MARCH 2005 – VOLUME 6, NUMBER 1 IN THIS ISSUE

Managing in a ChangingLegal Environment

PracticeInnovations

Mid-Decade Review: Critical Issues in Legal Records Management – p. 1

Best Practices in Electronic Discovery – p. 6

Practicing Law in China – p. 8

Law Firm Technology in the 21st Century: A Conversation with David Baker – p. 10

Gain an Edge—Competitive Intelligence is Here to Stay – p. 12

Book Review:The New Six Sigma – p. 16

Three editions of Practice Innovations are published each year.

March 2005

Communicating best practices and innovations in law firminformation and knowledge management to legalprofessionals.

Editors in Chief

Austin DohertyDirector, Information Resource CenterHogan & Hartson L.L.P.Washington, D.C.

William ScarbroughExecutive DirectorBaker & McKenzieWashington, D.C.

Editorial Board Members

Janet AccardoDirector of Information ServicesSkadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom L.L.P.New York, NY

Silvia CoulterPresidentLegal Sales and Service Organization, Inc.Boston, MA

Cindy DiamondKnowledge Resource CoordinatorHogan & Hartson L.L.P.Washington, D.C.

Lisa KellarPractice Automation ManagerHunton & Williams, L.L.P.Washington, D.C.

Kingsley MartinSenior Director, West km, Thomson EliteChicago, IL

Nina PlattDirector of Library ServicesFaegre & Benson L.L.P.Minneapolis, MN

Al PodboyDirector of LibrariesBaker & Hostetler L.L.P.Cleveland, OH

Linda WillDirector of Information ResourcesDorsey & Whitney L.L.P.Minneapolis, MN

Please direct any comments or questions to either of theeditors in chief:

Editors in ChiefAustin DohertyHogan & Hartson L.L.P.555 13th St. N.W., Rm. 10W100Washington, D.C. 20004202.637.8701 (voice)e-mail: radoherty@hhlaw.com

William ScarbroughBaker & McKenzie815 Connecticut Avenue N.W.Washington, D.C. 20006202.835.1640 (voice)e-mail: william.p.scarbrough@bakernet.com

Managing EditorEileen Gonyeau, J.D.West610 Opperman DriveEagan, MN 55123-1396651.687.5497 (voice)651.687.8722 (fax)e-mail: eileen.gonyeau@thomson.com

The trademarks used herein are the trademarks of their respective owners. West trademarks are owned by West Publishing Corporation.

© 2005 West, a Thomson business. Printed 03/05. Material #40396144L-107884

1

AT A GLANCE: At mid-decade, a records management professional discusses herpicks for the five critical issues on recordsmanagement for law firms and theirclients.

By Lee R. Nemchek, Information Resources Manager,Morrison & Foerster, LLP, Los Angeles, CA

In future years, the first decade of the 21st century will undoubtedlybe remembered as a period when corporate records managementcame of age as a professional discipline. Beginning with the eventsof September 11, 2001, when many businesses lost both theirphysical and electronic records and the image of New York Citystreets littered with paper embedded itself forever in the minds ofthe world’s population, through the Arthur Andersen documentshredding scandal and the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act,1

which requires strict record-keeping practices and stiff penaltiesfor noncompliance, a spotlight has been focused on the records management profession.

Historically, law firms tend to be insulatedenclaves, untouched by the kinds of scandalsthat rock the corporate world. But this is nolonger true. Lawyers and law firms wereamong the hardest hit by the World TradeCenter tragedy. In addition, lawyers are nowheavily involved in records management compliance matters, help-ing clients deal with new laws and regulations designed to ensurethat corporations do not repeat the mistakes of the past. Withrespect to the internal records management practices of lawyersand their clients, records management (RM) has never been hotter.

Although generated by unfortunate events, the focus on recordsmanagement has had a tremendous marketing/public relationseffect on RM professionals in all industries, including law. Thesedays, one cannot pick up a legal or business periodical without seeing at least one article on records-related management or com-pliance issues. Some of these issues have been at the forefront forseveral years now. For example, there is no longer any doubt thatlaw firms must develop and implement in-house programs

for both records retention/destruction and emergency prepared-ness/business resumption. This mandate is so universally acceptedas to be considered old news. The blurring of boundaries betweenthe library and RM department is another area that has gainedconsiderable acceptance over the past ten years, especially in largefirms with sophisticated conflicts-of-interest systems. However, aswe enter the last half of the current decade, compelling new issueshave emerged. These are the RM issues of our time, the ones beingwritten about every day, in every prominent legal publication.Here, then, in no particular order, are my picks for today’s top fivecritical issues in legal records management.

RFID TechnologyEvery librarian is intimately familiar with the various headachesassociated with tracking the movement of materials within and outside their organizations. These headaches include, among others, (1) finding and reshelving incorrectly shelved materials, (2) following the trail of materials handed off from one patron to another within an organization, and (3) the expense in time and money of replacing lost materials. Libraries that already use bar coding technology to electronically manage circulation canstill experience problems, such as long checkout lines, frequentmis-shelving, sorting and shelving backlogs, and repetitive straininjuries among staff who spend a lot of time handling books and bar code scanners. In the RM arena, the cost of misplacing or

continued on page 2

Critical Issues in

Legal RecordsManagement

“[L]egal records managers may finally attain a level of respect

that has formerly been reserved for librarians!”

A Mid-Decade Review

Mid-Decade Review: Critical Issues in Legal Records Management continued from page 1

losing a client file can potentially be hundreds of thousands of dollars. That’s why radio frequency identification (RFID) technology is so exciting.

RFID, which may eventually replace bar codes as an inventorymanagement tool, works by placing special microchips—RFIDtags—on or in goods, animals, and even people.2 The tags signaltheir location across a network of readers that are placed in strategic locations throughout an organization, enabling staff tomonitor an item’s location as it travels across floors, from office toworkroom to a different office and back to the library or recordscenter. The tags can be read in bulk from distances of 20 to 30feet, making manual scanning of individual items unnecessary.

Picture a typical scenario in a law firm RM department: five cartloads of client files are wheeled into the center by a facilities clerkwho has been cleaning out an abandoned workroom. An RFIDsystem can check in all incoming folders simultaneously, withoutanyone having to touch the folders. This may sound like technol-ogy of the future, but, in fact, RFID systems are already in placeor will soon be installed at over 300 libraries in the United States,including the University of Nevada and San Francisco publiclibrary systems. Law firms will follow suit, as soon as standardi-zation, cost, and privacy issues have been satisfactorily resolved.

