Monday, February 25, 2008
Thursday, February 14, 2008
It's Official: ConXPoint is Cool
Recent commenter Jay Arrowood, who advised me to check out ConXPoint, contacted me to let me know (as I suspected) that he works for them. He walked me through a demo of ConXPoint, and at first blush I am impressed. During our brief demo, I actually signed a document electronically, something I've been waiting to do ever since I heard that Bill Clinton did so awhile back. This feature alone makes ConXPoint worth considering for any firm that does a significant amount of transactional work.
In reaction to my fear that their offering was too expensive, Jay hastened to add that it's roughly comparable to Central Desktop. Depending on the number of users, it may be more or less expensive, but it's in the same ballpark. The user interface is not bad either: it doesn't reek of Web 2.0 goodness, but it's better than Same-Page and some of the others that I have tested.
They really ought to put screen shots & pricing up on their website, because these are not drawbacks for this program. In terms of functionality, it seems to have more of a traditional folder-and-tree organizational scheme, rather than a project management approach. These are my recollections from a one-hour web demo. I plan to try the program for a full 30 day test drive, although I'm NOT impressed that ConXPoint requires you to put down a credit card, and will proceed to charge you if you don't terminate your deal after 30 days. (If you guys want to lure users, there is NO better tool than the free, limited functionality account. I don't have any data to back that up, but I have to believe that it's true.)
After I've had my test drive, I'll report back with further thoughts.
In reaction to my fear that their offering was too expensive, Jay hastened to add that it's roughly comparable to Central Desktop. Depending on the number of users, it may be more or less expensive, but it's in the same ballpark. The user interface is not bad either: it doesn't reek of Web 2.0 goodness, but it's better than Same-Page and some of the others that I have tested.
They really ought to put screen shots & pricing up on their website, because these are not drawbacks for this program. In terms of functionality, it seems to have more of a traditional folder-and-tree organizational scheme, rather than a project management approach. These are my recollections from a one-hour web demo. I plan to try the program for a full 30 day test drive, although I'm NOT impressed that ConXPoint requires you to put down a credit card, and will proceed to charge you if you don't terminate your deal after 30 days. (If you guys want to lure users, there is NO better tool than the free, limited functionality account. I don't have any data to back that up, but I have to believe that it's true.)
After I've had my test drive, I'll report back with further thoughts.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Your Collaboration Suite Or Mine?
I posted recently about Central Desktop, my favorite collaboration suite, and about the potential of these products to really change the way attorneys can deliver services to clients. To my delight, someone actually commented on that post, referring me to ConXPoint, which is another collaboration suite, one which includes an e-signing capability (thus bringing us one step closer to a "transaction engine"). One beef that I have with ConXPoint right off the bat is the absence of screen shots & pricing information on their website. I find that those who don't include this information are more expensive and less refined of interface, as a general rule.
As I was contemplating these collaboration suites, a problem occurred to me. What if your client is using a different one?
In my review of these services, I investigated dozens of web-based, project management applications. I then test drove over a dozen products, including Central Desktop, Zoho Projects (incidentally, my second favorite and a very economical option), Same-Page (also very good, although the user interface could be improved), Joint Contact (which, although less appropriate for my needs, deserves an extra-special, honorable mention, since Wayne Bishop, its creator, is one of the nicest guys you'd ever want to meet; he bent over backwards to be of assistance to me during my trial), Project Lounge (which looks wonderful, but which is rather expensive; biglaw giant Jones Day is using it for their collaboration work), and @Task, just to name a few. Recently, Liquid Planner made my list of suites to investigate.
So now imagine it's next year and you've just spent all of your political capital, and then some, convincing your law firm to adopt a collaboration suite, such as one of the above. A short time later, by logging in to a single site, you are managing shared calendars, clicking through your to-do lists with great efficiency, planning projects and managing knowledge. You're really getting things done.
Then your biggest client calls to say, "We have just found a wonderful solution for getting things done." But it's one of the other suites. The corner office partner calls to berate you because his biggest client is using a third suite. Everyone is jumping on the collaboration bandwagon, but the problem is that there are too many bandwagons, and each is traveling in a slightly different direction. Your shared calendars don't inter-operate between suites. Your to-do lists are scattered across multiple sites. You consider going back to paper. I believe this could be a significant detriment to the collaboration suite industry, however, I believe there is hope.
