The survey found that law firms have reversed a recent trend in law library personnel and associated costs, taking what had been a 4.7% decline between 2017-2022 in the number of library and research personnel as compared to the rest of the firm, and turning that into 5.3% growth in personnel over the past year. In fact, of all the individual roles measured by the survey, knowledge management professionals (+26.3%) and library & research management (+9.8%) saw the largest year-over-year growth in terms of full-time equivalent employees.

On the other hand, however, there is the looming influence of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), which is set to transform how the legal profession operates, by even the most modest accounts. And part of that transformation means automating and productizing some law firm tasks, including those undertaken by law librarians and information professionals. This transformation will necessitate that law library professionals learn new, more tech-driven skills to adapt to how work processes will transform across their organizations.

So where does that leave the law librarian community? The Hot Topic: Artificial Intelligence & the Future of Law Libraries session at the聽 (AALL) conference attempted to chart two potential futures 鈥� the best- and worst-case scenarios 鈥� and describe how to prepare AALL membership for success.

The vicious and virtuous

The panel presented the results of AALL鈥檚 Future of Law Libraries: Artificial Intelligence, Opportunities, and Advancement initiative 鈥� a series of roundtables held at various institutions throughout the 2023-2024 academic year. At each of these roundtables, participants tackled various parts of law libraries and how AI will impact their growth and operations into the future.

In each of these areas, participants were asked to envision two separate futures: a virtuous cycle, in which law libraries are able to thrive in the age of GenAI; and a vicious cycle, in which technology hampers or even causes the demise of the modern law library. Then, participants were asked to consider how law libraries would potentially arrive at each of those points.

The panel stressed that law librarians need to be advocates, both for themselves and for the necessary technology to position law libraries as a trusted resource for technological knowledge and execution.

Here is what those roundtable participants considered the best and worst-case scenarios for various aspects of law libraries:

Staffing 鈥� The vicious cycle occurs as law libraries begin to cut staff again as AI replaces their capabilities. In a particularly dire scenario, this could even mean dropping down to just one employee in a library, which is overall managed by AI. The panel participants said libraries may land in this future if librarians don鈥檛 get out in front 鈥渁nd make a case for the value of the library.鈥�

In the virtuous cycle, librarians do just that, finding a way to leverage AI to demonstrate their value. And indeed, in this scenario, librarians are valued by their institutions and receive institutional support to be proactive and a leader in AI. It鈥檚 important, the panel said, to 鈥渉ire and train our staff specifically to be the experts in these areas.鈥�

Services 鈥� In the vicious cycle, less expensive, automated tech does things that look similar to human beings, but at lower quality. This causes stakeholders to decide librarians and their services aren鈥檛 worth the cost. Law libraries could end up in this scenario if they 鈥渇ail to show our value on top of technology.鈥�

The virtuous cycle, meanwhile, pairs law libraries with technology for even greater services than previously thought imaginable. Librarians use GenAI to eliminate drudgery and streamline workflows. They also become experts in the use of GenAI, becoming a hub for the organization and 鈥渟howing people why it鈥檚 not scary.鈥�

Space 鈥擳he vicious cycle envisions a world in which law libraries themselves are largely underutilized. Similar to trends following the introduction of eBooks, AI may reduce physical foot traffic, leading to fewer resources for the library. This could also result in community disconnect if fewer people are coming in-person to the library 鈥� a scenario described by one participant as 鈥渁 dystopian hellscape.鈥�

While there may not necessarily be unlimited space in the virtuous cycle, it is, more importantly, optimized space. Here, librarians are seen as experts and can create spaces for those in their organizations to learn about AI and get guidance. Librarians can also utilize technology to create flexible spaces, using libraries in a variety of ways to strengthen and support community connections.

Instruction 鈥� The vicious cycle has AI doing what they librarians do to instruct their charges, but on a larger scale. In this future, print media is dead, so there is no need for information curators because content providers are offering their services directly to subscribers. User standards are downgraded as long as the product is good enough, AI models that are tough to build and maintain eventually break down, and libraries can鈥檛 right these wrongs.

On the other side, the virtuous cycle sees librarians spending time learning about AI and translating their knowledge for their organizations. Librarians learn the difference between hype and reality, and let AI do what it does well while perfecting other tasks like creating niche content. This allows for reallocation of resources rather than losing them, transitioning from being storehouses to creators and curators of information. As one panelist said, 鈥淥wn the AI, and don鈥檛 seed the critical considerations.鈥�

Needs and seeds

With those potential pathways in mind, the AALL panel laid out what it called 鈥渘eeds and seeds鈥� 鈥� the tasks that today鈥檚 law librarians need to undertake to achieve a virtuous future, and the takeaways that will help them accomplish those tasks.

For the needs, the panel first stressed that law librarians need to be advocates, both for themselves and for the necessary technology to position law libraries as a trusted resource for technological knowledge and execution. Law librarians should seek to be part of decision-making processes for any AI implementation, panelists said, adding that librarians also should advocate for legal research instruction at all levels, and for preserving and advancing the profession of law librarians as critical thinkers and evaluators of legal information.

The [GenAI] transformation will necessitate that law library professionals learn new, more tech-driven skills to adapt to how work processes will transform across their organizations.