OutsourcingMedia coverage of the outsourcing phenomenon is at an all-timehigh, with the current focus on off-shoring American jobs to Indiaand other far-flung locations. In law firms, outsourcing has morphed, seemingly overnight, from a business arrangement targeting back-office clerical functions such as reprographics, messengering, and mailroom services to 24/7 technology help deskoperations to, most recently, provision of contract legal services,including research, document drafting and review, litigation sup-port, due diligence, and competitive intelligence reporting. Thesedays, it seems that every conceivable law firm task can be done bysomeone who isn’t actually employed by the firm, including the

job of lawyer!3 Moreover, the multi-billion dollar outsourcingindustry has created a new and growing niche practice area forlaw firms: representing corporate clients in complex global outsourcing transactions in both IT and core business operations.

Traditionally, information departments such as library, recordsmanagement, conflicts, and docket/calendar have been the leastlikely to fall victim to full-scale departmental outsourcing. This is still true, despite the fact that law firm libraries and RM departments have been successfully using selective outsourcing foryears to manage functions, projects, and staff positions.4 Now,however, many legal administrators are taking a more serious lookat RM as a potential target for some level of outsourcing. Recordsmanagers that prepare in advance for this development will farebest over the next five years.

Practice Area DevelopmentOutsourcing is not the only new practice area that law firms haverecently developed. A sure sign that records management hasarrived as an important consideration in the lives of lawyers is theemergence of RM-related practice areas. This emergence is thedirect result of this decade’s focus on corporate compliance,5

including Sarbanes-Oxley, Gramm-Leach-Bliley,6 HIPAA,7 and theimplications of Zubulake.8

Some firms market RM expertise under the umbrella of privacyand information management. For example, the Hunton& Williams Privacy and InformationManagement Practice Group adver-tises “strategic businessconsulting on

2

3

all aspects of information policy, including privacy, informationsecurity and records management.”9 The approach of ReedSmith’s Records Management and E-Discovery Group is to focuson electronic records management strategies.10 Blackwell SandersPeper Martin takes this concept a step further. Its Records &Information Management program, run by a partner whose practice focuses “on a single issue of central importance to com-panies today—how best to manage company records andelectronic data,”11 offers legal services in creating and validatingrecords retention policies and schedules, RM compliance systems,legal hold strategies, and electronic records risk management.12

I predict that before the end of the decade some law firms willdevelop a further specialization within the RM niche: providingrecords management compliance services to law firms and otherlegal organizations. Such a practice will offer librarian/recordsmanagers working in firms that offer it a rare opportunity to contribute to client service by providing reference and researchassistance in an area in which they possess professional expertise.

Electronic Records ManagementWhereas records retention/destruction was the hot topic of the1990s in legal RM, it has been replaced by electronic records management (ERM) as the number one priority of most law firmrecords and IT managers. “More than 90% of all new informationis created and stored in electronic form … Not since the adoptionof the Xerox machine 45 years ago has the centuries-old legal profession been so affected by new technology.”13

It is a Catch-22 that law firms must invest in sophisticatedrecords management technology in order to deal with the newsophisticated records creation technologies. In other words,firms must automate their RM operations at a high level ofsophistication in order to manage a wide variety of electronicrecords, including e-mails and their attachments, electronic documents, web pages, database output, digital images andrecordings, and instant messaging.

To date, the legal world has only scratched the surface of ERM.Although a lot of time and effort is being devoted to worryingabout electronic records, most firms have only recently begun toimplement an e-mail management solution. The most advancedfirms are beginning to incorporate e-document management aswell, but this is about as far as we’ve gotten. Moreover, the devel-opment of ERM in law firms is being driven by IT concerns andby the changing nature of the legal profession, not by RM. Forexample, the main reason that lawyers are accepting e-mail management functionality is that they are being forced to by (1)

mailbox volume limits imposed by IT, and (2) increasedlawyer mobility, which requires that electronic client

records be easily portable. Similarly, mandatory e-filingin the courts is driving the integration of e-document

management technologies in the firms.

Regardless of why and how it is happening,lawyers are being dragged slowly but surely, kick-

ing and screaming, into the ERM world of the21st century, if not for themselves, then for thebenefit of their clients.14 In coming years, lookfor voice mail and instant messaging to emergeas the next big ERM concerns.

continued on page 4

Electronic DiscoveryWhat can one say about electronic data discovery (EDD) in a fewhundred words that can begin to convey the enormity of the subject? Not much, considering that several treatises have beenwritten by leading legal authorities and whole conferences arebeing devoted to this area. This doesn’t include newsletters and online resource portals. A recent article states that about 160commercial companies offer EDD services, most of which sprangup in the past five years. Total revenues of these companies have increased tenfold, from $40 million in 1999 to $430 millionin 2003.15

To date, records managers have not played a significant role in lawfirm EDD. Whereas in the business world the corporate RMdepartment is usually heavily involved in coordinating EDDefforts, EDD in law firms is most typically handled by a litigationsupport department, and the department manager is most often anIT professional, a specialized paralegal, or an attorney. AlthoughEDD is all about the records, law firm records managers are generally left out of the loop in the electronic discovery process.

Realistically speaking, no law firm records manager has the timeor the staff to manage EDD in addition to running a traditionalactive/inactive RM operation. In all but the smallest firms, EDDmust be compartmentalized in a separately functioning unit. Most law firms outsource their EDD projects to specialized vendors, but in-house EDD is emerging as an alternative for firmswilling to make the necessary investments for hardware, software,space, and personnel. In return for this investment, bringing EDDin-house “theoretically opens a new—potentially substantial—profit center, and it can have a significant impact on revenue formany firms.”16

I believe there is a future role in EDD for legal records managers.First, such managers might look at litigation support as a changeof pace or a promotional opportunity. Those who have the requisite IT qualifications, or who are willing to train and learn,can make good use of their extensive knowledge of hard copy and electronic records to assist with EDD. Records professionals insmall firms that have not yet had to tackle EDD should be especially proactive in promoting themselves and their abilities,because it is likely that they can greatly increase their value byoffering services in this area. In firms starting up an in-house unit,there is an opportunity to get in on the ground floor and get theRM department involved at the outset.