One hope is common data standards, like RTF, vCard, iCal. This goes beyond my ability to really comment upon, as I am at best an amateur technologist, but it strikes me that it's possible. Consider the iCal format: if all calendar programs supported this, it would not matter whether you used Outlook, a collaboration suite calendar or Palm. Any project that you're a part of should have its own calendar, and because you can subscribe using the iCal format, your calendar should remain correct and up-to-date. Most contact managers can import and export contacts in the vCard format. My favorite, Plaxo, deserves an honorable mention here. Using Plaxo, you can sync contacts between several common applications. That's the type of thing that these collaboration suites have to consider in order for them to inter-operate. As far as I know, there is no common data standard for "tasks" (however, as I have posted before, "tasks" could be considered "events" of a different sort). I don't have all the answers, but I believe it's a good question.
I don't believe that collaboration suite purveyors have much incentive to use common standards anyway. Inter-operation may be a bad business model (at least in the short term). I'm no expert on the market, but if you get a customer to commit to your collaboration suite, you want them to stay, and making their data accessible to another application lowers the barriers to switching. That's how Microsoft Office became the de-facto industry standard. So what do you think? Your collaboration suite, or mine?
As I was contemplating these collaboration suites, a problem occurred to me. What if your client is using a different one?
In my review of these services, I investigated dozens of web-based, project management applications. I then test drove over a dozen products, including Central Desktop, Zoho Projects (incidentally, my second favorite and a very economical option), Same-Page (also very good, although the user interface could be improved), Joint Contact (which, although less appropriate for my needs, deserves an extra-special, honorable mention, since Wayne Bishop, its creator, is one of the nicest guys you'd ever want to meet; he bent over backwards to be of assistance to me during my trial), Project Lounge (which looks wonderful, but which is rather expensive; biglaw giant Jones Day is using it for their collaboration work), and @Task, just to name a few. Recently, Liquid Planner made my list of suites to investigate.
So now imagine it's next year and you've just spent all of your political capital, and then some, convincing your law firm to adopt a collaboration suite, such as one of the above. A short time later, by logging in to a single site, you are managing shared calendars, clicking through your to-do lists with great efficiency, planning projects and managing knowledge. You're really getting things done.
Then your biggest client calls to say, "We have just found a wonderful solution for getting things done." But it's one of the other suites. The corner office partner calls to berate you because his biggest client is using a third suite. Everyone is jumping on the collaboration bandwagon, but the problem is that there are too many bandwagons, and each is traveling in a slightly different direction. Your shared calendars don't inter-operate between suites. Your to-do lists are scattered across multiple sites. You consider going back to paper. I believe this could be a significant detriment to the collaboration suite industry, however, I believe there is hope.
One hope is common data standards, like RTF, vCard, iCal. This goes beyond my ability to really comment upon, as I am at best an amateur technologist, but it strikes me that it's possible. Consider the iCal format: if all calendar programs supported this, it would not matter whether you used Outlook, a collaboration suite calendar or Palm. Any project that you're a part of should have its own calendar, and because you can subscribe using the iCal format, your calendar should remain correct and up-to-date. Most contact managers can import and export contacts in the vCard format. My favorite, Plaxo, deserves an honorable mention here. Using Plaxo, you can sync contacts between several common applications. That's the type of thing that these collaboration suites have to consider in order for them to inter-operate. As far as I know, there is no common data standard for "tasks" (however, as I have posted before, "tasks" could be considered "events" of a different sort). I don't have all the answers, but I believe it's a good question.
I don't believe that collaboration suite purveyors have much incentive to use common standards anyway. Inter-operation may be a bad business model (at least in the short term). I'm no expert on the market, but if you get a customer to commit to your collaboration suite, you want them to stay, and making their data accessible to another application lowers the barriers to switching. That's how Microsoft Office became the de-facto industry standard. So what do you think? Your collaboration suite, or mine?
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Change is Good
Change starts when someone sees the next step.
— William Drayton
(I saw this on the FranklinCovey quote of the day iGoogle gadget, and I like it.)
(I saw this on the FranklinCovey quote of the day iGoogle gadget, and I like it.)
