THE AUDIT: NUTS AND BOLTS
The mechanics of the audit are simple. There are 4 mock assignments. The sacrificial lamb — an associate selected by the firm — is charged with preparing:
1. Exhibit binders for arbitration.
2. An opposition to a motion for summary judgment.
3. Written discovery responses.
4. A settlement agreement.
Each of the assignments is broken down into a series of tasks. For example, in preparing the exhibit binders for arbitration, the associate is given an Excel spreadsheet of deposition exhibits. See Figure 1.
Figure 1. Example spreadsheet of deposition exhibits. Click image to enlarge.
The associate is directed to turn the spreadsheet into, among other things, a simple index of arbitration exhibits. Based on the "Include in Arbitration Binder" column in the original spreadsheet, the index might look like Figure 2.
Figure 2. Example index of arbitration exhibits. Click image to enlarge.
Similarly, the associate is tasked with using the provided spreadsheet to generate discrete lists of exhibits associated with specific witnesses on specific topics (again, based on the information provided in the columns "Witnesses" and "Issues"). For example, see Figure 3.
Figure 3. Example lists of witnesses and exhibits. Click image to enlarge.
On a superficial level, such tasks are commonly assigned to junior associates, and it is therefore appropriate to observe how they handle them. More importantly, completing these tasks efficiently requires a certain level of proficiency in Microsoft Excel. That is, instead of going line by line — as most participants do — the economical approach is to utilize some of Excel's rudimentary data functions, like sort and filter.
The difference between a brute-force approach, i.e., going line-by-line and an automated approach, e.g., using filters, is significant. For the seemingly simple tasks just described, the brute-force approach requires more than an hour. The automated approach takes only a few minutes. A trained associate can complete Assignment #1 in less than 20 minutes. By contrast, Assignment #1 takes the untrained associate more than 5 hours.
Subscribe to Law Technology News
-
Dave Swider
Both this and the follow up article were interesting and entertaining to read. While the ability to use basic tools to perform true "lawyering" are important, we have seen tremendous inefficiencies in the processes firms use to perform document review. Given that document review can easily constitute the largest component of a client's bill, that may be a good place to assess firms' efficiencies and technological abilities.
We sometimes work with firms that try to apply the "tried and true" paper document review methodologies to electronic documents, generally providing dismal results in terms of cost and efficiency. We also work with firms that have a documented review workflow, defined QC checks, statistical sampling and other modern process management tools. Those firms almost always get through their review in a shorter amount of time at lower cost and with little pain, particularly at production.
Given that document review can be highly structured, just like any other "manufacturing" process, it would be interesting to see the results of an audit on that aspect of legal practice. Efficiencies during this phase will pay off handsomely for both firms and corporate clients. Firms that understand this will, I suspect, be better positioned to retain their clients.
Thanks again for a wonderful read.
-
Ted Brooks
Wow, what a concept! I guess that's one way of screening who will be working on your case. I just wrote a brief piece in response to two similar articles, related to young lawyers and their familiarity (or lack thereof) with technology.
http://trial-technology.blogspot.com/2013/01/master-of-your-domain.html
Looking forward to part 2.
-
V. Sheri Towne - the Practical Paralegal LLC
First - Great concept which would benefit clients of smaller firms as well! Frankly, the first thing that ought to happen with #1 and #3 is to delegate the drafting task to a seasoned paralegal. The audit would test the paralegal as described and then test the associate/partner on the ability to efficiently add value to the resultant draft work product (e.g. using "track changes" to make modifications directly to the document rather than handwritten changes to a printed version). Appropriate personnel using appropriate technology leads to the best cost savings. Word processing creates the skeleton, paralegals flesh out the draft factual and substantive details, lawyers provide their legal expertise to make sure the final product meets tactical, strategic objectives based on their legal and subject matter expertise.
Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.
Reader Comments