ConclusionThis is a very exciting time to be a records manager. The landscapeof RM is changing rapidly with every new regulatory and ethicsruling, court decision, and technological innovation. Almost noth-ing is routine anymore; it seems every day brings new twists to jobresponsibilities and tasks that were once upon a time considereddull and monotonous. Moreover, as lawyers come more and moreto acknowledge the complex and critical nature of records man-agement, they are affording RM professionals increased credibilityin the workplace. Toward the end of this first decade of the 21stcentury, legal records managers may finally attain a level of respectthat has formerly been reserved for librarians! •

Mid-Decade Review: Critical Issues in Legal Records Management continued from page 3

4

5

1 Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-204, 116 Stat. 745 (July 30, 2002).

2 RFID technology is currently being developed, or is already in use, forapplications as diverse as the following: (1) embedding in currency andmedicine bottles to combat counterfeiting; (2) tracking children in amusementparks; (3) tracking lost pets; (4) tracking airline luggage and dry cleaning; (5) implanting in patients to speed the delivery of vital medical historyinformation to doctors and hospital personnel; and (6) implanting in humansto curb identity theft and kidnapping and to tighten building security.

3 A study done by Forrester Research indicates that in 2005, “1 percent of thework traditionally done by U.S. lawyers will be sent offshore to places likeIndia and China.” The number is expected to rise to 8 percent by 2015. Forparalegals, the statistics are even grimmer. “[B]y 2015, 18 percent of the worktraditionally done by U.S. paralegals and legal assistants will be outsourced.”Steve Seidenberg, “Time to Get Rid of the Lawyers?” 25 California Lawyer(January 2005): 14. These statistics are echoed in Altman Weil’s fifth annualChief Legal Officer Survey. In October 2004 when data for the survey wascollected, 2 percent of respondents indicated that they were currentlyoffshoring legal work, “although 8 percent indicated that they would pursuesuch an initiative within the next 12 to 18 months.” Press Release, AltmanWeil, Inc., “Chief Legal Officers Face Increasingly Demanding Environment,New Survey Reports” (December 7, 2004), available athttp://www.altmanweil.com/news/release.cfm?PRID=47.

4 In the private legal environment, there are seven different outsourcingconfigurations for library and RM departments: (1) functional areas, e.g.,loose-leaf filing, messengering, micrographics, imaging, off-site storage ofinactive files; (2) projects, e.g., catalog and/or classification conversions,automated records management system (ARMS) conversions, inventories,retroactive retention policy implementation; (3) individual staff positionoutsourcing; (4) nonexempt staff only; (5) management only; (6) full-scaledepartmental outsourcing (management and staff); and (7) shared servicecenters. For further discussion, see Jean Barr, Beth Chiaiese, and Lee R.Nemchek, Records Management in the Legal Environment: A Handbook ofPractice and Procedure (Lenexa, KS: ARMA International, 2003): 34-37.

5“The most important client relationship issue chief legal officers identified iscompliance/Sarbanes-Oxley, including implementation, execution, training andrecords management in the new regulatory environment.” Press Release,Altman Weil, supra note 3.

6 Financial Modernization Act of 1999, Pub. L. No. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338(November 12, 1999) (privacy of financial information).

7 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-191, 110 Stat. 1936 (August 21, 1996) (privacy of health andmedical information).

8 Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC, et al., No. 02 Civ. 1243 (SAS) (S.D.N.Y. July20, 2004) (provides guidance to lawyers on managing electronic discoveryand litigation holds).

9 Http://www.hunton.com/practices/practice_detail.aspx?gr_H4ID=943&desp=true.

10 Http://www.reedsmith.com/specialtopics/specialtopics.cfm?topicID=9.

11 Http://www.blackwellsanders.com/bio.aspx?id=4534488c-34af-44f3-910a-66cac6f500f1&type=Firm. PartnerPeter B. Sloan’s firm biography shows that he is a member of two prominentinternational records management associations, AIIM and ARMA.

12 Http://www.blackwellsanders.com/programDetails.aspx?id=d4cef059-4983-4771-936f-64837a14fbc8.

13 Tricia Bishop, “Electronic Records Open Up Fertile Legal Research Field,”Los Angeles Times (December 27, 2004): C3.

14 See Barr, et al., supra note 4, at 366-422, for an in-depth discussion of electronic records creation and management technologies in the legal environment.

15 Bishop, supra note 13.

16 See, e.g., Richard E. Davis, “In-House EDD: Pot of Gold or Can ofWorms?” e-Discovery Law & Strategy (November 3, 2004):http://www.law.com/jsp/ltn/PubArticleFriendlyLTN.jsp?id=1099217123685.See also Matthew Levy, “In-House EDD Departments Help Law Firms Scalethe Digital Mountain,” The E-Discovery Standard (Fall 2004): 3, 10.

Arkfeld, Michael, Electronic Discovery and Evidence, Phoenix: Law PartnerPublishing, 2004.

Bennett, Steven C. “EDD: Calling All Voicemail.” e-Discovery Law & Strategy(December 15, 2004):http://www.law.com/jsp/ltn/PubArticleFriendlyLTN.jsp?id=1102944934273.

Cohen, Adam I., and David J. Lender, Electronic Discovery: Law and Practice,New York: Aspen Publishers, 2004.

Deitch, Joel, “Data Driven: The Chosen Path to E-Discovery.” LawSolutions(Winter 2004): 8-11.

Feldman, Joan E., Essentials of Electronic Discovery: Finding and Using CyberEvidence, Little Falls, NJ: Glasser LegalWorks, 2003.

Gilbert, Alorie. “RFID, Coming to a Library Near You.” CNET News.com(October 17, 2004): http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5411657.html.

____________. “With RFID, Corporate Might Makes Right.” CNET News.com(September 28, 2004): http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5385128.html.

Lange, Michele, Electronic Evidence and Discovery: What Every Lawyer ShouldKnow, Chicago: American Bar Association, 2004.

Lorek, L. A., “IM is a Must in Lots of Offices”, MySA.com (web postedJanuary 2, 2005): http://www.mysanantonio.com/global-includes/printstory.jsp?path=/business/stories/MYSA010205.1R.IM.55538bcc.html

McAree, Dee, “More Firms Are Helping Clients to Outsource.” National LawJournal (October 4, 2004): S2-S3.