Monday, January 28, 2008
The Transaction Engine (Part I)
The ultimate combination of law and technology will be the creation of Transaction Engines: expert systems that allow users to customize a set of variables to creates and administer a living contract. The transaction engine eliminates or greatly reduces the role of the transactional attorney by relying on standardization, automating process, reducing transaction costs and focusing on efficiency. It also reduces the role of human error and delay.
As a real estate lawyer, I tend to think of these engines in that context, so let's use the example of a residential real estate transaction (or, to you non-lawyers, "buying a home"). The traditional model can be broken down into the following phases: (1) pre-contract negotiations; (2) signing the contract and removal of contingencies; (3) closing preparations; and (4) closing. I'll assume a standard transaction involving a buyer and seller, each represented by counsel, a listing broker and a selling broker, a home inspector, a title insurance company, a surveyor, the buyer's lender and the seller's lender. Most states have one or more "standard" form contracts for the purchase of real estate, and we'll assume that the parties will complete their transaction using this form, without negotiation.
As a real estate lawyer, I tend to think of these engines in that context, so let's use the example of a residential real estate transaction (or, to you non-lawyers, "buying a home"). The traditional model can be broken down into the following phases: (1) pre-contract negotiations; (2) signing the contract and removal of contingencies; (3) closing preparations; and (4) closing. I'll assume a standard transaction involving a buyer and seller, each represented by counsel, a listing broker and a selling broker, a home inspector, a title insurance company, a surveyor, the buyer's lender and the seller's lender. Most states have one or more "standard" form contracts for the purchase of real estate, and we'll assume that the parties will complete their transaction using this form, without negotiation.
Friday, January 25, 2008
To-Do's v. Calendar Events
What's the difference between a Calendar Event and a To-Do? I believe that tasks and events are merely different views of the same thing: Things To Do That Happen Over Time. But my notion of these things isn't reflected in many software applications. Most applications treat these as different species, with different *screens* and *set-ups* for events and tasks.
Tasks don't place in a vacuum: they're typically assigned, and due, on a given day and time. Similarly, few events are without associated tasks--an event is often just a task's deadline. For example, a court hearing on a motion is a calendar event that requires preparation: re-read the briefs, prepare for the judge's questions, and perhaps prepare a form order. Consider a Statute of Limitations: If you merely "calendar" the 2-year Statute of Limitations on the appropriate calendar date, you don't account for all of the actions required to appropriately satisfy the Statute, most of which should happen many months before that date.
I would like to see all of my To-Do's in a Calendar view. Some will terminate with a Calendar Event, in which case I'd like to be able to see on my calendar that I've got, for example, 30 days before a court hearing, or 45 days before a brief is due. This would help inform my agenda for the day or week. Some might object that tons of tasks would unduly muck up a Calendar view, but my answer to that is *filters*, as well as the ability to view everything in a traditional list view, as with most To-Do lists. So far I've only seen something approaching what I'd really like in Central Desktop and Same Page.
I've also been searching for what I'd call "Count-Down" and "Count-Up" functionality in a Calendar View. Count downs track the number of days left to prepare for a given calendar deadline. I'd like to view tasks by count down to focus on my shortest deadlines first, and be reminded of count down tasks regularly. Count ups could help track things like billable hours and CLE. Suppose I need 30 hours of CLE in a given year, with a Calendar count-up I can log the hours I've put it and be reminded on a regular basis of how many hours I've yet to finish before the year-end deadline.
If anyone is aware of this type of functionality in a single-user environment (and preferably free), please leave a comment. I've given feedback to the good people at Scrybe suggesting that they include this in their next beta release, but I'm not holding out hope. Interestingly, Plaxo's calendar does Count-Downs. However, I can only get my GroupWise calendar to synch with Google Calendar, and when I synch Plaxo with Google it creates an all-day event across all of the count-down days, which creates a mess.
Tasks don't place in a vacuum: they're typically assigned, and due, on a given day and time. Similarly, few events are without associated tasks--an event is often just a task's deadline. For example, a court hearing on a motion is a calendar event that requires preparation: re-read the briefs, prepare for the judge's questions, and perhaps prepare a form order. Consider a Statute of Limitations: If you merely "calendar" the 2-year Statute of Limitations on the appropriate calendar date, you don't account for all of the actions required to appropriately satisfy the Statute, most of which should happen many months before that date.
