- Toby Brown argues in a post to 3 Geeks and a Law Blog that the legal profession is not in a "buyer's market," but rather is in a "competitive market." Steven Levy examines these labels in a post to his Lexician Blog and agrees with Mr. Brown, noting that unlike in a pure buyer's market "[i]t's not profit that's being squeezed out [of law firms]. It's inefficiency." He warns, however, that if lawyers do not "manage their legal projects in a way that recognizes business as well as legal imperatives...we will wind up in a pure buyer's market, where price will become the major factor in all but the small handful of bet-the-company cases."
- This may be old news, but I just noticed this week that Steven Levy has gathered together a few checklists he posted to his Lexician blog in one convenient page.
- Rees Morrison draws upon classical economics to reason that there is no value gap in legal services: " the grumbling about the high costs of law firms and a systemic gap between what is paid and what is gotten is sound and fury signifying nothing. Demand matches supply, ergo no value gap exists. QED." Hmm, I'd say legal supply and demand have been knocked out of equilibrium by the current economy and the sound and fury we hear from corporate clients signifies substantial chances to how legal services will be priced and provided.
- Jacques Nack Ngue, President and Founder of eClaris Inc., discusses his company's e-discovery project management solution in an interview published on May 3rd on the Metropolitan Corporate Counsel Web site. In addition to his software, he answers questions about how to best prepare and manage an e-discovery project, who should be on an e-discovery response team, and how corporate counsel can better work together with IT in responding to e-discovery matters.
- Ron Friedmann discusses the importance of sampling in document review with Jonathan Nystrom and Dick Oehrle of Cataphora on his Strategic Legal Technology blog.
- Steven Levy takes issue with law firms and legal-services providers who claim to be be practicing Six Sigma in two posts to his Lexician blog. In the first post he explains the term "six sigma" and this history of Six SigmaTM the trademarked process-improvement methodology and explains why it law firms and legal service providers who claim to be practicing six sigma really aren't. In the second post, which was triggered by discussion in the comments of his first post, he clarifies that while the standard Six SigmaTM methodology isn't appropriate for legal work, that doesn't mean that law firms and their clients wouldn't benefit from process improvement activity. He points out that Six Sigma and process improvement are not synonymous. "Ultimately," he writes, "my methodology is pragmatism and practicality. Use what works. Borrow liberally. Focus on the destination more than the path."
- D. Mark Jackson reminds us of the importance of getting a good night's sleep to our productivity on his Lean Law blog, citing a recent National Geographic article.
- Jim Hassett examines legal project management training in part 7 of his project management series on his Legal Business Development blog. He discusses the challenges many project-management trainers and consultants have connecting with legal audiences and contracts his "bottom up just in time, just enough" approach to the more complicated and expensive top-down approaches, such as that at Dechert, Eversheds, and Seyfarth Shaw.
Juicy bite-sized morsels of legal project management from the week ending May 8th, 2010.
TrackBack URL: http://legalprojectmanagement.info/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/peaston/managed-mt/mt-tb.cgi/151