Lawyers telling me they are still using Boolean searches and conducting page-by-page reviews because that is “what the client wants” and that way “we won’t miss anything.”
Junior associates doing work contract or staff attorneys can do at a fraction of the price, with the right training and proper supervision.
Cases without budgets or with budgets that are so poorly crafted that they are not being met.
eDiscovery being done without design thinking, a process map, or in silos without the right team: lawyers, vendors, contract attorneys, consultants and clients collaborating to reduce waste and inefficiencies and to provide a defensible documented process within budget and within the deadline.
Anyone telling me they are too busy – or don’t know where to start - to draft a legal innovation strategic plan.
Any organization, private or public, without a technology road map prioritized for the needs of that organization.
Organizations not investing in training their employees on process improvement techniques and new technology.
Clients not demanding that certified project managers handle their matters.
Lawyers telling they don’t understand the term “legal innovation” or that the term means nothing to them. For the life of me I cannot understand why it is hard to understand the concept of innovation. In its simplest and purest form, it means finding new ways to do something that has been done the same way for a long time. And it applies to many of our legal processes. You can tell me you don’t want to innovate, that the way you are doing things is working for you and your client, and you see no need to innovate; but don’t tell me you don’t know what it means to innovate Legal. Call me if you want to discuss what it means to innovate your billing, contract management, budgeting, document management, discovery processes, training of your lawyers, knowledge management, and matter management, just to mention a few.
And finally, I will not miss anyone being impressed with a successful woman who is a leader in her field just because she is a woman. Let’s stop thinking this is the exception, but rather the rule.