I would like to see all of my To-Do's in a Calendar view. Some will terminate with a Calendar Event, in which case I'd like to be able to see on my calendar that I've got, for example, 30 days before a court hearing, or 45 days before a brief is due. This would help inform my agenda for the day or week. Some might object that tons of tasks would unduly muck up a Calendar view, but my answer to that is *filters*, as well as the ability to view everything in a traditional list view, as with most To-Do lists. So far I've only seen something approaching what I'd really like in Central Desktop and Same Page.
I've also been searching for what I'd call "Count-Down" and "Count-Up" functionality in a Calendar View. Count downs track the number of days left to prepare for a given calendar deadline. I'd like to view tasks by count down to focus on my shortest deadlines first, and be reminded of count down tasks regularly. Count ups could help track things like billable hours and CLE. Suppose I need 30 hours of CLE in a given year, with a Calendar count-up I can log the hours I've put it and be reminded on a regular basis of how many hours I've yet to finish before the year-end deadline.
If anyone is aware of this type of functionality in a single-user environment (and preferably free), please leave a comment. I've given feedback to the good people at Scrybe suggesting that they include this in their next beta release, but I'm not holding out hope. Interestingly, Plaxo's calendar does Count-Downs. However, I can only get my GroupWise calendar to synch with Google Calendar, and when I synch Plaxo with Google it creates an all-day event across all of the count-down days, which creates a mess.
Central Desktop
Central Desktop is THE killer app of web 2.0. If you're a test-driver like me, you absolutely must head to their site, sign up for a free trial and give it a spin. (Were I a solo or small firm, I would absolutely use this technology. Unfortunately, I'm in a bigger firm; the type of firm that adopts new technology slowly, if at all, and usually not at all. Have you ever heard of GroupWise? 'nuff said. But you've got enough problems of your own, you don't need to hear about mine.)
What's so special about CD? I truly believe that it could form the basis for a real legal transaction engine. Stay tuned for a future post about what I think that means. Here are a few of its primary features: project management (Milestones with associated To-Do lists), team collaboration (including its own built-in word processing and spreadsheet capabilities, similar to Google Docs), a robust calendar system (including iCal feeds), robust communications (including RSS, plus webinar video conferencing at an additional charge), even database functionality. Oh, and did I mention wiki's? It does everything, and does it with the most attractive web 2.0 interface I've ever used. There is one limitation of which I'm not too fond: a 100 active-project maximum, which might limit its utility for bigger firms. But for the great majority of practicing attorneys, this software-as-a-service offering might be exactly what you've been looking for.
My search for a really integrated Calendar and To-Do list is what led me to look into Project Management Software to begin with. Most software applications treat Calendar events and To-Do's as two different things, but I contend that they're just two views of the same data. (For more on this, see my related Post: "To-Do's vs. Calendars.") The other thing that led me to collaboration suites was email noise. The Calendar in Central Desktop would be reason enough to subscribe to the service. It allows one to keep track of all Projects in a typical Calendar view, including both Milestones, To-Do's and Calendar events on the same calendar. But there are dozens of additional reasons to consider it for your law firm.
Let's apply Central Desktop's skill set to a small firm, composed of partner, junior associate, paralegal & secretary. They handle strictly residential real estate, and have fewer than 100 matters at any given time. In addition to the firm's client, there is always opposing counsel and opposing clients, one or more real estate brokers, home inspectors, lenders or mortgage brokers, title insurance personnel and perhaps a surveyor. All of these people have a need to speak with one or more of the other parties throughout the course of the transaction.
Using Central Desktop, the firm creates a Project for each new engagement. Each of the players for the Project could be invited to collaborate in the workspace, at various levels of security. Each Project is divided into Milestones, or major events. The Milestones might be (1) Client Engagement, (2) Contract Negotiation, (3) Due Diligence and (4) Closing. To-Do's would be associated with each Milestone. For example, under Client Engagement the To-Do list might include (a) conflict clearance, (b) assigning a matter number, (c) assigning an employee to the file, and (d) sending the initial engagement letter. (You can set up templates and clone them for similar Projects.) Many To-Do's are easily handled within Central Desktop: create a database of clients for checking conflicts and keeping track of matter numbers; automatically delegate file set-up to the secretary; keep a draft of the engagement letter in the built-in word processor.