The panel also stressed the importance of working throughout the organization on AI initiatives. Law librarians should team with privacy experts to seek proactive and ethical privacy policy development, advance technology, and ensure its proper usage. Teaming with finance colleagues, law librarians should push for increased financial support and resource allocation. This includes resources not just for AI implementation, but also for training and ensuring that librarians and the organization as a whole are upskilled. Finally, law librarians, acting with the organization as a whole, should promote their own expertise, letting IT departments, legal counsel, leadership committees, and other groups know what鈥檚 going on and why libraries are an important resource.

To that end, the panel also viewed collaboration as a seed, a key tool in librarians鈥� belts to be a part of the future. Law librarians have the ability to not only use data effectively, panelists explained, but to create new and unique data that will be a crucial part of the future. Even today, librarians can spearhead tasks like converting print publications into formats that can be ingested, collaborate on research and pro bono centers, and begin to build democratized models that can spread to all.

Finally, as was a theme throughout the conference, the panel urged AALL attendees to keep this discussion going, both in private conversations and in public proclamations such as annual reports from the library. Given the growing impact of GenAI, time is of the essence, panelists added. 鈥淲e need to do this now. The difference in discussions between the October and May roundtables was incredible. If we wait six months, we鈥檙e going to be left behind.鈥�

Group discounts available. Please email TRIsales@thomsonreuters.com聽for more details.

Sign up today!聽 Online registration now available.

]]> /en-us/posts/legal/coo-cfo-forum-knowledge-management/ https://blogs.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/legal/coo-cfo-forum-knowledge-management/#respond Mon, 31 Oct 2022 12:53:53 +0000 https://blogs.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/?p=54160 NEW YORK 鈥� For law firms to design and leverage a truly successful knowledge management (KM) program that can put the collective expertise, experience, and insight of the entire firm at each individual lawyer鈥檚 fingertips, the focus must remain on both data and people, according to several KM legal experts.

In a breakout panel, Expansive View: Developing a Growth-Focused Knowledge Management Strategy, held last week at 成人VR视频鈥� 21st Annual Law Firm COO & CFO Forum, panelists discussed how a successful KM initiative within a law firm can pay tremendous dividends around collaboration, efficiency, and client service, but only if it can remain properly focused on its mission.

Knowledge management often describes a purposeful system that is created within a firm to gather and organize all its internal and external expertise and legal acumen, along with its documented work product, contracts, libraries, and other information resources in order to create a single repository of all the firm鈥檚 collective data and knowledge. 鈥淜nowledge is the most important asset a law firm has,鈥� said panelist Judy Mackenzie Stuart, Global Chief Knowledge Officer at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner. 鈥淭his pool of knowledge and expertise is what clients are paying for.鈥�

Traditionally, firms鈥� knowledge management efforts were embodied among singular individuals in professional support roles within the firm; now, however, with the explosion of vast troves of data and digitized information that law firms can access, that role has expanded beyond people. Today, it takes a melding together of individual expertise with all that data to craft a methodology to make all this information and collective wisdom accessible to the firm at large, the panel argued.

“Knowledge is the most important asset a law firm has 鈥� this pool of knowledge and expertise is what clients are paying for.”

Panelist Kimberly Gardner, Chief Operating Officer of Holland & Knight, said that although many law firms 鈥渕ay have difficulty getting this fire started鈥�, they likely already have pockets within the firm in which people from different practices and departments are coming together and talking about how to get things done in an informal way. These fledgling efforts are the real beginning of the cooperative process that can lead to a full KM program.

鈥淚t鈥檚 important to take inventory of what a firm has 鈥� take stock and see what really exists,鈥� Gardner explained, adding that bringing people together around data and knowledge-sharing can ultimately lead to a more formal KM effort that can be communicated with the rest of the firm.

The key, of course, is keeping any KM initiative focused on the reasons the firm has decided to pursue this strategy, said panelist Cindy Thurston Bare, Chief Data & Innovation Officer at Frost Brown Todd. 鈥淵ou have to know the why.鈥�

By building their KM initiative around three basic categories 鈥� experience, matter types, and industry 鈥� Frost Brown was able to understand its clients better and look for ways to serve them better as well, while supporting its own legal teams, Thurston Bare explained.

Bryan Cave鈥檚 Mackenzie Stuart agreed, noting that the core of any good KM strategy relies on turning data into useable information while remembering that a vast amount of tacit knowledge resides in the heads of the professionals within the firm. 鈥淎nd you risk losing that every time they walk out the door,鈥� she said.

When a firm鈥檚 KM program is working well, it can provide ways for the firm to help 鈥渃lients see around corners,鈥� Stuart added, while bringing together technology and people 鈥渢o make things happen in the right way.鈥�

State of the legal market

At the opening of last week鈥檚 Forum, James Jones, a Senior Fellow at the Center on Ethics and the Legal Profession at Georgetown University Law Center, and Gretta Rusanow, Head of Advisory Services in the Law Firm Group at Citi Private Bank, took a deep look into the state of the US legal market.

鈥淎fter coming through more than two years of chaos, the legal industry has been dumped into a sea of uncertainty around such issues as pricing demand and return-to-work strategies 鈥� and this requires a particular type of leadership to keep a steady hand.鈥�

While 2021 was another record year for law firms, as data in the 2022 Report on the State of the Legal Market shows, cracks began to appear in 2022 as firms found themselves entangled in an elongated war for top legal talent, all while balancing higher expenses and early signs that legal demand in some areas was slowing.

