ALSP Redesign

I got an email a couple of weeks ago with my login information for the new ALSP website. Supposedly, logging in was going to allow me to access all parts of the site, but I haven't actually seen any pages that I can't get to without logging in, so I'm not sure just what is behind the member's only wall and what isn't.

I'm glad that they've made the webcast archives available, since I'm going to miss the next one, ESI Bootcamp ? e-Discovery Begins with Forensically Sound Data Collection this Thursday. Sounds like it might be pretty good, but I won't be near a PC.

Overall I've been happy with the content of the ALSP webcasts and newsletters thus far in my first year of membership. I'm still keeping an eye on other things that haven't quite taken off yet, but which I am eager to see, such as the forums, local chapters, and the certification process. I've also seen mention of the possibility of creating special interest groups, including one for folks coming to Litigation Support from an IT background. Obviously, I'd be very interested in seeing that develop. For all of the various resources I have access to through my Summation certification, the firm's ILTA membership and the Yahoo Litsupport mailing list, none of them address this specific situation, and I for one would like to create a network of folks going through the same patterns I am. Perhaps if one doesn't get going soon, I'll see about starting one myself. :)

Labels: LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 9:00 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
More on Backup Tapes

I wrote earlier about Index Engines and how I thought that technology might change the landscape when it comes to determining what's inaccessible electronically stored information. I also saw today that RenewData has announced their own technology to make data on tape backups more accessible.

Sean Doherty over at EDD Update has some details on RenewData's technology, news that CommVault is using the Index Engines technology specifically in the E-Discovery realm, and related thoughts about the inaccessible/accessible debate is being moved by new technology.

I suspect the needle of what's inaccessible will continue to be moved, to a point where just about everything is accessible It'll just be a matter of time until the costs of recovering data will be low enough that we ma not even see this debate any more. We'll see how this plays out over the years.

Labels: LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 11:08 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Summation Certification Update

Despite the fact that I haven't even been an SCT for more than 6 months, I was informed today that I will need to re-certify on the new version of iBlaze, 2.9, before August 1 to remain an SCT in good standing.

I'll have to sign up for an online review session, pay my $200 and take the test in order to re-certify and be able to offer outside training as an SCT. Internally, I can teach whatever I want, they really can't decide how the firm handles training to their own people, but if want to do any outside training I'll need to be certified to do that.

Had I known this was coming, I'm not entirely sure I wouldn't have waited. On the one hand, having to redo it this quickly sucks. On the other, we're not even using 2.9 yet, and may not be for a little while, so I don't know if that would have been ideal for me when it came to training internally.

Any way you look at it, I'll be working on this over the Summer. Waiting until after August 1 means having to go out to the 3 day workshop again and paying for the certification all over from the beginning. That's not a wise choice!

Labels: Certification, LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 7:21 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Indexing of tape backups?

Today at a local ILTA event, I saw a presentation about a company called Index Engines. They built enterprise search appliances, and one of their big sales pitches to the legal industry is that they can index from tape backups. This is somewhat huge. As it stands now, to do electronic discovery on data that is on tape, you have to restore the tape to disk, then search the contents of the tape from the disk to find the relevant data. Do this for enough tapes, and you can see where this restore then search work gets quite expensive. (I'm sure you can imagine a large company with 1,000 or more tapes in an archive trying to locate a small amount of information that may exist on those tapes!)

This is where this company's appliance comes in. It can hook to your tapes and index them without having to restore them, then you can do a quick Google-like search for the relevant data and only restore the data you are going to need. Now, this could be a big time and money saver for e-discovery, for sure, but it's not exactly a cheap option. For a mid-sized firm like ours, I have to think it'd be outside of or budget range. On the other hand they are selling the technology to some EDD vendors, which may be something we would look for if it ever came down to needing to search backup tapes for relevant data.

The really interesting thing about this technology, of course, is that I've been hearing over and over how tape backups are generally considered inaccessible for the purposes of e-discovery in the courts because of the high costs, except in cases where the data is that important to getting to the truth that the cost is worth it. As technology makes it easier, and cheaper to do, I wonder how quickly that equation will swing the other direction, toward tape backups being accessible and required?

Labels: LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 10:53 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Straddling Two Blogospheres

I've been writing about technology on this blog for a long time. The first posts here date back to Oct. 2001. and while I don't claim they are very good, I will claim to have been around the tech blogosphere for a very long time relatively speaking.