Scarbrough, William, “Shared Services Centers – Are Law Firms Ready for theLatest Corporate Trend?”, 5 Practice Innovations (March 2004): 4-5.

Sedona Conference, “Sedona Principles: Best Practices Recommendations &Principles for Addressing Electronic Document Production”, Silver Spring, MD:Pike & Fischer, 2004.

Valetk, Harry A., “Is Radio Frequency ID Technology Watching You?”, LegalTimes (December 6, 2004): 17.

Vizy, Nick J., “Records Retention Bibliography”, Corporate Counsel’s RecordsRetention Report (December 2004): 1-8.

Wehner, Ross, “Reform Law Powers Profits; Cottage Industry of ContractorsGrows to Help Firms Comply with Sarbanes-Oxley”, Denver Post (January 3,2005): 1E, 6E.

Additional Reading

in Legal Records Management

6

AT A GLANCE: Here are five basic concepts to help you unknot the tangleswhen you face pretrial discovery of information in electronic format.

By Tim Hood, eDiscovery Consultant, Faegre & Benson, LLPMinneapolis, MN

Over the past five years, the litigation world has run into a new twist on the old pretrialdiscovery road. Many lawyers see it as a tangle or even a knot in the civil discoveryprocess. Lawyers are no longer dealing with a stack of paper files, but with the more ethereal realities of the digital world when conducting discovery. Litigators must acknowl-edge that the server is usurping the file cabinet.

Many lawyers are not equipped to deal with this new discovery reality. Newly mintedlawyers grow up in a world where technology is used in most day-to-day interactions, buttechnology as a variable in the discovery process does not exist in the average civil proce-dure course. Those few students lucky enough to be exposed to the discovery process ina clinic are unlikely to even touch upon the many and varied digital sources of discoverythat confront a modern-day litigator. Many experienced (i.e. not “newly minted”) lawyersare reluctant to change the way “we’ve always done things.” Add to the mix the fact thatelectronic documents are dynamic in form, often transient in their existence, with a tendency to replicate themselves to the far reaches of any business, and you have thepotential for a very tangled discovery process.

The many variables involved with extracting electronic information for discovery purposes require a lawyer to adapt to a changing technology environment, interpret courtdecisions with individualized tangles, and potentially adapt to proposed changes to civilrules.1 Because each case presents its own discovery challenges and unique issues, it can bedifficult to embrace one generalized and encompassing set of best practices that will workin every instance. What follows are five basic concepts that I view as best practices whenaddressing the discovery of electronic information.

Best Practices in

DiscoveryElectronic

1. Do proactive reconnaissanceregarding your client’s systems and data retention practices.

Find out what e-mail platform is being used by the client and how recently this system was put in place. Determine whetherthe client uses a Document ManagementSystem (“DMS”) to manage critical docu-ments. Find out if there are writtenprotocols for creating, transmitting, andstoring electronic documents, and whetherthese are enforced. Find out if any of thepotentially relevant documents fall under aretention guideline prescribed by a statuteor regulation.

These are just a few examples of the questions lawyers need to ask to helpfamiliarize themselves with what mayawait them and their clients when facedwith responding to a discovery request.2

Understanding the technology landscapeprior to litigation will streamline the actual collection and discovery processwhen the time comes. Litigation-savvyclients are looking for lawyers and lawfirms that know to ask these kinds of questions up front.

2. Understand and communicateyour client’s preservationresponsibilities.

While the preservation of electronic infor-mation is a challenge, it is also a necessity,because failure to preserve can lead tosevere sanctions and undesirable legalresults. In modern electronic systems, datais created, saved, modified and deletedconstantly. Although pinpointing the exactmoment that a party has a duty to preserveinformation in the face of litigation is a

difficult task, courts are less and less sym-pathetic to parties who seem not to havetaken this duty seriously. At least onecourt3 has developed a line of reasoningthat would impose the duty as of the timewhen “key actors” have knowledge ofanticipated litigation.

The imposition of the duty to preserveforces a process whereby sources of elec-tronic information must be identified,whether the source is defined as a personor business entity (and one cannot forgetthird party technology providers who maybe hosting e-mail or other data4). Thesesources must then be given notice of theirresponsibility to preserve information andto identify any practices that may causepotentially relevant information to bedestroyed. This is commonly referred to asthe “litigation hold,” and the process forinstituting a litigation hold should be wellthought out and standardized.

3. Do not procrastinate.For those lawyers and clients who have a habit of putting things off with regard to discovery, electronic data is an icebergbearing down on you. Even a run-of-the-mill contractdispute betweentwo moderate-sizedbusinesses can involvepotentially enormous amounts ofdata, putting a lawyer and a client in atough position when it comes to meetingdiscovery deadlines. An avalanche ofinformation, much of which may not berecognized at the outset, that needs to be

collected, reviewed for privilege or confi-dentiality, and produced, can also forceunwanted changes in litigation strategy.

Another important reality of electronicdiscovery is that working with electronicinformation takes time. The unstructuredform of most electronic data is anotherreason to start early. I know people whokeep all e-mail in their inbox. I know others who have an e-mail folder for everyconceivable project or topic. Guess whichones are harder to work with in the con-text of discovery? Clients organize dataaccording to their personal preferencesand business needs, not to suit litigationdiscovery. Unraveling their classificationschemes (or lack thereof) takes time.

Those lawyers whose historic practice hasbeen to procrastinate about discovery maybe forced to address the issue of electronicdiscovery sooner than they might wish dueto proposed changes in the Federal Rulesof Civil Procedure. As an example, pro-posed modifications to Rule 26 wouldrequire parties to address issues concern-ing the identification and production ofelectronic information.5 Certain local rulesalready require this or similar action.6

“[T]he server is usurping the file cabinet.”

7

continued on page 15

AT A GLANCE: Today’s U.S. law firmssee China as a major growth market,a view unimaginable in 1972.

By William Scarbrough, Executive Director, Baker & McKenzie LLP, Washington, D.C.

Practicing Lawin

8

CIn response to U.S. concern over the growing imbalance of Sino-American trade, in whichimports from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) far exceeded U.S. exports, formerSecretary of State Henry Kissinger is said to have joked to former Chinese Premier DengXiaoping that the U.S. had a surplus of lawyers available for export to China.