鈥淎fter coming through more than two years of chaos, the legal industry has been dumped into a sea of uncertainty around such issues as pricing demand and return-to-work strategies,鈥� Jones said. 鈥淎nd this requires a particular type of leadership to keep a steady hand.鈥�

In 2021, the legal industry was really seeing some extraordinary yearly statistics around profits and demand, Jones explained. Then, higher talent costs and rising associate turnover brought some dark clouds into the picture. Now this year, as demand slows mostly because of the fall-off of corporate transactional work, the picture may be darkening further.

鈥淵ou鈥檙e really getting a counter-intuitive picture because profits remain high and rate growth is robust, yet demand is falling,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a mixed message.鈥�

Rusanow said much of this could be attributed to a timing issue, and that this year鈥檚 nascent slowdown hasn鈥檛 really impacted individual firm numbers in areas such as realization and rates yet. In fact, she added, that in speaking with individual large law firms, the vast majority of them are still making plans to bring on larger associate classes in the near future, indicating that a possible economic slowdown hasn鈥檛 altered their plans for growth.

Yet, what is considered an impediment and barrier to KM is often the result of confusing KM with information management (IM).

Instead, KM and IM should be considered more alike in their value systems rather than a competing priority in which an organization must choose between securing information and data versus sharing information and data. In accepting that there are both enablers and barriers to any organizational priority, a strong KM culture includes many of the same enablers that zero trust is tasked with supporting. KM, when it is aligned with zero trust, creates an even stronger KM value in the organization. And zero trust, like KM, succeeds best when working from the position of the four KM enablers: people, process, technology, and governance 鈥� as well as a strong organizational policy, which is critical for zero trust.

The successful implantation of KM and zero trust should be:

• • • business focused;
    • supported by senior management;
    • embedded with the strategic vision and principles of the organization;
    • focused on higher value knowledge and higher value data;
    • able to demonstrate measurable benefits, such as competitive advantage and process improvement in tandem with risk mitigation and security; and
    • employed as a full organizational change.

Despite the decades-held belief that most security threats are external, it is inside threats that have risen to become a serious cause for concern, most recently this is due to the extension of network access across mobile devices, cloud users, and employees working in hybrid or fully remote environments.

Behind the emergence of zero trust is a broad concept that applies to technologies, networks, IT architectures, and security policies. This concept holds that users within a network should be treated as if they could pose a threat. Therefore, enterprise resources and data are to be protected individually and access to these resources should be evaluated and analyzed continuously.

The zero trust future

Zero trust is not a particularly unique approach. IT professionals would consider the principles of this model to be a good housekeeping practice for any healthy secure enterprise. Most IT professionals have long taken great pains to design systems that consider inside risk as dangerous as any other risk. Therefore, zero trust systems have been developed to behave as an integrated platform that contextualizes information based on identity and security that has shifted risk measures from traditional perimeter models (e.g. firewalls) to one that is identity-centric. Through this process, key questions emerge, such as who has access to what information? When do they have access? How much access is given, and what business purpose does their access support?

This identity-centric approach is consistent with KM mapping. KM mapping outlines the business challenge of what we know with strategic goals that can then be supported with KM interventions, such as a knowledge base, intranet, sales wikis, and CRM platforms. Additionally, to be successful, both KM and zero trust require agreed-to measurable outcomes.

This simplified explanation of zero trust in a KM world is consistent with KM values that improve business agility which brings with it the priority of protecting internal data and internal assets.

Strategies to overcome perceived KM barriers brought on by a commitment to zero trust overlay with the implementation of zero trust models. These strategies include:

• • • mapping 鈥渘eed to know鈥� information (KM) alongside 鈥渘eed to secure鈥� (zero trust);
    • finding common alignment with strategic goals;
    • outlining business objectives and agility with business security; and
    • agreeing upon measurable benchmarks and outcomes, remembering that i) not all measures are monetary values; ii) not all measures should be targets; and that iii) common solutions can be identified聽to overcome 鈥渋mposed鈥� targets.

Much like KM, zero trust is a new mindset that requires sweeping changes to be implemented effectively. On the surface this seems daunting, but after evaluating KM and zero trust, both can be implemented to improve organizational value and effectiveness.

Even though remote work models are reported to improve employee well-being and job satisfaction, expand talent pools, and reduce long-held costs associated with infrastructure, there is further evidence these success drivers have also exposed employee isolation, deteriorating workplace culture and limiting organizational knowledge-sharing.

One of the frequent issues raised in remote and hybrid environments is the very real feeling of missing out. The loss of such in-person interaction as coffee meet ups and impromptu knowledge exchanges has diminished the sense of belonging and organizational purpose. This type of informal organizational knowledge-sharing is predicated upon relationship proximity that is defined by trust. In other words, the people with whom we typically interact, are those whom we are more willing to share with and learn from.

Rather than hitting the limit on organizational knowledge-sharing鈥� the time is now ripe for knowledge-sharing behavior to be seen as central to innovation.

So what are the practical considerations for an organization whose historical and continued success is gleaned from knowledge-sharing behavior beyond knowledge capture?

