3 Geeks and a Law Blog

One of the best member benefits of a State Bar Association is the ability to access Casemaker or Fastcase (or InCite for Pennsylvania). However, sometimes it is confusing to keep up with which product each state offers. Luckily, the kind folks at Duke University's Law Library have mapped everything out for us. Many law librarians have been promoting these services to the lawyers that want good research functionality, but don't want to either pay a high price for an individual subscription, or don't want to pass any costs along to clients for firms that do cost recovery.

If you're unfamiliar with any of these products, go sign in at your state bar association and find out more. In some states, even paralegals and law librarians can use these products without actually having to be a member of the state bar association.

Image [cc] fbpa.wayne

In the 19th century one of the big business revolutions was the adoption of a new technology called "Railroads." Of course when railroads were first proposed, two things happened. The first was a general uprising from the establishment about why this was a bad idea. This push-back came from those you would expect - the ones with a financial interest in keeping things the same way.

Although the first railroads were successful, attempts to finance new ones originally failed as opposition was mounted by turnpike operators, canal companies, stagecoach companies and those who drove wagons.

The second reaction was an "irrational exuberance" over the potential profit to be made and the speed at which change would occur. Mass quantities of speculative dollars were thrown at building rail lines from here to there to everywhere. Which of course resulted in much lost money when change didn't come that fast.

Obviously railroads did not fail in general. I understand we still use them. But what did happen? It took about 50 years for railroads to fully embed in the US economy. From then on, this new way of doing business was considered business-as-usual. So instead of a quick revolution, change came about incrementally over a much longer period of time.

In the 20th century something similar happened with TV, only the commercial adoption was shortened to about 20 years. This highlights the accelerating rate at which new technologies are being adopted. For tablets, I think it was 3 years - although I just made that stat up.

The obvious conclusion, according to this history and everything I read about BigLaw, is that we have about 10 minutes left before BigLaw collapses and the Phoenix of the New Normal rises. By the time you come back from the bathroom, it will all be over.

For those of you who followed my suggestion and are now back, you will notice my predictions were proven false. Not much has changed.

As an alternative, I suggest the revolution in the delivery of legal services will take a bit longer to occur. Now I am not suggesting it will take 50 years. But I do suggest it will not come as fast as many might predict. We all know things need to change. And many see financial opportunities in that change, as they well should. However, I have been feeling a bit of irrational exuberance lately about how this will all play out.

So don't look for BigLaw to collapse or for new-style providers to sweep through the market in short-order. Instead watch for steady, incremental changes in the way law firms function and deliver their services. Next generation providers will continue their growth, law firms will merge and things will generally keep changing. Much like the railroads, change will come, just not all at once.

Image [cc] sweetmandy

I got a LinkedIn email last week from someone that has taken a path very similar to the one I took twent-some years ago. Same Army M.O.S., same college, same law school, so far, not interested in the library portion. He's a 3L and about to enter the workforce as an attorney, and he asked if I had some words of advice. Of course, you know I'm pretty easy when it comes to doling out my opinions, wrapped in the guise of advice.

The advice I gave isn't very unique… in my humble opinion, it is really just common sense. I'm sure there are additional things that could be said (such as "be a good lawyer"), but I thought a few short words would be better than a five paragraph blog post. That said, I thought it would be easy to turn it into a blog post, so here it is:

My advise is to get you foot in the door and do good work. Take the time to build relationships with the folks you work with, and build good relationships with the folks that hire you to represent them.

Never eat lunch alone. Get involved in you community doing something you love, but that affects others at the same time in a positive way.

Don't be afraid to step out and try something new. Don't be afraid to ask others for help.

Treat everyone with respect and keep all of the staff members happy and engaged with the work you do.

It's a tough market out there, but hard work, smart work, and good relationship building will help you succeed when others might not.

Best of luck.

Image [cc] Ozzie Davis

At the recent (and extremely successful) P3 Conference last week, a comment really stuck in my head. There was a panel on Show Me the Practice Innovation and the final question to the panel was to point out any true innovations in legal services over the past 25 years. The panel included three of the smartest people I know: Kingsley Martin, Keith Lipman and Michael Mills.

The consensus from these big brains: What innovation?

Michael Mills from Neota Logic said online legal research was one innovation, which he acknowledged did improve efficiencies some, but it didn't really change the core delivery model.

So where am I going with this? Not where you might expect.

Many of the next-generation law firms (and non-law firms) hold themselves out as "innovative" and in fact win awards for said innovation. But when you peel back the covers, where is the innovation? Are they using next generation technologies like Neota and KM Standards? No. Are they building out process maps and reengineering how matters are managed and handled? Not that I can see. Are they employing project management people, principles and tools across the board? Well .. some are using them in document review, but otherwise - not so much.

What they appear to be doing is hiring BigLaw trained lawyers and utilizing significantly lower overhead. Some do it via onsite client secundments. Others do it with less expensive office space. All seem to do it with lower lawyer compensation. But this is merely doing it the same way - only cheaper.

Is this approach a smart idea? Absolutely. Many times I kick myself and Number 1 for not thinking of it first. But is this approach a real transformation to the way legal services are delivered?

Judge for yourself.

There has been a lot of discussion in Law Library Land lately about the use of the term "Librarian" to describe the staff that curates and researches in a private law library. The discussion, which has taken place in both blogs (Here is an excellent post) and on AALL listservs, has been lively and interesting. 

As a brand, the term is unparallelled in its universal recognition.  However, the connotations associated with the term may not be of a dynamic and forward-thinking professional. Just try telling someone you're a librarian at a social function and watch their eyes immediately glaze over from boredom. 

As proud as I am of being a Librarian (note the capitalized first letter of the word), I am at heart pragmatic when it comes to my career and have no problem with labels like Research Specialist, Research Analyst, Information Manager, Technical Services Specialist, Director of Information Services or Lord Emperor of Research (cue the Darth Vader music).   My self-worth isn't tied to a label. I'm sure that the Librarians of Ancient Babylon were not called Librarians.   Labels and professions evolve over time and, just as in Darwinian evolution,  those who can adapt will succeed and those who can't will be left behind.  In the end, I will do what I need to in order to succeed. How successful I am is shown by being the go-to person people turn to when they need assistance.  A label doesn't affect that one way or another.