For American law firms, China has become one of the most remarkable frontiers of privateinternational law. According to the National Law Journal (November 15, 2004), there are36 U.S. law firms registered in China, and the U.K., France, Germany, and other countriesare also well represented. In addition to Baker & McKenzie, those firms include CoudertBrothers, Freshfields, Linklaters, Morrison & Foerster, O’Melveny & Myers, and SkaddenArps. Lawyers are involved in nearly every transaction that makes up a bilateral trade volume that has grown to nearly $180 billion per year as of 2003.

“It is better to

enter a tiger’s

mouth than

to enter a

court of law.”

Old Chinese saying

9

In 1972 Nixon Went to China But U.S. Law Firms Had Yet To Visualize a Future ThereRichard Nixon was the first prominent U.S. lawyer to visit thePRC when, as President, he visited China in February 1972. Thelawyerly touch he helped give to the Shanghai Communiqué, inwhich the U.S. dealt creatively with the delicate Taiwan questionwith its “acknowledgement that all Chinese on either side of theTaiwan Strait maintain that there is but one China and thatTaiwan is a part of China,” may have been a harbinger of lawyers’work to come.

It was nearly beyond imagination in 1972 that Beijing would everwelcome foreign lawyers to set up shop in the Middle Kingdom.

“It is better to enter a tiger’s mouth,” says the Chinese adage,“than to enter a court of law.” During the Great ProletarianCultural Revolution, Chinese lawyers had been banished to thecountryside, “to learn from the peasants.” The earliest U.S. business visitors to China found nearly no formal legal frameworkfor commerce. Marxism, Leninism, and Maoism had China oncourse toward the “withering away of state and law,” along witha withering away of the legal profession.

Russell Baker, the visionary founder of Baker & McKenzie, who atthe end of WWII pioneered the practice of private internationallaw, nevertheless expected no future for the firm in China. “It’s awill-o-the-wisp,” he told a young associate in 1972. “China is aCommunist country that will never allow foreign law firms to beestablished there, and they will never use foreign lawyers.”

That associate, Gene Theroux, became the firm’s first lawyer tovisit China in 1972, just four months following the Nixon visit.He first established a Baker & McKenzie presence in Beijing in1980, and in 1983 became the first foreign lawyer retained to

defend the Chinese Government in U.S. litigation (successfully,with partner Tom Peele, in Jackson et al. v. People’s Republic ofChina, et al, 794 F.2d 1490 (11th Cir. 1986)). Today Baker &McKenzie has registered offices in Beijing and Shanghai, support-ed by more than 200 lawyers in the Firm’s Hong Kong Office. Ms. Jia Zhao, Harvard Law School’s first Chinese J.D. graduatesince the founding of the PRC, is presently a partner of the firm’sChicago office, and leader of Baker & McKenzie’s U.S.-basedChina Practice Group. In 2004, Baker & McKenzie’s ChinaPractice was named “China Practice of the Year,” and the firmwas named “International Law Firm of the Year” and “AsiaPacific Law Firm of the Year.”

Today Many U.S. Law Firms Work in China inComplex Interaction with Chinese LawyersForeign law firms in China are registered pursuant to elaborateregulations implemented and enforced by the Ministry of Justice(MOJ), and registration must be renewed annually in a rigorousre-application process. Foreign lawyers who practice law arerestricted to advice on national law of their own jurisdictions andon matters of international law. They are prohibited from advis-ing clients or issuing opinions on Chinese law. Not surprisingly,foreign law firms in China depend upon local Chinese firms foradvice and opinions on domestic law. To assure the growth of astrong domestic legal profession, the MOJ assures that foreignfirms are encouraged to utilize the services of the rapidly growingnumber—and sophistication—of Chinese law firms. In thatregard, the MOJ’s annual review requires foreign firms to submitwith their re-application a report that shows the extent to whichapplicant firms are utilizing the services of Chinese law firms. TheMOJ requires detailed information concerning:

1. a description of services undertaken with Chinese firms

2. the areas of law involved in such cooperation

3. the period of time over which cooperation occurred

4. the name and address of the Chinese firm, and

5. the nature of the cooperation.

Foreign firms, and their resident attorneys, are subject to incometaxation by the Ministry of Finance. Inasmuch as many commer-cial transactions do not give rise to taxation in China, serviceproviders such as foreign law firms and foreign lawyers are amongthe leading sources of tax revenues to China.

Foreign law offices in China conduct their practices almost entire-ly in Chinese. Proficiency in the Chinese language is as essential forU.S. lawyers in China as English is for Chinese lawyers practicingin the United States.

continued on page 15

hina

10

AT A GLANCE: Linda Will picks the brain of legal technology veteran David Baker,who promotes knowing to the level ofmanagement and implementation.

By Linda Will, Director of Information Resources,Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Minneapolis, MN

Ben Johnson once said, “There are two types of knowledge, one is knowing a thing, theother is knowing where to find it.” Legal technology veteran David Baker, founder andchairman of Baker Robbins & Company, promotes knowing to the next level, one of man-agement and implementation.

With over 20 years in the legal information industry, Baker has witnessed a few watershedmoments, from the advent of word processing to knowledge management. But it is,according to Baker, in the last five to seven years with the evolution of content, research,and the library, that we are once again at a tipping point of change. Although the tech-nology has been impressive and has played an important role in making law firms morecompetitive, the tools by themselves have not been enough. It is the blending of technol-ogy with policy and culture in law firms and, more specifically, in practice groups, whereBaker sees the next revolution.

Practice-Specific Workflow Processes Are the Beginning of a Law Firm’s KM InitiativesThe starting point for Baker is a law firm’s workflow process. Much of it is routine, andmatter intake is a common denominator firm-wide. However, when workflow is examinedon a practice-specific basis and the question is asked, “What do we do, how do we do it,and can we do it better?”, then standard client/matter intake procedures will not be themost effective way to organize the process and client service. Baker sees practice-specificworkflow processes as the beginning of a firm’s KM initiatives. “KM is not simply aboutchoosing technology tools, rather it involves studying workflow processes, how practicegroups are structured and managed, and why.” He is emphatic that one size does not fit alland, for a KM initiative to be successful, it must be granular before it can become holistic.

Baker states that the legal industry has not embraced change management (CM) as otherindustries have done. Culture in law firms is the one constant, and it is culture, along withfirm policy, that will guide formal CM. And Baker is adamant about formal CM, believ-ing that there must be a policy established before any type of knowledge management canbe structured.

in the 21st Century: Law Firm Tech

Interaction, the Client Relationship Management tool used bymost law firms, can be a million dollar mistake if some simpleconcepts are not absorbed. These concepts include: integratingtools with what people do and how they do it; setting expecta-tions; training and support; and finding a champion, preferablysenior partners who are converted nay-sayers.

Law Firms Should Analyze Profits by Practice AreaRather Than Geography“The average large law firm IT department spends 6% of thefirm’s funds each year. IT expenditures are a leap of faith, and still not easily measured.” Again, Baker returns to analyzing practice-specific workflows. Of course, accordingto Baker, this will require a paradigm shift, from analyzingprofits by geography to a measurement using practice orindustry grouping, the antithesis of how most law firmspresently measure revenue. Measuring by practice groups willrequire a virtual team that collaborates across the firm usingthe tools of technology.

WiFi Will Revolutionize the Way Law Firms NetworkThat brought up a discussion of wireless connectivity, whichBaker says is for everyone (or should be). Although manyfirms already use Bluetooth (capabilities include cordless com-munication between an earphone/headset and a cell phone,enabling a cell phone and a PDA to talk to each other whenthey are in range, and automatically synchronize their contactlists), it is quickly becoming less of a player and losing marketshare to WiFi. Bluetooth devices only have a transmission

range of about 30 feet, while WiFi offers the same wirelessconnectivity, is not limited, and is cheap. Baker thinks thathigh-speed WiFi will revolutionize the way we network andsearch the Internet. It will enable a user to have a virtual ver-sion of the local office. Users will be fluid, not bound to aspecific location, never having to skip a beat. WiFi meansthere is no need for DSL or cable to get to the Internet, nor isthere a need for cellular service for a phone. All services willall be enabled from the same network. Baker sees the expan-sion of WiFi technology as the new frontier.

In closing, Baker revisits the relationship between law firm cul-ture and change management. Expansion of WiFi will revolutionize office life as we know it. Beginning with sub-stantial savings in real estate, attorneys will no longer have tohave a physical office. They can replicate their entire desktopas well as administration from their home computer.Everything from conference calls to faxes can be programmedusing business rules. This will enable attorneys to serve clientsin a more expedient and customized manner. The entire lawoffice operation will be seamless.

It is the culture of a law firm that could hinder or even denythis technology. Senior partners will be reluctant to break thetraditional paradigm of mahogany reception areas and corneroffices. Not only is the traditional office space in question, butservice as well. Law firms want to serve their clients as bestthey can and want clients to know they are always there for them.

What Service Will Clients Come to Expect ofTechnologically Advanced Firms?When is it okay to be unconnected? Will clients come toexpect law firms to be available 24/7 (even more than theymight already)? What will the expectation be if they knowlaw firms have the technology to offer such a service? If, as Thomas Davenport states in his book The AttentionEconomy, “... you want to be successful in the current economy, you’ve got to be good at getting attention,” attorneys will have no choice but to offer 25/8 services.

This again comes down to a practice group’s workflow andthe culture of the firm. Law firms, enabled with the technol-ogy to offer super-sized services, must look within and decideif this is the path to be taken. There is a fork in the technol-ogy road and we will likely see the first manifestations of thenew law practice before the first decade of the 21st century is over. •

11

nology

”You want to be successful in the current economy, you’ve got to be good at getting attention.”

A Conversation with David Baker

12

Competitive intelligence (CI) is not just relegated tothe realm of high-tech or manufacturing companies,but also has a definite place within law firms and oth-er professional services organizations. CI can help alaw firm gain a competitive edge through the follow-ing three ways: knowing your competition, knowingyour clients, and knowing your clients’ industries.

Jan Rivers, CompetitiveIntelligenceLiaison, Dorsey &Whitney LLP, Minneapolis,Minnesota

Silvia Coulter, President, Legal Sales and ServiceOrganization,Boston, Massachusetts

AT A GLANCE: Competitive intelligence has a definite place within lawfirms and can help the organization gain a competitive edge.

Gain an EdgeCompetitive Intelligence

is Here to Stay

While some firms may elect to have their marketing orsales personnel conduct competitive intelligenceresearch, the most efficient approach is for a firm toutilize its Information Resources/Library departmentfor this activity. Not only does the IR department like-ly already have the contracts in place for the onlineresources needed for such research, InformationResources also has the personnel whose primary skillset is conducting research or—another way to look atit—managing and cataloguing information. The col-laboration between Information Resources and themarketing and sales organization creates benefits thatthe firm as a whole may realize, for example, the elim-ination of contracts for duplicate resources and theutilization of personnel time according to core com-petencies. Marketing and sales personnel are able toconcentrate on creating the pitch and collateral mate-rials and other business development tasks knowingtheir information resources team is supporting themwith the necessary research.

Good CI requires a significant amount of time andeffort to do properly. It should not be attempted hoursbefore a client meeting. The goal of CI is to have good,actionable information and not just a data dump ofmany articles and other unfiltered information. To obtain this goal, the research results need to beread, culled, interpreted and synthesized. Whereverpossible, data should be presented graphically usingpie charts, spreadsheets or graphs. Articles should bedistilled into bullet points of the most important information. All of the synthesized data should be presented in an executive overview type of deliverable,such as a PowerPoint presentation. The full-text articles and other supporting materials can be delivered along with the overview so they can beaccessed if needed.

Know Your CompetitionSun Tzu advised, “Know your enemy.” How well doyou know your competition? What are their strengths,weaknesses? Are they expanding or contracting?Who’s coming and who’s leaving, and for where?How have they performed over the past few years?

Martindale-Hubbell provides information on lawfirms and their attorneys and offices. Thomson LegalRecord can also provide information about a firm’sattorneys, the cases in which they have been involved,and the judges before whom they have appeared. Thisinformation can be combined with that gleaned fromthe firm’s website. Pay attention to conferences thefirm is sponsoring, speaking engagements made by itsattorneys (both topic and venue), pro bono activity,lateral hires (especially in which practice or industryareas and in which offices), publications and newslet-ters the firm produces, and representative client lists.Follow-up with a news search to see who has left thefirm and for where, as well as the practice and indus-try areas involved, since these departures are not goingto be reported on the firm’s own site. A news searchwill also uncover interviews with firm personnel(including COO, CIO, and other non-lawyer employ-ees), coverage of major case wins or losses, and otherstories that may be of interest (e.g., contracts signedwith technology vendors). A good news search willinclude trade and industry journals outside of the legalprofession. Examine all rankings lists, specialty (e.g.,IP), and geographic, as well as the American Lawyerand National Law Journal lists, to see how the firm isrising or falling over the years.