Rather than hitting the limit on organizational knowledge-sharing (and despite organizations having largely focused on improving knowledge-sharing through information technology systems), the time is now ripe for knowledge-sharing behavior to be seen as central to innovation.

Understanding that most aspects of organizational sharing are based on experience and are largely rooted in undocumented (tacit) rather than documented (explicit) knowledge, it is knowledge-sharing behaviors that are embedded in organizational routines, processes, and structures that improve the weakened relational ties unearthed by remote work. Organizations that invest in and strengthen the development of knowledge-sharing behavior through relational networks contained within teams to create a more matrixed and cross-functional team approach influence cooperative communication that broadens the various dimensions of internal knowledge expansion.

This approach will form interpersonal networks of common sharing as a personal goal and characteristic. This also opens up an organization to social knowledge-sharing systems that are not solely defined by proximity.

Improving knowledge-sharing

Effective models for improving knowledge-sharing behavior and outcomes are commonly studied across academic and corporate circles. These studies are consistently focused on fostering a knowledge-sharing mindset, creating space or ways for sharing to happen, adapting to different forms of knowledge-sharing leadership values, and formalizing the sharing process.

There are a number of ways to improve knowledge-sharing behavior within an organization, and most recognize that people are central to the success of any knowledge-sharing effort. Through their social connections, employees view themselves as knowledge contributors and as such, an organization should make the most of this view. Indeed, some ways to better foster this view include:

1. 1. Acknowledging self-belief and that everyone has valuable knowledge to share 鈥� Do this through team debriefs and learning opportunities, and by developing informal social networks. Employees believe in social leaning as a key driver in their success.

   2. Designing ways to create mentoring as a knowledge-sharing scenario 鈥� Whether through project teams or organizational participation, this strengthens and leads to cross-functional learning.

   3. Enabling people to regularly share knowledge 鈥� This forms consistent habits and feelings of purpose and contribution.

   4. Considering that your peers are a collective network of knowledge 鈥� Reach out regularly to identify and solve problems that innovate and improve process.

Organizational knowledge-sharing is now positioned to evolved beyond the limits of technology structures. How an organization perceives and values what people know can offer further insight into the discipline of knowledge-sharing as a core institutional value 鈥� and one in which there are no limitations.

It鈥檚 a definition that Marcia Burris, Director of Research and Knowledge Management at Nexsen Pruet, knows well and has applied throughout the many phases of her career. Always centered around library services, Burris began her professional path as a legal entrepreneur and then as an internal library services manager at an Am Law 200 firm. She also supported law firms as a consultant, helping them optimize research and information services.

Burris joined 鈥� a major regional commercial law firm with more than 180 attorneys in eight offices throughout the Carolinas 鈥� about two years ago. She immediately set out to innovate the firm鈥檚 research and library services and ultimately drive efficiencies in attorney workflow by identifying and removing barriers to information access.

In addition to expanding legal research training and resource awareness programs, Burris worked with firm leadership to revamp the firm鈥檚 approach to online costs so that attorneys could conduct research without concerns about these potential costs to their clients. To make online access more seamless for users, she also worked with vendors to remove client matter entry screens and implement a single sign-on to eliminate the need for passwords.

These changes have spurred growth in use of online tools, enabling the firm to cut print materials and save administrative time on cost recovery efforts.

On the knowledge management side, Burris said she is seeking to enhance access to internal firm knowledge and determine how the firm can do the same for clients. Internally, Burris launched a new intranet platform that integrates financial data dashboards and organizes other common information sets, paving the way for future enhancements and team collaboration sites. Externally, the firm is adding portals to facilitate client access to work products and case management information, and creating virtual deal rooms to add efficiency to those transactions. These sites help to strengthen client relationships through added practical efficiencies and partnership with clients.

Burris鈥檚 approach in creating collaboration platforms, both internal and external, is to start small with one or two targeted projects for a small group of users. This 鈥渇irst step鈥� allows her to learn from each user group and incorporate that as she rolls out collaborative platforms to new user groups.

In the external client project, Burris is creating client-facing sites with basic functionality like file sharing and then enhancing the sites based on what the clients want. 鈥淚t’s not just about the technology,鈥� Burris says. 鈥淲e’re trying to be strategic to have conversations with the firm鈥檚 attorneys and their clients and make sure we are providing content that is going to help them manage their legal matters.鈥� This client-centric approach is enhanced through use of user-friendly tools over which attorneys have significant control.

This approach has worked well. When a seasoned attorney, who was piloting the tool for firm-client collaboration, built his own homepage with no formal training other than Burris opening up the tool and giving him a quick tour, she knew the platform would work well for attorneys throughout the firm.

Influencing & persistence are key

Through her entrepreneurial background and experience in her own business development, Burris learned early the value of framing the pitch to focus on the audience member or stakeholder to determine what is the one thing that will get them to Yes. Burris keeps that in mind in her current role as she focuses on the benefit to end-users of each new tool the firm introduces. For example, during the implementation of the new intranet (which occurred before the pandemic), Burris provided each individual a tour of all of the information they now had at their fingertips, personalizing the tour to highlight features which would benefit them specifically. And in order to deliver information users needed, the firm integrated many different data sets, such as those from billing and collections, configured into easy-to-access-and-read dashboards and an enhanced employee directory that was merged with timekeeper details.