Consider Milestone #2, Contract Negotiation: keep drafts with version control in the application. There's no need for a separate word processor. Give your client permissions to collaborate on contract drafts, if that's appropriate. Give opposing counsel read-only privileges if you want (I haven't thought through all of the ramifications of this, so I don't advise it. But it's possible with this program.) Once the contract is drafted, create new To-Do lists for contingencies such as Attorney Approval, Inspection, & Financing. Invite the client's mortgage broker and real estate broker to the site so that everyone has their eye on these deadlines. The title agent could up-load the commitment right to the application for everyone to review. There's no need to keep track of multiple email strings: everyone can communicate directly in the application.
As a client extranet, (I believe) your site can be privately branded. Clients can not only collaborate on documents, but also populate databases, propose meeting dates, and subscribe to their Project Calendars in any other calendar that supports iCal. You control the rights that in-house and outside parties have to edit information on the site. Maybe turnover is a problem for you. Well, use the Central Desktop wiki as a knowledge management tool for all things related to residential real estate. Your new secretary or junior associate can get up to speed in no time. All that's required is a high speed connection, ANY computer platform (mac, windows or linux), and the low-low price of $99 to $249 per month, depending on features. (For those of you who wanted to switch to mac but were reluctant to do so for lack of a good case management system, consider this!)
Central Desktop is not as specialized as Legal Case Management Software, but it easily performs many of the same functions. I spoke to someone at Central Desktop about the possibility of merging database information into the built-in word processor to automatically generate letters, pleadings, etc., in a fashion similar to Hot Docs, and was advised that such a feature would be considered for a future release. There are many other competitors to Central Desktop, but I tried many if not most of them, and this was my favorite application by far. I strongly encourage you to consider it for your law office. There are some possible negatives: I didn't spend much time considering the question of how to get my data OUT of Central Desktop if I ever wanted to change applications. Although I believe their service to be secure, I'm no expert in data integrity or security when it comes to web applications. I believe that they allow users to archive Projects, but it would be really slick if you could aggregate all of the content from a given Project and archive it into one PDF. That way, if any question ever arose about a prior representation, then getting at the data would be simple. There may be other possible negatives that I haven't considered. I'm recommending ONLY that you check it out, and if you're intrigued, to ask all of these questions and any others that might occur to you.
(NOTE: The author is not affiliated with Central Desktop in any way. I used their free test-drive service for many months, but my employer was unwilling to pay for my subscription, and I was unwilling to foot the bill myself. As such, I am not a current user of this product.)
What's so special about CD? I truly believe that it could form the basis for a real legal transaction engine. Stay tuned for a future post about what I think that means. Here are a few of its primary features: project management (Milestones with associated To-Do lists), team collaboration (including its own built-in word processing and spreadsheet capabilities, similar to Google Docs), a robust calendar system (including iCal feeds), robust communications (including RSS, plus webinar video conferencing at an additional charge), even database functionality. Oh, and did I mention wiki's? It does everything, and does it with the most attractive web 2.0 interface I've ever used. There is one limitation of which I'm not too fond: a 100 active-project maximum, which might limit its utility for bigger firms. But for the great majority of practicing attorneys, this software-as-a-service offering might be exactly what you've been looking for.
My search for a really integrated Calendar and To-Do list is what led me to look into Project Management Software to begin with. Most software applications treat Calendar events and To-Do's as two different things, but I contend that they're just two views of the same data. (For more on this, see my related Post: "To-Do's vs. Calendars.") The other thing that led me to collaboration suites was email noise. The Calendar in Central Desktop would be reason enough to subscribe to the service. It allows one to keep track of all Projects in a typical Calendar view, including both Milestones, To-Do's and Calendar events on the same calendar. But there are dozens of additional reasons to consider it for your law firm.
Let's apply Central Desktop's skill set to a small firm, composed of partner, junior associate, paralegal & secretary. They handle strictly residential real estate, and have fewer than 100 matters at any given time. In addition to the firm's client, there is always opposing counsel and opposing clients, one or more real estate brokers, home inspectors, lenders or mortgage brokers, title insurance personnel and perhaps a surveyor. All of these people have a need to speak with one or more of the other parties throughout the course of the transaction.