Conducting a law firm strategic profile will identifythe volume of litigation cases the firm has had over thepast few years and will break it down by types of mat-ter (i.e., labor, securities fraud, product liability).Searches can also be done to identify the volume ofwork the firm has had involving initial public offer-ings (IPOs) or as patent counsel, etc.

Information about a firm’s offices and leases can alsobe useful. Are they moving into new office space? Arethey closing an office, but remain stuck with anexpensive lease? Local business press is a good sourcefor this type of information.

continued on page 14

13

Know Your ClientsResearch underscores over and over again that in-house counselwant their outside law firms to understand their business. Theywant outside counsel who know what issues keep them awake atnight, which developments may have an impact on their business,what activities their business is currently undertaking, and whattheir strategic priorities are for the year.

Competitive intelligence provides the necessary background forsales personnel and attorneys to go into a client meeting with a corestate of the client overview, including current financials, significantdevelopments within the past year, other law firms the client usesand for what types of matters, biographical information on the gen-eral counsel and other “C”-level executives, a profile of the client’slegal department, threats and opportunities the client is facing, andother information. This core information provides a foundationfrom which to ask questions and enter into a relationship-buildingdialog with prospects and clients.

It is always useful to review a public company’s latest 10-K and10-Q filings. These filings always include sections on legal mattersthe company is facing, operations and competition, and manage-ment discussion and analysis, among others. These filings can beobtained from the Securities and Exchange Commission websiteor, in nicely formatted versions, from various online vendors.

To identify potential cross-selling opportunities, as well as to seewho else may be gaining a bigger portion of your client’s legal spend,research the litigation your client has faced over the last five years.A strategic profile will identify what types of matters your client hasfaced, as well as who represented them and in what districts.

Some firms make the mistake of preparing briefing books basedsolely upon what information can be pulled off of a client or target’swebsite as well as via a quick search in Google. While this approachcan yield some results, much information will remain uncovered. Itis necessary to use a fee-based online resource for searching newscoverage about your client, because archival depth and broad indus-try and trade coverage for many critical sources are only available infull-text via such repositories. Remember, negative news rarelyappears in the press releases on a company’s website.

This does not mean that the general Internet should be ignored asa source. It should always be searched via two or three search

engines (Google, Vivisimo, etc.), since results will differ. Thesesearches will capture conference information, speaking engage-ments, sponsorships and memberships of key client personnel,donations made by them, and, most importantly, small local“home town” newspaper coverage. Frequently, these small news-papers are not included in online vendor databases.

Know Your Clients’ IndustriesYou cannot know your client if you do not know that in whichthey live—their industry.

CI can help keep sales and marketing personnel, as well as attor-neys, abreast of industry developments via ongoing currentawareness services, such as newsletters or e-mail feeds. Specialintranet pages can also be created to serve this function. Currentawareness can also be done via alerts for cases filed against clients,enabling you to find out when your client has been sued, fre-quently before the general counsel knows herself.

Good current awareness newsletters are e-mail based, allowingthem to be pushed to readers instead of making the reader go toan Internet site to read them. They are organized for quick skim-ming and include only a citation and sentence or two for eachnews item contained, as well as a headline link to the full-text ofeach news story should the reader wish to access it.

CI research can also be done to create profiles of industries muchlike the client profile work described earlier. This would include anoverview of the major players within an industry, government/reg-ulatory and other developments affecting it (including naturaldisasters, weather and other non-man-made events), long-rangepotential of the industry, identifying threats and opportunitieswithin it, etc.

Be PreparedIn summary, building a strong sales strategy is no different thanbuilding a good trial strategy. Today’s competitive climate in whichwe find the legal profession demands excellence. Sales provides anopportunity to showcase that excellence. Be in control of theprocess and know as much as you can about the prospect, the client, and their industry. Go to clients and prospects with awinning strategy. Competitive intelligence, provided by a strongteam of experts, is part of the strategy that will help build winningsales teams. •

Gain an Edge— Competitive Intelligence is Here to Stay continued from page 13

14

15

4. Assess the need for external help.

Even large law firms and corporate legaldepartments use outside experts and vendors to help them with many electron-ic discovery projects. Most of the outsidehelp comes in two forms: (a) forensic dataacquisition and analysis, or (b) file reviewand production. Whether you need outside help for a particular projectdepends on many variables. The type oflitigation might make a difference. Forexample, if the case involves trade secretsor a sexual harassment claim, some forensic data preservation and analysismay be necessary. Do you have any experience in managing the review of electronic files for relevance and privilege?If not, you may need a third party to hostthe data so you can review it via a secureweb connection, allowing you to focus on document content and not mechanics.

5. Document your procedures.Electronic data has put discovery disputesfront and center in much litigation. Beingable to articulate the precise steps taken to identify, preserve, and produce

information is key to withstanding a dis-covery attack. In cases where parties havebeen sanctioned for discovery failings,judges use words such as haphazard anddisorganized 7 to describe discovery efforts.Even if you lose the dispute, the judge’sorder may be more narrowly tailoredbecause of documented procedures.

ConclusionElectronic information is now a staple in the diet of discovery in most civil litiga-tion. There will likely always be paperdocuments that are collected and produced, but it will be the rare lawsuitwhere the volume of paper documentsexceeds the volume of electronic informa-tion produced. The digital realm presentsboth enormous volumes and the manage-ment of disparate information formats.Although many lawyers have shied awayfrom addressing this change in their dailypractice, those who are embracing it andlearning as much as they can about issuesand possible solutions will have a compet-itive advantage in marketing their legalservices. Their knowledge will also pro-vide a strategic advantage to their clients.

