  Their system is called "Littler GPS," they cover 65 subject areas that are maintained for 52+ jurisdictions.  It includes links to new legislation (fed by research & library services team).  At the bottom is Littler's analysis of the legislation, including what companies should do about new legislation and so forth.  

A third product is access to "on-demand" answers.  They want answers quicker than email.  They offer subscriptions to another extranet.  They've added Q & A forums where clients can ask Littler attorneys questions.  For instance, benefits people had lots of people answering questions from employees and can come to the forum and find the answer.  

General liability and cyber insurance is a must.
Lynne Simpson
Her backup slides are on paper, Scott's and Meredith's are on iPads.  That represents the typical difference between law firms and law departments.
Every client is different.  DuPont is in safety & health, nutrition, and other industries, with 70,000 employees, 300+ legal counsel in 90 countries.  Most are commercial attorneys, but they also have litigation, environmental, and labor experts in-house.  They have about 40 law firms in a "partner network," primarily in litigation and big deals.
What do clients want from KM?
 
They want law firms to focus on capturing knowledge and providing very efficient service.  That's more important to most in-house counsel than logging in to an extranet.

They want KM to help firms target information delivery to in-house counsel.
 
They don't want another place to go for information.  Tokens and password fumbling is the norm.

Clients appreciate having attorneys come in and present on timely topics.  It especially matters that the topics is relevant to the business and important right then.

DuPont's business is moving more towards consumer products.  Law firms that noticed that and targeted information provided in-house counsel at consumer issues benefitted.
A lot of the information we house for clients is subject to the client's security requirements.  It may require two-factor authentication and so forth.

Their "EDGE" system requires a token to access.

Up front it shows budget against actuals (updated by a manual process).  It houses calendar information, depositions, exhibits, and pleadings.   Outside counsel can access or join.  

The system is, in Lynne's words, "ancient."

Questions

An audience member asked how the law firm folk convince the attorneys to get in front of attorneys.

Meredith has had to fight to get in front of clients.  She had practiced as a corporate attorney, and hired litigation KM people to help with that.  She needed a success story. 

At Baker, they have a KM or LPM person at every pitch to discuss efficiencies. 
Meredith reports to a "Strategic Planning Officer" what gets innovation. 

Monday, February 1, 2010

"Sharepoint Development Best Practices” at LegalTech





These are my notes from my first session at LegalTech in New York, a session on the Advanced IT Track. It is a major experiment in terms of connectivity for meI hope this looks all right as it is being moved around between three devices to get posted.

Overall the session was quite informative and addressed some innovative ways of using SharePoint as a platform for internal and external content sharing and development.

Presenters:

  • Guy Wiggins, Director of Practice Management (and KM expert) at Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
  • Bob Beach, HubbardLaw
  • Steve Fletcher, CIO, Parker Poe

The session description:

"Industry leaders discuss how their firms are leveraging SharePoint technology to serve clients and bring value to the firm."

"Panelists share lessons learned and suggestions for best practices."

The introduction noted both general the hash tag #ltny and a session-specific one #ait1

Sharepoint for Business Development at Parker Poe

Steve Fletcher said that Sharepoint is not just an intranet for HR forms or for office pages. It can be used for client service and business development. Sharepoint is used to generate targeted news and events.

Parker Poe is a 225-attorney firm with offices in the South. They compete with much larger firms.

The Parker Poe intranet "Parkway" is a significant business development tool. Their attorneys show it to clients.

Parkway is used for Client Service teams, for instance, for targeted clients, that have news and information about that target.


They do resort development work in the Caribbean. From the main practice screen for the Resort and & Hospitality page you can browse to different regions ("Caribbean") and then islands/countries (e.g.,"Anguilla"). The site pulls in weather and local news through RSS feeds. There are separate sections for resorts, golf courses, articles, legislation, local contacts, development resources, local contacts (from Interaction). Organizes firm information around "Location." They use it as a client development tool and show it to clients to identify how they work. The sites have won the firm business.

The resort sites are run by one technically savvy person located in the Resort & Hospitality area. It was developed by a team of five people including individuals from Research & Library Services, IT, Business Development, and a Practice area rep.

This firm also has dynamically created "Client Sites."

"Client Sites" provide links to unpaid invoices, invoice history, and relationships from Interaction. You can look at individual matters, documents created for the client. A News tab goes to an RSS based on the top 3-5 articles using client name as a search. He plans to bring in West Monitor information in another tab. West Monitor shows client company information identifying what type of legal work that client has, which law firms they are using, litigation/judges, and a lot more.


