The future success of law firms will depend
on how well they capture, manage and
disseminate their knowledge. Knowledge
management (KM) in the legal profession has come a long way from being just document and case management systems. Cultural, business processes and technological issues are now being addressed. The seminar set out to:
.highlight the key challenges facing law firms;
.illustrate visions for the future of KM in law firms;
.demonstrate the shift in the KM paradigm;
.share experiences gained from real-life examples of KM strategy development and implementation.
The first in a series, the seminar, which had more than 60 attendees, got off to a great start. Speakers from Baker Robbins, Microsoft, Perceptive Technology and Morgan Cole were faced with a demanding audience that included
representatives of Bird & Bird, Clifford Chance and Masons.
Challenges, culture and the next wave
Andrew Levison, head of Baker Robbins’ UK consulting arm, described some key challenges facing law firms. As companies’ business operations become more global, they want global legal advisers who can advise them round the clock. Clients are also demanding increased transparency of billing methods. The future will also see flexible charging methods, including fixed and capped fees, Levison said. Lawyers must contend with the masses of information pumped at them by legal, governmental and other bodies. Firms must face the challenges of recruiting and retaining lawyers as competition increases. He also spoke about the impact of the internet on the prevailing business model.
Andrew Terrett delivered the second part of the Baker Robbins presentation. He began with an overview of three current law firm approaches to KM solutions, describing some as “document-centric info-banks” based on big
repositories of information; others as KM systems acting as extensions to the document management system; and, finally, as systems managed by professional support lawyers who add value to the information by categorising and
contextualising it. He also highlighted other technologies applicable to KM, such as databases, information-gathering tools, taxonomies, workflow and collaborative tools.
He suggested some reasons why firms manage
knowledge badly – primarily because there is no clear vision from management and no high-level project sponsor. Lawyers are focused on billing targets, not building corporate knowledge. Firms are being held back from successful moves towards KM, by not gaining firmwide buy-in (HR, training and IT), not developing a knowledge-sharing culture, not preventing opt-outs by users, not reassuring users that they will not be sucked dry of their knowledge and cast aside and by not making sure that users understand that they have more to gain from being a part of the initiative.
He made some suggestions to address these cultural issues:
