successful universal search...

Successful Universal Search Implementations

Tuesday, August 24th, 11-12:30(INFO 6)

Session Objectives• Before you buy . . . • Brief overview of the market• Case studies of universal search implementations

– Firms representing all sizes (small, med, large)– Various stages of rollout (mature, new, upcoming)– Multiple products

• Recommind MindServer• Microsoft’s FAST ESP• Autonomy’s IUS • Lexis’ Search Advantage

• What worked well • Challenges encountered• Lessons learned (group discussion)

Mobile App Poll #1

• Which Universal Search Tool do you use?– Recommind– Lexis Search Advantage– FAST– Other Microsoft Search tools– Autonomy Universal Search or IUS– Google– Other– None

Speakers

• Rachelle Rennagel, CKO, Sheppard Mullin• Patrick DiDomenico, CKO, Gibbons P.C.• Bryan Gehle, Applications Manager, Howrey

LLP• Kathleen Hogan, Practice Support Lawyer,

Cassels Brock• Kirk Scruggs, CIO, Bracewell & Giuliani LLP

Mobile App Poll #2

• What phase are you in?– mature implementation– new implementation– purchased but not deployed/rolled-out– still evaluating solutions– in our longer term plan

Firm OverviewFirm Attys Offices Operates in Maturity

Sheppard Mullin 550 11 N. America, Asia Operational since 2006; Upgrade to IDOL end of 2010

Gibbons P.C. 230 5 N. America(N. East U.S.)

Purchased/Installing

Howrey LLP 619 17 Asia, Europe North America

Purchased/ Installing

Cassels Brock 200+ 1 North America (Toronto)

Mature (Vivisimo); IDOL upgrade in October

Bracewell & Giuliani LLP

475 11 North America, Europe (UK), Asia (UAE, Kazakhstan)

Operational since 2007; Upgrade early 2011

Before You Buy . . . An Overview of the Market

Sheppard Mullin Overview• Existing Search – Sharepoint (XMLAW) with

Ontolica Search, WestKM. Searches DMS and Sharepoint content

• New Search – Sharepoint (XMLAW) with Autonomy’s IUS– Phase I: DMS, WestKM, SharePoint Content,

selected HR and Financial Data (in conjunction with iManage upgrade)

– Phase II: CRM data, remainder of HR and Financial Data, Expertise module, and others

– Phase III: ?

Sheppard Mullin Overview

• Why Autonomy IUS?– Firm experience with IDOL– Integration with other Autonomy products –

EAS, iRM, iManage– Liked features/functionality– Autonomy’s strategic vision very compelling

despite relative “newness” the legal vertical market (ie. Electronic discovery)

Before you Buy . . .

• Take your time – don’t rush into any decisions– Is this something you need?

• Can you leverage existing resources?• Will building an intranet site suffice?• Does your current “search” suffice (even if within an existing

application)?

– Is your organization ready? What is the culture like around collaboration, and efficiency?

• If you build it, they may not come


• Identify your business drivers/strategic goals and match those against tools you are evaluating– Survey End-Users to identify their needs– Risk management– Upgrades to systems– Expertise management– Increased Client Service– Increased attorney efficiency


• Obtain support from firm management/Tech Committee/identify champion early– Utilize them in the decision making process?– Manage expectations regarding costs,

timeline and deliverables


• Consider total cost of implementation and ownership– Software– Hardware– Consulting Services– Internal resources for implementation and post-

implementation– Other “Soft” costsRule of thumb: Add financial cushion. It generally

always costs more than you think


• Consider scope of your project– What do you want to have searched?

• DMS• RM systems• HR and Financial Systems• CRM/ERM data• E-mail

– Phased approach v. Big Bang approach


• Considerations for the tools you are exploring– How much time and R&D money is spent on the legal

vertical market?– How much experience do they have with the legal

vertical market?– What is pricing model? (ie. Modular v. All-inclusive)– What is their support model?– What is their long-term/strategic vision?– How do they approach implementation

• Partner consultants

Overview of the Market

• The Cast of Characters (just to name a few)– Recommind’s MindServer– Microsoft’s FAST ESP– Autonomy’s IUS– Google– Vivisimo– Others – pointing to existing repositories

• Lexis’ Search Advantage• Thompson Reuters’ WestKM


• Gartner “Magic Quadrant” (Sept. 2009)– Good assessment of the search enterprise

market. – New Gartner report coming out (end of 2010)– Identifies strengths/cautions for search

vendors


• Magic Quadrant Leaders/Visionaries and High Ability to Execute– Recommind’s MindServer– Microsoft’s FAST ESP– Autonomy’s IUS– ZyLAB– Endeca– Vivisimo