Yet, in promoting any new tool or innovation for firm-wide adoption, the value of stakeholder support and good user word of mouth cannot be overlooked, Burris explains. Even with good influencing, the new intranet ultimately had to be easy to use and provide the promised efficiencies in order to be widely adopted. Burris knew the project would be successful during preview tours when staff members asked her to make the site their new homepage.

While the new intranet was easily adopted, other changes can be more difficult to implement. In those projects, Burris values the perspective gained from her prior business experience that 鈥�No鈥� from a new user or prospect may simply mean 鈥�not right now鈥� or 鈥�not until I have more information鈥�. Understanding this has allowed Burris to continue working through stakeholder and user concerns and help get projects over the finish line.

Impact of pandemic on innovation

During the current pandemic, Burris has observed a positive element in her work 鈥� a silver lining of sorts in an otherwise overall difficult situation. Though she characterized the culture of Nexsen Pruet as one that is open to innovation, Burris says she also knows that all organizations have those individuals who are slower to adopt new tools and technology.

Despite this, she has found that many lawyers and staff are showing an increasing willingness to new technology and change in general because of the dramatic nature of the impact of the pandemic on workflow. 鈥淚 think the situation has opened people’s eyes and created more openness to trying new things because the status quo really has been upset,鈥� Burris says.

Unlike previous business interruptions where the impact may have been more short term, Burris explains that she expects the changed outcomes in practices to be permanent once the pandemic wanes. 鈥淭his time the change really feels real,鈥� she says. 鈥淲e find that attorneys who hadn’t done certain tasks online in the past, or who might have thought they could make it to retirement without changing their work processes, are increasingly doing more work online.鈥�

And once these individuals discover that they can be successful in leveraging newer technologies, they are naturally more open to additional new ways of thinking about their work processes, she adds. 鈥淐hange begets more change.鈥�

鈥淭his obsession for me started when I was a kid,鈥� he explains. 鈥淚 spent a lot of time in the hospital growing up, and I was struck by how many kids didn鈥檛 have access to books. I must have been 11 or 12, and I started this organization that collected books and set up carts in hospitals for kids. And from then on, I had this conviction that said, 鈥楲ook, any of us can innovate. We can see a problem, find a new solution, and make it happen.鈥欌��

An associate professor of law at the at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas (UNLV), Regalia calls his approach to teaching human-centered. 鈥淓verything I teach, I try to bring back to the people: The people we are persuading, the people we are affecting, and the cognitive science that sheds light on how all of us process information,鈥� he says. 鈥淪o, when we are writing a demand letter, we are thinking about the human element 鈥� not just the legal stuff.鈥�

He emphasizes the benefits of incorporating technology and innovation, alongside strong writing, into the practice of law. One way he helps students bridge the gap between law school and legal practice is by using a blended classroom, including his Lawyering Process Class, which is UNLV鈥檚 version of a first-year Legal Research & Writing course.

鈥淩ather than just write a brief and focus only on traditional research and writing exercises, students also work on longer-term projects that give them tools they need to innovate 鈥� to look at problems and find new answers to them,鈥� Regalia explains. 鈥淭eams of my 1Ls build a document-automation app to help pro se folks in our community. These teams had to go through the process of identifying problems in our community that needed innovating, they had to work together to come up with an innovative solution, and then they had to plan out and build that solution.鈥�

Learning traditional legal skills

Throughout this exercise, students learned all the traditional skills of writing, researching, and analyzing the law, Regalia says. 鈥淏ut they also worked on building wider-ranging tools that go beyond all that to help them solve new problems in new ways,鈥� he adds. 鈥淟ike how to find solutions as a team, and how to integrate technology into lawyering.鈥�

In evaluating students鈥� writing skills, Regalia noticed many needed help to develop a sense of what鈥檚 important and how to focus their readers on that. He observed a disconnect 鈥� evident in both students and lawyers 鈥� between the work product attorneys prepare, and the functional aspect of what judges or clients want to see in the documents.

To better sharpen students鈥� writing skills early in law school, Regalia recently launched the platform, which compiles years of his research in legal writing. The platform also features tools that law students and lawyers can use not just for their writing and presentations, but for innovating and using new technology as well.

Indeed, Write.law reflects another hallmark of Regalia鈥檚 teaching style: empowering students to see how much they can accomplish on their own. He hears from former students who tell him that his classes prepared them for practice and positioned them as the go-to attorneys in their firm around the use of technology. 鈥淭hey feel so empowered,鈥� Regalia says. 鈥淧eople are looking to them to say, 鈥楬ow do I do this stuff?鈥欌��

Regalia admits he takes great satisfaction in hearing this. 鈥淲hat makes me love being a law professor so much is those stories,鈥� he says. 鈥淲hen students come back and talk concretely about a principle, concept or tool they鈥檙e using, it鈥檚 the best.鈥�

Last semester, there was even a 鈥渟ilver lining鈥� of sorts with the COVID-19 pandemic, because the crisis underscored how important technology is for lawyers and law professors, as well as the importance of being adaptable, he notes.