Within the last year, however, as I've been writing about my work with Litigation Support, I've found myself more and more drawn to law blogs, or blawgs as they are commonly called. I'd say that the Lit Support posts here are very much part of the legal blogosphere as opposed to the tech one, but the tech posts are still part of the overall tech blogosphere.

One thing that I can say that I've been proud of over the last 6 plus years of blogging; I've never been anywhere close to an A-list blogger, and I've never gotten involved in any of the petty BS that tends to play itself out in the Tech Blogosphere every few months, at the very least. I won't point out cases, or names, those of you who've been around as long as I have can probably think of 5 examples just off the top of your head. I've been perfectly happy to sit over here in my own little corner, sharing information and ideas with other techies, instead of worrying about getting on Digg, or Techmeme, or how much my Google Ads were bring in, etc. (disclosure: I've never run ads and never made any money from this site, any money I made in Amazon Affiliate links, which was infinitesimal, was added to my own donations to child abuse support and prevention organizations.) I've enjoyed it and learned from it far more than I ever thought I would, that is reward enough in itself.

As I've moved over into paying more attention to the legal blogs though, I haven't seen any of that behavior. Given the reputation of lawyers, I actually would have expected it more, but I haven't seen much of it at all. For sure, many lawyers are blogging just to get attention, and bring in business, but I think, given the nature of legal work, and the existing ethics rules in place when it comes to offering legal advice, criticism, it keeps things on a somewhat mature level.

Maybe I just haven't been around the legal blogosphere long enough to have noticed. On the other hand, maybe there's just something about the human nature that, absent strong ethical rules, causes the lesser of our qualities to come to the forefront every now and again for a good airing? I'm not sure, but I'd be interested in a conversation about it.

Labels: Blogging, LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 10:37 PM | 2 comments | Links to this post

 
Email Archiving

I got to spend lunch today at a local ILTA meeting, watching a presentation about email archiving technology. The presentation was pretty informative, if not a bit long, but the part that really had me shaking my head was when the presenter talked about the technology having the ability to archive everything directly from the Exchange server, and then not be deleted unless by an Admin, usually someone in IT.

Excuse me, what?

I get the concept that we need to treat email like other business records, but not all of our email would be considered a business record. In fact, most of it is crap. Email list postings, newsletters, personal emails etc. There's a whole lot of stuff that, if I'm an email administrator, I don't want to keep. I don't want to have to search through all of that junk if it comes time to do some e-discovery, I don't want to pay for all the extra storage, etc. I just want that stuff gone.

I also don't want to pay for someone in IT to sit and decide what is a business record and what isn't on all the email that comes into a server. No offense to the IT folks, but really, are you the most qualified person in your organization when it comes to knowing what needs to be kept and what doesn't? I actually hope you aren't, because that says bad things about your users. :)

They should be the one's who decide what is a business record and what isn't. We shouldn't have to "keep everything, forever", just in case they can't or won't do that properly.

Seriously, there's got to be a better way, but everything I've looked at is just as much of a mess as the next option. It's not a pretty picture.

Labels: LitigationSupport, Tech

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 10:41 PM | 3 comments | Links to this post

 
Color me Impressed

Well, you all already know how impressed I've been with using VMWare Fusion on my Macbook for those times when I need to dip into the Windows world for something, but today I really stressed out that virtual machine and it handled it like a charm.

The basics, I had to dump a series of Excel spreadsheets into one sheet, so that I could use the magic of COUNTIF and SUMIF to match data across all of them at once and get a sum. Unfortunately, putting all of them together left me with over 300,000 rows, which our Excel 2003 at work just wasn't going to deal with. So I fired up the Macbook and the Vista VM with Office 2007 on it, and hooked up an external drive to it with all that spreadsheet data. I then proceeded to build that 300,000 row sheet and then do my counts and sums. You'd think working in a spreadsheet with 300,000 rows on a virtual machine running off a laptop would be painfully slow, but it really wasn't, at all. The only time it paused was when I asked it to calculate the sums of 2000 records all at once, but let's face it, any machine would pause for that, virtual or not!

In short, I love being able to do something that resource intensive and still have OS X running stuff at the same time! It's quite awesome.

Before anyone asks, or calls me names, I am aware that I probably could have done this same processing in Numbers just in OS X, but it needs to get done, and get done correctly, and I haven't been around the block enough with the iWork suite to feel like I could have gotten it done very quickly, so Excel was the choice for me, at least this time.