The notion of “best practices” in electron-ic discovery is a difficult one to grasp.8

The almost limitless combination of disputes, parties, available resources andtypes of electronic information prevents us from creating stock responses to a set number of circumstances. Such is the practice of law. But by adhering to the basic concepts listed above, lawyerscan do much to address digital discoverysuccessfully. •

Best Practices in Electronic Discovery continued from page 7

Practicing Law in China continued from page 9

1 Proposed modifications to Rules 16, 26, 33, 34, 37 and 45 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

2 In today’s world nearly every discovery request is an electronicdiscovery request.

3 Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13574 (S.D.N.Y. 2004).

4 Kier v. UnumProvident Corp., 2003 WL 21997747 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).

5 http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/comment2005/CVAug04.pdf

6 Federal district courts in Arkansas, New Jersey, and Wyoming.

7 In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practice Litigation, 169 F.R.D. 598 (D.N.J. 1997).

8 One group of practitioners, commentators and industryparticipants has put a tremendous amount of thought into thisissue. They have created a document entitled “The SedonaPrinciples: Best Practices Recommendations & Principles forAddressing Electronic Document Production (2004).”

China’s leading law schools are excellent, and they are turning outvery able practitioners. Foreign law firms are not allowed to hireChinese law graduates who are licensed to practice law in China,though foreign firms are allowed to hire local professional staff.Chinese lawyers are associating themselves into law firms in all ofChina’s major cities, very much on the American partnership mod-el. A growing number of Chinese law graduates are enrolling in JDand LLM programs at law schools in the United States. Many ofthese graduates are found, today, in American law firms, and an

increasing number of them are practicing in U.S. firms founded andstaffed in this country by Chinese nationals who have been licensedto practice in the U.S.

The idea of American lawyers practicing law in China may havebeen unthinkable thirty years ago, but it has become an increas-ingly well-established fact today. As in many other segments ofAmerican business, the legal industry is looking towards China asa major growth market in the 21st century. •

Six Sigma’s focus on process is

well-suited to measuring the

true value of assets, which is

the value of the work they do

(not the liquidation value).

16

In 1979, Motorola set up a task force that developed a program to improve product quali-ty and retain Motorola’s global leadership. Theprogram was initially focused on manufacturingprocesses, but it quickly became apparent thatthe program had to extend beyond manufactur-ing to all units involved in developing newproducts and services. A succession of qualityand design engineers developed the program,which eventually took the name Six Sigma. It became a company-wide initiative for obtain-ing continuous quality improvement andmobilizing employees around common goals.Motorola also defined the standards for BlackBelts, originally quality improvement experts, byrequiring that they also possess statistical, team,and business skills.

Tom McCarty describes the New Six Sigma as currently applied by means of an extendedcase study of a hypothetical technology compa-ny. First, understand the Voice of the Customerby developing a statement of what are believedto be the customer’s expectations, validatingthem with actual customers, converting them tomeasurable requirements, and communicatingthem throughout the organization. Next, obtaingeneral agreement on strategic objectives.Analyze the environment to build the case forchange. Develop a dashboard, i.e., a small set ofkey measurements for leaders to use in moni-toring progress toward goals. Identify a small setof performance drivers that have the greatestimpact on the dashboard measurements and setup teams to target each for rapid improvement.McCarty emphasizes the importance of target-ed, just-in-time training. Team members aretrained in Green Belt statistical tools, while teamleaders learn (presumably more sophisticated)Black Belt tools.

McCarty concludes by reviewing the fourinsights of the New Six Sigma:

Insight #1: ALIGN – create relevant targets and

appropriate measures.

Insight #2: MOBILIZE – use empowered teams

and a focused project management methodology

to enable people to act.

Insight #3: ACCELERATE – with coaching,

application support, and rigorous review of project

teams against deadlines.

Insight #4: GOVERN – with visible support by

senior executives and ongoing knowledge sharing.

Alejandro Reyes and Carey Dassatti discussapplying the DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze,Improve, Control) framework to solving theleadership shortage at Motorola. The first step isdefining the gap by measuring the decrease inthe pool of business leaders against the increasein corporate demand for leaders. Measure andanalyze the gap by studying Motorola’s existingleadership process and benchmarking it againstother world-class corporations. Improve byredesigning the process into six interdependentprocesses. Require each business unit to identifyits most effective leaders and its most leveragedpositions to spotlight gaps where top talent is needed.

Matt Barney discusses future applications of SixSigma. Focusing on one of Baruch Lev’s threecauses of financial accounting failures—financialreporting is too narrow and misses intangibles—Barney shows how Six Sigma’s focus on processis well-suited to measuring the true value ofassets, which is not their liquidation value butthe value of the work they do. He proposes tomeasure this value by using “stochastic models(i.e. Markov chains) and operations researchsimulation tools [that] can help model the realtime performance of assets in a system.” (p. 74).

Book Review:

The New Six Sigmaby Matt Barney and Tom McCarty*

Reviewed by John E. Duvall, Administrative Analyst, Hogan & Hartson L.L.P., Washington, D.C.

Barney advocates making better choices amongprojects by using real options analysis, MonteCarlo analysis, and linear programming to eval-uate probabilities of outcomes.

He recommends using new risk managementtechniques not yet known to Six Sigma practi-tioners. Policy capturing reverse engineerscustomer decision-making processes and forecasts future customer requirements, allowinga company to anticipate them faster than thecompetition. Multidimensional scaling, factoranalysis, and other data reduction techniquesextract the vital few of hundreds of customerspecifications to permit meeting the true customer need more efficiently.

Six Sigma Black Belts will need to learn new statistical techniques for measuring and improv-ing employee performance, predicting jobcandidates’ performance, measuring the impactof training, and managing organizationalchange. They will need to master time seriesanalysis, real options valuation, and othereconometric methods.

While this book names numerous techniquesthat Six Sigma uses or could use in the future,and that presumably distinguish Six Sigma fromother management initiatives, it does notexplain or describe any of these techniques orhow they are used, leaving the reader unable tojudge how much, if at all, Six Sigma is different.It does introduce readers generally to BlackBelts, the Voice of the Customer, and other SixSigma concepts. •* Although Matt Barney and Tom McCarty are identified as theauthors of this slim volume, intended to give a quick overview ofSix Sigma, they are really as much editors as authors, as thevolume embodies substantial contributions by several otherindividuals.

PRESORTEDSTANDARD

U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDWEST

610 Opperman DriveEagan, MN 55123

Communicating best practices and innovations in law firm information and knowledge management to legal professionals.