• Magic Quadrant Challengers/Niche Players and High Ability to Execute– Google– Oracle– IBM– Isys Search Software– Exalead– Kazeon

Case Studies

Gibbons Project Overview

Now:WorkSiteWeb 8.1Total SearchInterActioniManage 8.5 w/ IDOLAderantNo enterprise search

Soon:SharePoint (XMLAW) Lexis Search AdvantageInterActioniManage 8.5 w/ IDOLAderantVivisimo search engine for

SharePoint and Lexis Search Advantage

Hyperlinked Case Citations and Statutes

Shepard’s Citations

Web 2.0 Stuff:

Best Practices Stars or Rating Stars

Tags

Comments

Mentioned Contacts

Pulled from InterAction

How did it go?What Worked Well• Selling it: equate it to something they know • “Secret” Beta Testers Group • Create hype – start rumors • Shoot for the moon with your vendorChallenges • Getting vendor attention • Managing the project manager • You don’t know what you don’t know (so, ask: is

there anything else?)

Howrey Project Overview• Locate People, Expertise and relevant Info• FAST was chosen based on…

– Analysis of Alternatives– Strategic partnership with Microsoft

• Switched from FAST ESP to FAST Search for SharePoint 2010

• Release in late Summer 2010

Email & RSS Alerts Presence AwarenessDynamic Refiners

Social Tagging

Social RelevanceDynamic Refiners

How did it go?What Worked Well• Framework for information sharing• ‘Change Champion’• Search Engine ‘Bake-off’• Vendor and Partner RelationshipsChallenges• Changing the culture• What to index (many disparate

repositories)

Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLPProject Overview

• Linked to firm’s strategic plan, especially increasing professional capacity

• Intense selection process – weighted business needs matrix

• Fully implemented on Vivisimo platform; currently upgrading to IDOL engine

SearchWell

Results page

SearchWell

Date range

Customized icon CustomizationTotal results

Go to DMS workspace

SearchWell

Document type

Subsearch

How did it go?

What Worked Well• Giving lawyers what they were asking for • One-on-one lawyer training • Attending practice group meetings for demos • Launch party! Challenges• Past IT projects• Document clean-up

Bracewell Giuliani Overview

• First PCDocs library in 1992. Quickly expanded to 7 ‘office’ libraries – Users unable to ‘full text’ search across

libraries• Implemented Autonomy in 2002

– Integrated Word Toolbar (AI-Integrator)– Unable to see Metadata (context) of results

• Attorneys and Marketing wanted more features and ability to search other data stores

• Wanted a stop to “Does Anyone Know..” emails


• Wanted to search across DM Libraries, Client Information, Time Entries, Attorney Profiles, Contacts and Portal

• Started looking for new solution in 2006• Reviewed (circa early 2006) Autonomy,

Google Appliance, Lexis Total Search, Microsoft (Sharepoint), Recommind, West KM


• Selected Recommind– POC 4th quarter 2006– Signed Contract December 2006– Utilized most out of box configurations with

some customization– Released March 2007

• Index• Indexed data is stored on 2 servers• Search UI is webpage and Portal (sharepoint) box


• Index• DM Libraries (6 U.S. libraries• DM - Client matter docs only (based on client id

nomenclature) - NO date limit• DM - Some non-billable non-matter (marketing,

speeches etc) items• DM - Personal and Administrative docs NOT

indexed• DM - New documents and data are indexed nightly • Interaction contacts (Public Contacts)• Elite – Client information• Elite – Time entries - NO date limit

Document Results: Documents containing related to searchterm

Filter on Metadata related to Author, Related People, Client,Matter, Library, Date Range

People Results: Wrote documents, Bios or time entries reference searchterm

Matter Results: Documents or time entries related to searchterm

How Did It Go?

What Worked Well• Measuring success

– Large turnouts to training– Logging / reporting (who is searching,

training, etc)– Reduced amount of "Do you know?"

messages• Challenges

– upgrading to latest version

Lessons Learned/Advice Cont’d• Being Successful:

– Identify Success Criteria– Simplicity a key success factor

• Sources and Filtering:– What sources should be indexed– Meta data is not DEAD! – How to filter out content – Define your taxonomy and social media strategy– Security by obscurity goes away….

Lessons Learned/Advice• Testing/Training/Feedback:

– Pilot group– Launch and Learn – success is an iterative process– Training and communications – Identifying potential key users. Obtained input on UI

and search ‘wish list’

• Support & Maintenance– Care & Feeding– Planning and IT support

• Reporting/Metrics– Report feature – what / how people are searching.

Send out search tips.

Questions?