Labels: LitigationSupport, Mac, Tech

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 10:37 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Blaming IT

I saw this late last night, a post by Ron over at Strategic Legal Technology in response to a LexisNexis survey:

Inside Counsel (April 2008) reports on a LexisNexis survey on information overload by professionals: ?77% of legal professionals? cite a clack of sufficient information technology tools to cope with the ever-increasing information burden."

Law firms and legal market vendors undoubtedly can do better in creating, deploying, and training on tools. But it irks me to see surveys point fingers at IT professionals. I?ve run IT at a law firm and hosted widely publicized internal seminars to create awareness of or training on new tools. Often, literally not a single lawyer shows up. And many lawyers who complain have almost no patience to learn new software or new features. So many lawyers have only themselves to blame.

Now, of course, as an IT guy, I completely agree with Ron. There are much better ways to cope with information that many people, not just lawyers, simply don't take the time to learn. RSS is a great example of this, I would tell you that the number of percentage of people I know using RSS readers is probably in the single digits, and I know a lot of people who work in tech and blog, so I'm betting my experience is on the higher end compared to most. Instead, most people are still hitting websites every day looking for the latest news items, or worse, subscribing to dozens and dozens of email newsletters that they just let sit in their inbox along with hundreds of other emails, never to be read.

There are better ways to handle information, but you have to learn to use the tools, and adapt them to whatever suits your style best.

That being said, now that I work in Litigation Support, I find myself more frequently in a different role. Instead of supporting the tools we roll out for other people to use, some of my time is now spent using those tools to get certain things done. Sometimes, the tools I have, as many and varied as they are, simply aren't that good.

Lately, I've found myself longing for a different tool than what I have because I've needed to cross-reference financial information by querying across numerous spreadsheets, which isn't difficult to do if I bring those sheets into Access, but then I have to export the results of my query back out in order to use formulas to get my bottom-line numbers. It's frustrating that the tools I have limit me like this, but I also know I can't really expect to have an unlimited budget for tools, so I deal with it. I make do because I have to. (This is lesson #1 for those of you who want to work in Lit Support, learn how to make do however you can to get things done!)

On the other hand, maybe this is exactly what Ron was talking about. I probably could do this easier if I knew VB or something, but I don't, and I don't really have time to learn it on the fly either. Hmm....

How do you resolve the competing need to bill hours, or get work done in any organization, versus spending the time to learn the tech tools that can help you do that work? There are no easy answers, that's for sure.

 

Labels: LawFirms, LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 9:35 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Good Advertising

Got some snail mail at the office today from a vendor based up in Cleveland called JurInnov. I thought it was pretty interesting. Basically it was a postcard with some stats on it:

80% -The percentage of firms and organizations that will need to respond to an ediscovery request.

88% -The percentage of lawyers who would rather get a root canal than respond to an ediscovery request.

See how we can help.

Now, I know next to nothing about this company, other than some second hand recommendations, and I'm not even the front line person who would be deciding on our use of outside vendors for this sort of thing, but if someone comes asking about a place who can do this work, I'm going to remember that postcard. That, to me, is good marketing.

Labels: LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 9:45 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
The Natives are Restless

Yet again today, on a mailing list this time, I saw the proclamation that imaged e-discovery production is dead, everything will be produced in it's native format in the near future. There are simply too many benefits, and it's not even worth worrying about how you'll do imaging in the future.

Of course, despite the fact that I've been hearing this proclamation for close to a year now, I've never been asked to do anything but imaged productions. Not one single native production request has crossed my desk.

Now, maybe it's just a coincidence, or maybe we're a smaller firm, in a smaller legal market than the New York, Philly, West Coast who tend to see trends develop before we do, but it's beginning to sound a little odd. Coming from the tech world it's beginning to sound a bit familiar too. How many things there have supposedly "died" that you're still using to this day?

We'll see how it goes. At this point I believe it, but the longer it goes on, the less convincing these proclamations sound.

Labels: LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 9:36 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Summation iBlaze 2.9 Impressions

I got the download link for the new version of CT Summation's iBlaze product the other day and managed to get it installed on my laptop yesterday. Naturally I proceeded to set my laptop on my desk at work, and look at the two programs side by side.

I do believe, when it comes time to upgrade the network installation, it will be a bit of an adjustment to the folks who've grown used to using the program the way it is now. On the other hand, the users who are only vaguely familiar with using it, which would be most of them, will probably pick it up a bit easier.