In fact, one student distilled that feeling into an email to Regalia about legal work during the pandemic that read: 鈥淭his is a prime example of why it’s so important to be well-versed in managing technology, and you are my only professor thus far in law school that has emphasized the importance of it. Thank you for making me comfortable with technology and using different platforms, for this is what makes this already stressful time, a little less stressful.鈥�

Another potential benefit was how the crisis forced people to suddenly do things differently, which may make everyone more open to change and innovation moving forward, he notes. This mindset will be key to legal education innovation, Regalia says, adding that as law schools consider what鈥檚 next for evolving legal education, the first step is embracing innovation both as a tool and as a discipline. 鈥淲e need to understand more of business, regulation, and the human factors, and how all this comes together with law,鈥� he says, adding that embracing technology is another big piece. 鈥淲e are seeing the rampant acceleration of tech adoption in the legal field right now,鈥� he observes. 鈥淔or law schools, that means embracing tech more as a tool for teaching, a skill to equip law students, and a field of study.鈥�

Regalia says he is encouraged by approaches like his partnership with other faculty from various institutions and the law school division at 成人VR视频 in building an online certification program to better introduce new law students to legal research. Through this partnership, he feels that legal research service vendors are invested in education as well, Regalia says. 鈥淚 also hope more partnerships between legal education and the public and private sector come out of this,鈥� he explains, adding that one of the many lessons of innovation is the power of collaboration and information.

鈥淪o, closing the gap between what we are teaching and what the public and private sectors need out of our law students is a core mission for me, certainly.鈥�

The Law School Innovators series was created by Michele Best, who leads the U.S. Law School business at 成人VR视频; and Brooke Stokke, the Proposition Strategy and Development Manager for 成人VR视频 Law Schools.聽

of Academic Affairs, Law Library & Law and Technology Programs at the . To begin addressing this skills gap for her students, Janoski-Haehlen developed one-hour programs on topics including e-discovery, smart contracts, blockchain, and cryptocurrency. 鈥淲e identified the need by looking at what our students know and what don鈥檛 they know,鈥� she explains. 鈥淢y main goal was to integrate legal tech into the curriculum so that when students graduate, they鈥檙e ready to practice law 鈥� not just ready to go into a courtroom, but ready to do the business of law.鈥�

Technology in legal

Students told her how invaluable these skills have been, and she wanted to reach more students. She gave CLE presentations and soon was being invited by law firms to present on technology in legal practice. In need of a program to put all these elements together, Janoski-Haehlen essentially evolved the university鈥檚 law library into a technology center.

鈥淢y librarians got on board, and we started looking at how we could integrate skills across the curriculum,鈥� she says. 鈥淲e looked at the trial advocacy class and using courtroom presentation technology. Even our clinics are mobile, and that was before COVID-19. We have an inmate assistance program, and the students have to take all of the resources with them to the jail.鈥�

From her law firm presentations and involvement with the , Janoski-Haehlen realized that the need for stronger technology skillsets goes beyond law students. 鈥淢y original goal was, 鈥楲et鈥檚 get the students practice-ready,鈥欌�� she notes. 鈥淚t has expanded into: The students need to be ready, but the people they are working for need to be ready, too.鈥�

Indeed, it鈥檚 often her former students leading technology initiatives when they enter law practice. 鈥淚 have a lot of students who go back to practice with their families,鈥� she explains. 鈥淥ne student went back to Idaho and is working with his father鈥檚 firm. He said, 鈥業 streamlined the entire firm鈥檚 processes just using CMS and some document automation. It saved my dad so much time and money that I鈥檓 now the favorite!鈥欌��

This isn鈥檛 the only story like this that students have shared with her. 鈥淚鈥檝e also heard from students hired as associates at small or mid-sized firms,鈥� says Janoski-Haehlen. 鈥淎ll of a sudden, they are the ones in charge of legal tech for their firm! It鈥檚 such a positive reinforcement of the program 鈥� these students are actually using the skills they鈥檙e learning in class.鈥�

Janoski-Haehlen describes her teaching style as hands-on. 鈥淚 want the students to embrace the technology, and to screw up and have issues, and call me with their frustrations so we can talk through those,鈥� she says. 鈥淚t really helps students problem-solve.鈥�

Adapting to remote work

Since COVID-19 has moved classes online, she has been reaching out to her students more often via Google Chat and with additional WebEx office hours. She has tweaked her lectures and discussions to focus on how attorneys are adapting to remote work. 鈥淭he pandemic has been a good topic for class,鈥� she says. 鈥淪tudents have had to realize how much attorneys have had to change in the last four to five weeks. If you don鈥檛 embrace technology, you can鈥檛 do online meetings with your clients or online mediation. What鈥檚 going to happen to you in your future?鈥�

Most students react positively to learning legal tech skills, with some exceptions, she observes. 鈥淚鈥檝e gotten some negative concerns like, 鈥榃hy do I need to know about this? I鈥檓 going to law school to practice law, not to be a computer wizard,鈥欌�� she says. 鈥淭o them, I say: You don鈥檛 have to use these things, but you do have to know about them because your opposing counsel might be using them. Clients might expect you to have an online case management system, where they can log in because they don鈥檛 want to pick up the phone every time they want to see the status of their case.鈥�

Janoski-Haehlen recently collaborated with faculty from various institutions and the law school division at 成人VR视频 to deliver a online certification program for student, which she says has shaped how she teaches, as well as work she has done with others. 鈥淓arly on in my career, I was told to be careful working with vendors because their training sessions always devolve into sales pitches,鈥� she says. 鈥淚鈥檝e found in working over the years with vendors that they really want our students to succeed and learn how to use the products.鈥�

鈥淭he recent certification project I鈥檝e been doing has been eye-opening,鈥� she says. 鈥淲e鈥檙e not focusing on the platform, it鈥檚 about the learning. And in a very real sense, vendors are trying to make us better lawyers and these partnerships are critical to the success of our students and to the success of law practice.鈥�

That鈥檚 why Janoski-Haehlen advises law faculty who may be interested in starting their own technology center to partner with vendors. As a first step, she recommends law faculty assess their own level of technology competence and encourages 鈥渟tarting small鈥� by talking to vendors and bringing them in for monthly webinars. She also suggests reaching out to other academics and attorneys who are interested in legal tech for their perspectives on ways to embrace technology.

鈥淚 found different avenues of research and different ways to embrace the type of legal tech that law firms are doing just by talking to colleagues who work in firms in Akron and Cleveland,鈥� Janoski-Haehlen says. 鈥淚t鈥檚 amazing what we can learn from each other.鈥�

The Law School Innovators series was created by Michele Best, who leads the U.S. Law School business at 成人VR视频; and Brooke Stokke, the Proposition Strategy and Development Manager for 成人VR视频 Law Schools.聽

By contrast, COVID-19 was like an earthquake that tore apart the landscape overnight and forced law firms into a twilight zone between the past and their transformed future. A firm鈥檚 response and resiliency depended on where the organization fell along the spectrum of agility, infrastructure, digital knowledge, and collaboration tools.

In is biography Call Sign Chaos, retired U.S. Marine General James Mattis articulates three drivers of wartime knowledge sharing: housekeeping, decision-making, and alarms. The Mattis KM checklist for 鈥渦nder the gun鈥� decision-making is succinct: What do I know, who needs to know it, and have I told them?

At the onset of the current crisis, knowledge management professionals were simultaneously challenged with assuring that both administrators and lawyers had access to existing knowledge resources while aggregating and disseminating the tsunami of laws, regulations, and policies that were emanating at warp speed from every level of government. Seemingly overnight every law firm had to assemble pandemic teams to advise on how the firm should respond internally to stay-at-home orders while advising clients on how to protect their supply chains, their employees, their contracts, and their own customers in an emerging area of 鈥減andemic law.鈥�

KM professionals became key leaders and collaborators in these pandemic swat teams, setting up internal knowledge sharing platforms, establishing client facing e-rooms, and feeding content to marketing for COVID-19 client updates, thought pieces, and webinars. They were also helping lawyers respond to real-time demands from clients.

Ron Friedmann, a legal consultant and blogger at Prismlegal.com observes that 鈥渢he crisis will also have positive KM knock-on effects.鈥� For example, the use of document management systems at most firms has been spotty, he explains; but now, between security and collaboration concerns that could change. 鈥淚 expect many firms will get serious about requiring DM use,鈥� Friedmann says. 鈥淎nd that will build a better KM foundation.鈥�

Making digital transformation stick

Forward-thinking librarians and knowledge managers had unknowingly prepared for the pandemic when they designed digital research and workflow platforms that offered lawyers one-click access to e-treatises, statutes, agency releases, 50 state surveys, custom digital newsletters, practical guidance, analytics on judges, tools for red-lining deal documents, forms, brief banks, and precedent databases. These libraries were open 24/7 and could be accessed from any location. And even those firms had holdouts that were reluctant to use these tools.

The COVID-19 crisis has turbo-charged technology adoption. Lawyers who had proudly defined themselves as Luddites have been forced into Zoom rooms for meetings and have been deprived of their books.

As law firms start re-opening their offices over the next few weeks and months, they need to hold onto the ground that has been gained and in fact, press on for greater adoption and transformation. Firms need to recognize that 鈥渢here is a big difference between using video or work-from-home and adopting tools genuinely designed for ongoing collaboration,鈥� says Friedmann, adding that he also sees an opportunity for firms to use the post-pandemic world to pry lawyers away from tools that were designed for individual work, not groups. The next challenge will be investing in and managing the adoption of true collaboration tools that anyone to work with anyone else from anywhere.

Indeed, COVID-19 challenged every firm to engage in design thinking in real time, and the reimagining of law firm workflow needs to continue. This should not be left behind as a tabletop exercise 鈥� the lessons learned by the forced change in work during the pandemic crisis need to be embraced.

And law firms need to reward and encourage the agility that will be required to move them to the next tier of knowledge sharing and collaboration.

But the ability to effectively analyze data and put it to good use is directly related to the quantity and quality of the data being analyzed. Lawyers will stare awestruck at a colorful stacked bar chart, but the smiles quickly turn to frowns when they realize that the data being depicted is just dead wrong.

Law firms grappling with how to capture better data should consider hiring a data quality specialist. These individuals can own the processes for gathering, organizing, and cultivating quality data, which allows others in the firm, such as analysts or data scientists, to create accurate reports. Although data quality is often viewed as a less interesting topic than data analysis and visualization, it is a critically important area to tackle for law firms looking to build a more data-driven culture. In fact, you can鈥檛 have effective analytics without quality business data.

The Challenge

Capturing and organizing quality data is a tricky endeavor, however. The continued evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning is an important piece of the puzzle. We are already seeing impressive advances in the litigation space where technology tools are extracting rich data points from public records and other documents. The advancements to date look to be just the tip of the iceberg, but we are still a long way from a world where machines instantaneously extract quality data and organize it into neat tables that are ready for analysis.

