|
By Julie Stauffer
A decade ago, proponents of knowledge management spent much of their time explaining what it was, and justifying the time and cost of implementing KM systems. Today the acronym that refers to the practices and tools used to gather, organize and share information within a firm, is on everyone’s lips. And even if no one can agree on just what falls under the KM umbrella, its benefits are well recognized: greater efficiency because lawyers aren’t constantly reinventing the wheel, and better quality control, thanks to easy access to tools such as checklists and templates.
No surprise, then, that corporate clients are making KM systems a requirement in their requests for proposals. Today the big firms, as well as many smaller and mid-sized firms, view knowledge management as a basic cost of doing business, even if there’s no recognized standard of KM. With knowledge management evolving and expanding within the legal sector, leading practitioners highlighted some of the emerging trends and challenges that they see.
Buy-in
Step one is creating an approach that encourages knowledge sharing. Although that runs counter to the imperatives of the billable hour, Ted Tjaden sees an increasing trend towards openness. “The whole idea, especially at the larger firms, is that we’re a team,” says McMillan LLP’s national director of knowledge management. “People who would somehow hoard their knowledge wouldn’t last very long.”
Andrea Alliston, knowledge management partner at Stikeman Elliott LLP, highlights the importance of making it as easy as possible for lawyers to contribute information, either by designing a system that captures knowledge as seamlessly as possible as lawyers work on documents, or by employing KM specialists to handle the task.
Usability
Next comes designing a system that is easy to navigate and delivers the documents users are looking for, without a lot of irrelevant results.
Miller Thomson LLP accomplished that by involving lawyers during the development phase, rather than leaving all the decisions to the KM department. “When a lawyer goes to our system now, they’re able to find what they’re looking for because they helped create the structure, the taxonomy and the keyword tagging,” says Sukesh Kamra, Miller Thomson’s national director of knowledge management
Improved technology
For large firms, the development of more powerful, contextual search engines means that KM lawyers don’t need to spend as much time choosing just the right metadata tags and keywords for each document in the system.
At the same time, the explosion of wiki and blog technology is giving smaller firms low-cost KM solutions: searchable, user-friendly internal forums for posting updates and inquiries on designated subjects. This readily available technology is also enormously flexible, so firms can tailor it to their evolving needs.
Wikis may not have all the bells and whistles of expensive databases and search engines that big firms use, but in most cases, those aren’t essential. As an example, U.K. mega-firm Allen & Overy LLP has set up more than 50 internal wikis to capture information and facilitate discussion on specific topics.
Regional differences
At big law firms, can a national KM system meet the needs of lawyers in regional offices? Miller Thomson took into account regional differences by having knowledge management lawyers in place across the country.
“The way we practise law in Vancouver or Calgary or Edmonton is very different than the way we practise law here [in Toronto] simply because the marketplace is very different there,” explains Kamra.
“Our southwestern Ontario lawyers, for example, are not interested in a 35-page shareholder agreement because the clients they work with are sometimes mom-and-pop shops. Having somebody on the ground, in the office, as part of the knowledge management team there, makes a difference.”
Knowledge categories
If the first generation of KM can be defined as the digital organization of precedents and research, today’s systems often encompass a much broader range of information.
Stikeman Elliott’s system, for example, includes lawyers’ speeches and client writing. McMillan has created a one-stop shop that gives lawyers and staff access to the firm’s contact-management system and financial information, as well as legal documents.
And since not all knowledge is written down, Miller Thomson has begun capturing the wisdom that senior lawyers have accumulated over the course of their career, through recorded interviews. Topics cover everything from practice-management tips to advice on appearing in front of certain courts and tribunals — “anything they think would be of relevance that you will never, ever find in a text book or in a document,” says Kamra.
Outsourcing
As firms search for greater efficiency, some, like McMillan, have subscribed to precedent services that provide analysis and commentary on new legal developments, along with a bank of practice notes.
Is this the first step towards the wider-scale KM outsourcing seen in the U.S. and U.K.? “It’s a really hard one to predict,” says Tjaden. “The discussions are only starting to happen now in Canada.”
Firm collaboration
The more KM expands beyond simple document management, the greater the opportunities — and the need — for collaboration within a firm. The library department is a natural partner, of course, along with the IT department, if a firm’s intranet serves as the portal to the KM system.
In addition, many KM lawyers are contributing to project-management teams, helping to deliver continuing legal education, assisting with e-discovery and sitting on professional standards committees, thanks to their role in disseminating best practices.
Training
Whatever the specific knowledge-sharing technology used, training is essential to make sure that lawyers, staff and students can take full advantage.
Alliston notes that group training is the most time-efficient way to introduce the system, but one-on-one sessions are the most effective. That’s why, at Stikeman Elliott, the knowledge management department often views a call for help in tracking down information as an opportunity for individual training.
'Personal KM'
While big firms have invested significant resources in enterprise-wide KM systems, their lawyers still have a responsibility to keep their individual knowledge up to date. In smaller firms, that so-called personal knowledge management becomes even more vital.
RSS feeds are an excellent way to stay abreast of developments in law and legal practice. A good filing system, physical or digital, is also essential. “It doesn’t have to be fancy,” says Tjaden. “It’s just a matter of being organized.”
The Bottom Line
It’s important to remember that knowledge management isn’t a one-size-fits-all proposition. “You just have to do what works for your firm, your culture, your clients,” Alliston says.
Whatever form it takes, all firms need some way of managing knowledge — and a process for re-evaluating that management system regularly. “[KM] never stops,” says Alliston. “It is not a checkbox on an RFP or your law firm business plan. It’s an evolving part of the way we practise, and it will continue to change.”
Julie Stauffer is a freelance writer.
|
|
Small-firm solutions
For Felix Tang of Innovate LLP, knowledge management lies in web-based software that allows members of the firm to access current documents, colleagues’ calendars, financial information and more, whether they’re in the office, at home or on the road.
“The data lives on the Internet,” explains Tang, a partner in the Toronto intellectual property law firm, who completed a master’s degree in computer engineering before earning a law degree.
He says shifting the location of information from individual computers to the web gives Innovate’s lawyers the flexibility not just to edit a document or respond to email when they’re away from their desk, but to collaborate with their colleagues in real time because they always have access to the most current information.
While Innovate LLP uses a customized combination of Internet-based programs including Gmail, Google Calendar, Xero (an accounting and time-tracking program) and Dropbox (document-sharing software), less tech-savvy firms can opt for all-in-one suites such as Clio and Rocket Matter.
Tang acknowledges these kinds of tools often arouse concerns about data security and privacy in potential users, but he contends that using web-based systems is no more risky than banking online. And there are advantages to web-based systems, from a security perspective. For example, they automatically apply the latest patches to address potential security breaches — “the real risks, I think, day to day,” Tang points out — while in many small firms or solo practices, lawyers may not get around to it right away.
Every firm has to do its own risk assessment and decide what it’s comfortable with, in addition to following best practices such as ensuring that lawyers and staff use secure passwords and that these are changed regularly, says Tang.
The bigger, long-term issue in relying on web-based solutions is the question of data ownership. “How do I get my data out? Do I own my data? When I outgrow my current solution, how am I going to grow into my next solution?” Tang asks. To allay those concerns, Innovate LLP chose a customized solution that ensures it can extract its data if and when it needs to. “If you can’t access your knowledge, you can’t do anything,” says Tang.
|
|