I haven't really gotten into using it very much, but the changes seem logical enough that I haven't had any difficulty finding an option that I was looking for, or figuring out what the icons on the new view toolbars do. That's got to count for something! Most of the complaints I hear now are about not being able to find an option in a particular view, so anything to help make that clear would rock!

One thing is for sure, it looks so much better! It's amazing what a little color in the toolbar and on the icons can do for software. I always found the Summation interface very daunting, and I think the fact that everything was gray had something to do with that. It seemed so serious and intense. (Working in it is serious business, but a little color helps the interface seem a little friendlier and less intimidating, I think.

We'll see if that holds true for other folks. It may be just me. :)

Labels: LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 10:39 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
It's not like TV

One of the stories I like to tell people about working in Litigation Support is the conversation I had with someone shortly after I made the transition. Upon hearing my description of the job, and my reference to handling electronic evidence, I was asked if it was like when they do the computer forensics stuff on CSI.

Um, no not really. Aside from the fact that every computer forensic examiner probably kicks their TV when the CSI people go to a crime scene and turn on the computer sitting there, real life just isn't that interesting. Or as I like to tell people, yeah every once in awhile I get to do some cool stuff like imaging hard drives, or collecting e-discovery, but nine times out of ten I'm doing really routine stuff that would bore you to death if they put in on TV. Things like getting clips from video of a leaky roof or cracked foundation. :)

This week has been a great example. I've been knee-deep in data analysis for a case. By data analysis I mean taking various spreadsheets with thousands and thousands of records, importing them to Access so I can run various queries on the raw data and cross reference them across the various spreadsheets, then exporting the query results back to Excel so I can use formulas like SUMIF and COUNTIF to quantify parts of the raw data into something meaningful. Literally, the only breaks I've gotten from this all week are the small, 15 minute, Summation imports that I've needed to do for other cases, and the hour long meeting spent discussing what data we needed to try and extract from all this raw data!

Sure, it makes for some nice billable hour totals this week, but it's hardly something that would be interesting to show on TV.

Come to think of it, this doesn't make for a very interesting blog post either. Can't say I didn't give you an honest picture of the job though!

Labels: LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 9:58 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Evernote Impressions

Some of you probably know by now, that I'm a sucker for note taking applications that help me be more organized. I often say, if it's not on my to-do list or calendar, it may as well not even exist. (Case in point, this weekend I had planned to catch up on the John Adams series that is sitting on the DVR, but as I went through the list of things I needed to do last weekend, that wasn't on it, and I forgot to watch them.)

Anyhow, my current note-taking organization method involves two tools, OneNote and Google Notebook. I love OneNote, but since I currently use 4 or 5 different computers during the course of any given day, let's face it, the really current to-do lists need to be online, hence the reason they are on Google Notebook. Of course, for more in-depth stuff, notes I don't particularly want to share with the Google machine, or information I absolutely need to have during times I may not be able to get online, OneNote works just great.

Now comes the new version of Evernote. I took advantage of the  offer on giveaway of the day last week to grab a copy of the Mac beta for my laptop, and this was really the first time I got a look at the web client. I currently use the old, free version of Evernote at work for some specific things, like using a time tracker to jot down time that I need to bill without opening up our billing system to enter it completely or keeping track of work info that I really don't want to put online, even in a private notebook, so I am somewhat familiar with the Windows version, albeit in an earlier form.

Might this be the answer to the vexing conundrum of having information available from any computer, and also when I'm offline? It might just be, at least until Google gets their Gears hooked up to Notebook, which to my mind should have happened already, shouldn't it?

I haven't even begun to test out Evernote on the Mac, but when I do, I'll be sure to let you all know if the trial brings about any change in my current organization routine. It's certainly possible!

Labels: LitigationSupport, Personal, Tech

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 10:38 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Ethics Revisited

I know, I know, it was just a few days ago that I wondered if I could go back to just working at the help desk after sitting in the session about ethics in e-discovery.

Truth is, even there, I was subject to more stringent ethical rules simply by virtue of working at a law firm. I was reminded of that today, while certainly handling ESI gives me more opportunity to screw up in a big way, every single person at the firm is responsible for handling some client data, and is charged with even keeping our client's confidentiality. That's just part of the job, and something that has pretty severe consequences for not adhering to.