Human coding is still how most law firms build core client and matter data sets. For example, classifying matters is the primary way law firms go about understanding the types of work they handle. Questions like, 鈥淗ow many IP litigation matters have we handled in the Eastern District of Texas?鈥� or 鈥淗ow much do real estate joint ventures typically cost?鈥� are asked daily. Most firms gather matter classification data through an intake process during which legal assistants enter information about the new matter. This process includes choosing a code indicating the type of work being performed. Unfortunately, many law firms do very little beyond intake to gather additional data points (i.e., case outcomes, deal size, etc.).

Some firms have invested in more robust processes and technology designed to capture additional matter meta-data well after matter opening. Many of these processes involve workflows that ask members of matter teams (often junior lawyers or paralegals) to provide information based on pre-defined triggers or at the conclusion of a matter.

With human coding comes challenges with quality and consistency, of course. When dozens (if not hundreds) of people are selecting codes, quality and consistency often suffer. Moreover, when those making selections are not properly trained or do not have the skills and experience required to make accurate selections, the issues are compounded. Add to all of that the struggle with incentivizing people to take the time to make a proper selection, and you have a situation fraught with potential error.

The simplest example of this dynamic is a file opening. An attorney wants a new matter opened as soon as possible, but does not provide his or her legal assistant with proper guidance on selecting a matter type. The legal assistant is left with the choice of delaying opening and pushing the attorney for more information, or just taking a best guess at a code and getting the matter opened. Let鈥檚 face it: the latter is usually a far more attractive option.

In the world described above, law firms are spending a lot of time on training, re-coding inaccurate data, and finding ways to incentivize lawyers to put more care and diligence into the coding process. In a word, it鈥檚 a slog.

Enter the Data Quality Specialist

At a high level, the data quality specialist鈥檚 role is to ensure that the firm is capturing quality, relevant data, and that the data is ready for use. This responsibility is distinct from data analyst roles which typically focus on using data to produce outputs that help inform and drive business decisions. The data quality specialist is all about giving those downstream users the clean, rich data they need to be successful in their own roles. Put another way, the data quality specialist becomes the data analyst鈥檚 new best friend.

The exact role will vary from firm to firm, but core responsibilities of a data quality specialist might include:

1. Classification and Code Selection 鈥� Instead of just reviewing selections made by others, the data quality specialist role could take the lead in data creation in targeted areas. For example, take client and matter classification codes obtained during matter opening 鈥� one path would be to encourage robust matter descriptions from attorneys and have the data quality specialist select the matter classification after the file opening based on the matter description. This process would: i) speed up matter opening; ii) reduce the information requested on the opening form; and iii) ensure consistent and accurate coding. The extent of the data quality specialist鈥檚 role in actual code selection would depend on several factors, including the size of the firm and the specific data points being captured.

2. Drive Quality 鈥� As part of this role, periodic quality control reviews would be done to identify any missing or inaccurate information and resolve any inconsistencies. Part of the quality review would involve working with key stakeholders that use the data, such as practice area or industry leaders, in order to best confirm accuracy.

3. Help Develop Processes for New Data Capture 鈥� This task involves the data quality specialist working closely with the business operations professionals (and potentially, the attorneys) who are analyzing the data. These people might include pricing and business development professionals, practice managers, or financial analysts. These stakeholders would confirm whether the right data is being captured and could identify new data to capture based on business needs. The data quality specialist would then drive developing processes for gathering the new data.

4. Data Taxonomies and Data Structure 鈥� The data quality specialist would work collaboratively with IT to ensure captured data is structured properly to allow for easy extraction and use by end-users. Initiatives to standardize classification taxonomies, like work done by the , are a big step in the right direction and provide a great roadmap for defining fields, setting the broader data taxonomy, and potentially even building a data dictionary.

5. Automation of Data Capture 鈥� As key data points are being identified, the data quality specialist would assess opportunities to automate data capture. For example, can a client鈥檚 industry be fed directly into a data table from another third-party source? Can technology read a matter description and select a classification?

6. Report Creation 鈥� This role might have the data quality specialist also work on developing reporting of the data to help ensure that the correct data is being captured and to help identify any gaps in the data as well as any potential data enrichment opportunities.

How Do I Find a Data Quality Specialist?

Data quality specialists are not a staple, stand-alone role at law firms, and there is room for healthy debate on the skills and experience that would drive success in this role.

In addition to being detail-oriented and facile with data, successful candidates will have strong interpersonal skills and the ability to work collaboratively with attorneys and business operations professionals from across the firm. Like with many other growing legal operations roles, change management would be part of the data quality specialist鈥檚 role, so being able to motivate people and drive change also will be a key component of success.

On one hand, experience working with data, defining data structures, and the more technical aspects of the role would be beneficial; on the other hand, experience working with lawyers and having a baseline understanding of legal work would also be extremely beneficial. The skills that are most important will depend on the particular circumstances and culture of the law firm, what other roles already exist within the firm, and the specific areas of responsibility for the new role.

There will not be a single formula that will guarantee success in bringing on a data quality specialist, but ignoring gaps in this critical function will guarantee headaches for law firms looking to extract real meaning from their rich data.