They also publish their own news through Business Development. One of the keys to success has been a joint venture of Business Development, Marketing, and IT. BD is responsible for delivering news and vets / targets the news. Can limit news to particular groups of attorneys (e.g., partners). They use the vendor"ShiftCentral" to serve as a source of edited news about practice areas or teams. It comes in as an RSS feed, delivered to a particular practice area.

People will use a portal if the information there is timely and creative and useful.

Steve Fletcher has a business development background and it showed in the skill with which his firm has provided BD-appropriate information to his firm. "Parkway works as a business development tool because Business Development helped develop it."

AMS Legal, a big vendor in the space, is Parker Poe's choice for extranets.

Parke Poe uses XMLaw webparts to display iManage folders.

They are using Yahoo weather and a Caribbean news site's RSS feeds. There is no central repository or control over the feeds and they sometimes break. ShiftCentral providing targeted news is some of the most valuable.

Guy Wiggins on Provisioning Made Easy


Provisioning refers to the process of supplying and maintaining passwords. Make it as easy for the end user as possible. Letting paralegals and site administrators add users without IT is a basic requirement. You need to have separate Active Directory structures.

His firm decided to use "Epok for SharePoint." Site administrators can invite people to the site. They then get a page providing provisioning training and letting them create their own passwords. It's a two-step verification, first of the email address, then another email has the link to get them in.

Epok has password reset ability. Microsoft IAG Gateway provides good access to Microsoft.

A best practice is to require legal terms of use that contain disclaimers and limit liability. Epok has an audit trail for acceptance of terms. Sites can expire automatically.

A big consideration in designing the extranet is site collections. The best practice is to have a Site Collection for each extranet. Automatic site provisioning is possible but only necessary if there are hundreds of sites.

If you'll have a lot of documents, data, you should create a dedicated SQL database to that site. No SQL database should be over 100 gigs.

Do you need detailed reporting on visitors and activities? The best practice is to be aware of auditing processes and turn it on if needed. What you can audit is limited in WSS; there are good examples of code if you have a good programmer who knows Sharepoint.

Sharing information from internal to external

Guy claims (without strong certainty in his voice) that XMLaw is the only vendor known to have synced up a legal intranet and an extranet. Extranets should reflect the client's look and feel. Another "best practice" is to set up alerts on key lists so that the client knows when new content is being added (this is the aspect of Sharepoint most like a wiki or other Web 2.0 platform).

Where you can, create a custom solution that solves a particular client problem. Even legal departments in big publicly traded companies may lack IT resources to do such things themselves. A good extranet site can lead to more work for your firm.

Resources include Codeplex External Collaboration Toolkit; XMLaw/Hubbard One Oneview Extranet; and EPOK Edition for SharePoint. Guy does not recommend that small firms undertake this, or that anyone undertake it lightly. It's best if you can leverage existing SharePoint skills and knowledge.


Bob Beach

Bob is often surprised at how little thought goes into providing meaningful content through the portal.

Bob has a six-point bulleted list titled "5 Rules for Great Content." (He made fun of himself for this so I don't have to). Great content is:

Fresh and Relevant

Vetted (manually or through workflow)

Categorized (by practice, department, office)

Targeted (by user, internal or external)

Prioritized / highlighted (by importance, timeliness)

Readily Available (no manual effort)

An extranet is a real opportunity to interact with your firm. Having a place to grab a document is not achieving the "enhance client relations" goal. Vetted content is much more effective. News stories should provide distinct value for that user. You have to deal with information overload. Personalization helps address that. iGoogle or myYahoo are really good for users. Attorneys would rather have someone else think about what information they need. Must be able to tag or attach metadata to the content.

Capturing blogs, wikis, discussion threads is happening. Categorizing and tagging it will help make it great. (I agree but in SharePoint 2007 there is no effective way to have cross-site or even cross-list tagging. You certainly can't look at who made what tags or use the categories on any but the site you are on).

Content Management in MOSS

Site columns provide consistent possible source of categorization, tagging, and metadata.
Content Types lets you define "classes" of communications with common attributes and policies. Can define the metadata and workflow/retention policies. He considers these an important part of configuring a robust content management capability.


User Profile data can drive targeting and what news shows on a portal page.
Presentation can be as important as the data itself. Browsing for content is still really important for people.

Sharepoint 2010 will have some improved content management capabilities. Metadata and taxonomies can be defined for the whole enterprise. You can navigate through categories. There will be better blogs and wikis for capturing information. Social feedback will allow rating of documents, discussions, posts, and so forth.

User profiles are more scalable, as are lists and libraries.

The panel feels that Extranet & Intranet usage analysis is a significant weakness of SharePoint.