So, while there's certainly a lot of responsibility when collecting or processing ESI, or building a Summation database with the client's documents, those ethical responsibilities have always been in place. You simply have to do what you know is right in every case, no matter what. You know it's wrong to talk about your clients outside the office, you know it's wrong to offer advice when you're not a lawyer, and you know it's wrong to be careless and end up with possible spoliation of ESI, so you don't do it. It's pretty clear what you're not supposed to do, so be careful to do things the right way, and you won't have to worry too much about the sanctions that comes from ethics violations.

Still, I get a little jittery every time I have to sign a chain of custody form. :)

Labels: LawFirms, LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 10:56 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
One session I missed at Techshow

As much as I wanted to attend the session "A Real World EDD Motion Hearing", it ran concurrent with the CT Summation demo, in which I had hoped to get another look at iBlaze 2.9 and Discovery Cracker. Luckily for me, I found where Mazyar Hedayat at TechoLawyer Blog had posted some very detailed notes on that session.

Reading them makes me almost feel like I was there, so it's nice that Mazyar and I hit some different sessions, at least for me.

Also, he has some good notes from the session "The Mobile Office: Take your Desktop in Your Pocket", another one I missed out on.

Yes, there was quite a few really good sessions this year, more than one person could possibly attend! That's why I succumbed to live-blogging, as a way to help communicate what was going on in the sessions I was in. Hopefully my live notes were close to as helpful as Mazyar's are!

Labels: Blogging, LitigationSupport

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 9:25 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
A few Final Techshow Thoughts

Just a few thoughts, now that I've had some time to think about it rather than live-blogging it:

1. I've never been a big fan of live bogging, but I felt like I needed to really give it a shot. Doing it over the 3 days of Techshow helped me see where the value is, but I'm still not the biggest fan. Simply put, while it allowed to me to share what I was hearing and learning immediately with folks back in our office or all over the world, (And that has tremendous value, don't get me wrong), I still think my writing sucked because I was trying to keep up. :)

2. Live-blogging and Twitter gave this conference a different feel for me personally. I'm not normally very good in social situations, but having the handful of other folks who were blogging and twittering actually follow what I was doing and want to chat with me helped me feel a bit more comfortable, even when it came time to interact with the far larger number of people who were simply attending and not reading blogs or Twitter.

3. As much as I learned in the sessions, and with the vendor booths, the most important benefit I saw from Techshow was the people. Getting the chance to chat with other folks doing what I do, the speakers, the other bloggers, etc, and share ideas and experiences will make me a better Litigation Support professional, and a better blogger.

4. I met a bunch of great people at this conference that I hope to stay in touch with. I have read some blog entries of folks who were there or speakers who I heard who I didn't get a chance to meet, not to mention all the other attendees I couldn't possibly have had time to met. Whether we met or not, feel free to drop me an email and say hello! (Email link over on the right column of the blog, or connect with me on Facebook or LinkedIn.) Being relatively new to the Lit Support world, I'd love to build upon the network of folks, and their knowledge, that I have access to!

5. Now I have to go back through all these blog posts and pull out the best ideas and bits of knowledge that I think apply to our firm and how we're doing things. I didn't stop to think about just how much I was blogging over those 3 days, but now that I look back, it's A LOT! Hopefully anyone who actually followed along with all that drivel found some value as well.

Labels: Blogging, Career, LitigationSupport, Personal

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 8:45 PM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
Techshow Day 3 Session 2

Automated Documents

Barron Henley and Allan MacKenzie

Barron: Quit using copy/paste and search replace to create documents! You copy over errors into all your documents. Most of the people, who consider themselves power users, don't use word processing software effectively at all. Movement away from per hour billing to flat fee means you need to work quicker and get more done!

Allan: Within Word you can use fields to simply fill in a letter, or other common docs, you can even set up the template to use fill in questions to fill in those fields. You can use styles to reuse what is typed in one field in another field. Use Autotext, not just globally, but specific to a template as well, makes it easier to find and use in that template. So, you can create a clauses folder with autotext entries and simply enter the clauses that are relevant to only that template. If you use links to a template your letter will update any time you change the autotext library for that template, say if you make part of it underlined, then you hit Ctrl-Shift-F9 to close links before saving. Minor programming in 2003 will allow you to automate that as well. (Note, need to research exactly how these sorts of macros are written and how we could use them.)

Autotext in 2007 is different, you need to add it to the quick access toolbar to reach it...