Using Central Desktop, the firm creates a Project for each new engagement. Each of the players for the Project could be invited to collaborate in the workspace, at various levels of security. Each Project is divided into Milestones, or major events. The Milestones might be (1) Client Engagement, (2) Contract Negotiation, (3) Due Diligence and (4) Closing. To-Do's would be associated with each Milestone. For example, under Client Engagement the To-Do list might include (a) conflict clearance, (b) assigning a matter number, (c) assigning an employee to the file, and (d) sending the initial engagement letter. (You can set up templates and clone them for similar Projects.) Many To-Do's are easily handled within Central Desktop: create a database of clients for checking conflicts and keeping track of matter numbers; automatically delegate file set-up to the secretary; keep a draft of the engagement letter in the built-in word processor.
Consider Milestone #2, Contract Negotiation: keep drafts with version control in the application. There's no need for a separate word processor. Give your client permissions to collaborate on contract drafts, if that's appropriate. Give opposing counsel read-only privileges if you want (I haven't thought through all of the ramifications of this, so I don't advise it. But it's possible with this program.) Once the contract is drafted, create new To-Do lists for contingencies such as Attorney Approval, Inspection, & Financing. Invite the client's mortgage broker and real estate broker to the site so that everyone has their eye on these deadlines. The title agent could up-load the commitment right to the application for everyone to review. There's no need to keep track of multiple email strings: everyone can communicate directly in the application.
As a client extranet, (I believe) your site can be privately branded. Clients can not only collaborate on documents, but also populate databases, propose meeting dates, and subscribe to their Project Calendars in any other calendar that supports iCal. You control the rights that in-house and outside parties have to edit information on the site. Maybe turnover is a problem for you. Well, use the Central Desktop wiki as a knowledge management tool for all things related to residential real estate. Your new secretary or junior associate can get up to speed in no time. All that's required is a high speed connection, ANY computer platform (mac, windows or linux), and the low-low price of $99 to $249 per month, depending on features. (For those of you who wanted to switch to mac but were reluctant to do so for lack of a good case management system, consider this!)
Central Desktop is not as specialized as Legal Case Management Software, but it easily performs many of the same functions. I spoke to someone at Central Desktop about the possibility of merging database information into the built-in word processor to automatically generate letters, pleadings, etc., in a fashion similar to Hot Docs, and was advised that such a feature would be considered for a future release. There are many other competitors to Central Desktop, but I tried many if not most of them, and this was my favorite application by far. I strongly encourage you to consider it for your law office. There are some possible negatives: I didn't spend much time considering the question of how to get my data OUT of Central Desktop if I ever wanted to change applications. Although I believe their service to be secure, I'm no expert in data integrity or security when it comes to web applications. I believe that they allow users to archive Projects, but it would be really slick if you could aggregate all of the content from a given Project and archive it into one PDF. That way, if any question ever arose about a prior representation, then getting at the data would be simple. There may be other possible negatives that I haven't considered. I'm recommending ONLY that you check it out, and if you're intrigued, to ask all of these questions and any others that might occur to you.
(NOTE: The author is not affiliated with Central Desktop in any way. I used their free test-drive service for many months, but my employer was unwilling to pay for my subscription, and I was unwilling to foot the bill myself. As such, I am not a current user of this product.)
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Mindjet MindManager
For those of you who haven't tried it, I cannot recommend MindManager strongly enough. Mind mapping with this program is easy, intuitive, and incredibly useful for brainstorming. I received my first license as a participant in a LexThink event in Chicago back in 2006, and I've used it ever since. There are various add-ins that extend the functionality of mind mapping that are worth serious consideration.
I have used and can recommend Gyronix's ResultsManager, another MindManager add-in that implements David Allen's GTD methodology. Although I don't use this program as my GTD "trusted system," I can appreciate how it works, and in particular the benefits it would bring to working groups all using the same system. In my case, I'm the only attorney in my shop who uses it, so it's much less valuable.
I recently downloaded a 21-day trial of an add-on called ThinkingWorks, which applies a structured approach to problem solving. While it looked promising, I had trouble with the initial download and installation. I was able to install it on my laptop, and tried the PriorityWise tool. (Days later, the add-in mysteriously disappeared from MindManager on my laptop, after a confusing boot sequence that I originally attributed to leaving my laptop out in a very cold car overnight.)