Commercial Drafting Systems: Can be a nice option if you don't have time to design these yourself. Lexis has forms, ABA, and your local Bar Association have good forms. This helps to keep up with law changes, because they send you updated forms, and usually have listserv to help communicate with other users of the form set, who also happen to be in the same practice area as you. On the other hand, they can be expensive, and are charged SAAS, so it's ongoing, may not include all you need or every state, some are difficult to learn, or maybe don't work very well. Biggest complaint Barron hears is complexity of system in some cases.

Document Assembly Products:

HotDocs
DealBuilder
Rapidocs
Qshift
Pathagoras
Perfectus
Activedocs
Exari
AmazingDocs
Dynamic Document Drafting

HotDocs (a Lexis Nexis Product) is the market leader. HotDocs has a web-based component as well. Barron is showing off doing a letter in Hot Docs by answering questions. Simplified training, want to do a letter, "open the letter template". You program the one template and everyone shares that so you know every letter is going to have the correct stuff in it.

What documents to automate: create chart, two axis how frequently you use them, and how difficult they are to do. Start easy when you're learning how to program templates! If you start with the hardest document you handle, you'll never get anywhere, start with things like fax cover sheets, and grow from there. You can still save lots of time with these simple documents being automated, maybe 5 minutes at a time.

Barron is on office.microsoft.com talking about training videos that are on there. Also suggests the Word MVP site. He wishes he could give every law office the simple understanding of how to really use their word processing software. He actually got applause with that one..:)

OK, this will be the last post for today, not going to try to blog 60 sites in 60 minutes, it goes too fast, and then I'm off to spend the afternoon with the wife before flying home. I'll have more to say about the event overall soon.

Labels: LawFirms, LitigationSupport, Tech

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 10:47 AM | 0 comments | Links to this post

 
ABA Techshow Day 3 Session 1

Before I get started, I've got to say I had a good time meeting up with other bloggers last night. Kevin O'Keefe organized the event and picked up the tab, which was awesome. Got a chance to meet and chat with a few fellow bloggers, who I won't even try to link to, because I would undoubtedly leave someone out and I don't want to do that, but trust me when I say that I enjoyed meeting and chatting with all of you, and I'll be adding some new subscriptions to my Google Reader.

After spending some time there, I met up with Angela and walked up to Millennium Park, had dinner at Pizano's on Madison, and tried to take some interesting night time photos. We'll see how that worked out. :)

Just a couple of sessions this morning, then meeting back up with Angela for the St. Patrick's Day parade.

Session 1 Notes: Managing Email, Britt Lorish Knuttgen and Dan Pinnington

OHIO: Only Handle it Once
RAFT inbox: Refer/Read, Act, File, Toss
Flagging and/or folders as organizational tools. (We're already dealing with fallout of people filing things in folders and never deleting anything, we need to hit that concept hard before anything else!)

Are you doing work, or avoiding work by dealing with email? Turn off the new message "ding" and popup!

Speakers are suggesting using more than one email account, keeping various things out of your business email, like listserves, and personal email that you don't look at as often. (Since we block all outside email accounts, and web-based accounts, does it actually encourage people to use their work email address for everything? I think it does.) -Interesting live Twitter discussion about this idea, since I posted it there too, shows power of Twitter right there.

Lots of questions about problems with spam filters. Obviously, folks still have issues getting real email through spam filters. I am not surprised by that.

Uh-oh he's talking about Sent Items folder. As proud as I am of my clear inbox, I tend to keep a whole lot of Sent Items, too used to needing to CYA with emails I sent. ;)

One minute rule: decide what to do with a message within one minute, even if it's setting yourself a task to accomplish the more complicated task.

Use signature blocks like auto text. (I've been getting some good use out of this, learned it at the help desk, because we were getting many of the same questions through email, so we made the answers or common replies signature blocks. Now I use them for things like letting someone know when a Summation load is finished, for example)

I've never got the hang of search folders, why not actually use folders?

Britt is encouraging people to save client emails in the Doc or Practice management system so that it's attached to the client/matter instead of just sitting in someone's mailbox. YAY! I wonder if she'll come talk to some of our attorneys? :) (She demonstrated it with World Docs, didn't look much different than Worksite/Mailsite)

Labels: HelpDesk, LitigationSupport, Tech

Digg this | Post to del.icio.us| FaceBook | Stumble Upon| Google Bookmark| 9:26 AM | 1 c