For attorneys, the benefits of mind mapping could be extraordinary. From using mind maps to document processes, to structuring logical arguments, to aligning evidence with issues, the applications are abundant. Check it out and let me know if you have any killer uses for this wonderful software to share.
I have used and can recommend Gyronix's ResultsManager, another MindManager add-in that implements David Allen's GTD methodology. Although I don't use this program as my GTD "trusted system," I can appreciate how it works, and in particular the benefits it would bring to working groups all using the same system. In my case, I'm the only attorney in my shop who uses it, so it's much less valuable.
I recently downloaded a 21-day trial of an add-on called ThinkingWorks, which applies a structured approach to problem solving. While it looked promising, I had trouble with the initial download and installation. I was able to install it on my laptop, and tried the PriorityWise tool. (Days later, the add-in mysteriously disappeared from MindManager on my laptop, after a confusing boot sequence that I originally attributed to leaving my laptop out in a very cold car overnight.)
For attorneys, the benefits of mind mapping could be extraordinary. From using mind maps to document processes, to structuring logical arguments, to aligning evidence with issues, the applications are abundant. Check it out and let me know if you have any killer uses for this wonderful software to share.
Friday, January 18, 2008
wiki-PLEAD-ia
wiki-PLEAD-ia is the name of my pet project, on which I have done relatively little work to date. LMW will comment periodically on the vision of wiki-PLEAD-ia (so named in homage to the most famous of all wikis, wikipedia), but in essence it's a chance for attorneys all over the United States, and perhaps even the world, to bring the practice of law down to the layperson's level. I see it as a way to educate lawyers and non-lawyers alike on legal processes, legal forms and legal thinking.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Wikis
Here at LMW, we're gaga about wikis. In fact, I believe that wikis will become increasingly important to the practice of law. I believe that many law firms will begin to create wikis for internal knowledge bases. (I believe that Morrison+Foerester has done so, using SocialText. I am planning to introduce my firm to SocialText in the next few months to try to drum up some interest for our own knowledgebase.) Legal OnRamp, a new Biglaw social networking site, has incorporated a wiki. I recall seeing "wikilaw" (though as of this writing I can't find the web site).
Wikis make sense to lawyers because they use words and link to concepts, composed of other words, and that's how lawyers tend to think. When we draft contracts or statutes, we use defined terms to convey the meaning of broader concepts. In many ways, legal writing is like programming, with its logic and structure. But one thing that drags down many people who might otherwise be interested in law is the archaic procedural aspects.
Which got me thinking. One of the ways that business handles complex procedural matters is by flow charting. Wouldn't it be cool to have a graphical wiki? A wiki flow-chart? Imagine a wiki that attempts to describe a process graphically, but that can be edited by others wiki-style to best describe the logical process of otherwise complex procedural rules. Lawsuits, zoning variances, employment--all of these have elaborate procedural elements that require years to master. Before the law can be accessible to all, we need a means to make these procedures less arcane. Perhaps one way to do so would be to flow chart it, and then let lawyers and judges and legislators examine the process with a new set of eyes.
Sure enough, a Google search for "graphical wiki" shows that Kerika purports to be just such a thing. I'd love to sit down and play with it for awhile, but I've got hours to bill.
Wikis make sense to lawyers because they use words and link to concepts, composed of other words, and that's how lawyers tend to think. When we draft contracts or statutes, we use defined terms to convey the meaning of broader concepts. In many ways, legal writing is like programming, with its logic and structure. But one thing that drags down many people who might otherwise be interested in law is the archaic procedural aspects.
Which got me thinking. One of the ways that business handles complex procedural matters is by flow charting. Wouldn't it be cool to have a graphical wiki? A wiki flow-chart? Imagine a wiki that attempts to describe a process graphically, but that can be edited by others wiki-style to best describe the logical process of otherwise complex procedural rules. Lawsuits, zoning variances, employment--all of these have elaborate procedural elements that require years to master. Before the law can be accessible to all, we need a means to make these procedures less arcane. Perhaps one way to do so would be to flow chart it, and then let lawyers and judges and legislators examine the process with a new set of eyes.
Sure enough, a Google search for "graphical wiki" shows that Kerika purports to be just such a thing. I'd love to sit down and play with it for awhile, but I've got hours to bill.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)