“Your old road is rapidly agin’.” Bob Dylan, 1963

Outsourcing to India; unbundled services; cost pressure; internet-based practice:  the profession has entered a roiling period of accelerating change.  The decade will see market- and technological forces affect every nook and cranny of the present structure of legal practice. 

What does this have to do with a survey about attorney concerns over whether to hire a virtual paralegal? Much, I allege, because this period of change is landing attorneys and paralegals in the same boat.  Last year’s discussion about the obvious cost-reduction advantages of hiring virtual paralegal assistance seems to be giving way to a more urgent need to respond to the pressures for change dictated by the legal market.  Last year’s convenient choices about whether to “hire virtual” are transforming into next year’s ineluctable necessity.  The threat of “legal commodification” is cropping up around the legal blogspace.  So we had better be ready to adapt.

In this context, Paralegal Associates’ “survey” results are probably in line with what should be expected.  A significant proportion of attorneys are not sure how to use a virtual paralegal because they are not sure how to respond to the changes in practice that implies.  The other response categories are a short catalog of fears that grow out of unfamiliarity with a non-traditional work relationship where you and I aren’t in the usual bricks-and-mortar surroundings.   My point is that a decision that ought to be pretty easy- let’s do some legal work over the internet to hold down costs- gets stymied by  fear of loss of control.  From there, I expect that a perceived threat to the business follows readily.  Our psychology of fear is a barrier to the rational.  Nothing new here; the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle acutely analyzed this human weakness about 2400 years ago.  Inertia seems a species of fear.  If I refuse to recognize a threat, maybe it won’t “recognize” me, and I can go on as usual.  This response is not helpful to survival. 

I agree there are serious practical concerns involved in this transition.  They are management  concerns:  ethical issues, data security needs, client confidentiality maintenance, software/hardware support, liability.  These are the stuff of rational management.  Valuable work is being done on these concerns right now by legal- and technology professionals.  I expect that over the next couple of years, we will see the tools for responding to this emerging network-based legal environment become available in a unified structure that attorneys can readily adopt and use.

What we need to do now, attorneys and paralegals, is come together in a conversation that results in a well-developed approach to supporting the changes in law offices that are needed to adapt successfully to virtual practice, with a minimum of fear and loathing.

It’s true that most practices are “bricks and mortar” at present.  What has yet to emerge is a consensus about when that structure will undergo significant change; “when”, not “if”.  My sense is that there will be wide agreement that we are in the crucial decade.

We are entering the time when last year’s early adopters and leaders give way to broader acceptance of the value of the new business model.  We “virtuals” will soon be pioneers no more.

In this post, I’m offering the view that attorneys need to see transitioning to virtual paralegal support as a necessary response to emerging competitive threats.  Paralegals need to see their traditional in-office situation as under pressure for the same reasons. 

In upcoming posts, I’ll offer some suggestions that address the specific concerns expressed in the survey response categories.

Please stay tuned, and give us your comments.

Paralegal Associates surveyed attorneys on their concerns about using virtual paralegals.  We offered a list of possible worries, and invited responders to mark all that were relevant.  We also invited comments.

Here are the results, sorted by frequency of response.  Our hearty “Thank you” to the tens of attorneys nationwide who took time to respond.

1.  Not sure how to use a virtual paralegal— 35%

2.  Lack of control over what tasks are being worked on— 25%

3.  Not sure how to find a virtual paralegal— 20%

4.  Lack of control over quality of work product— 20%

5. Trust issues— 15%

6. Communication issues— 15%

7.  Concerned a virtual paralegal will be too expensive— 10%

Each of these responses raises an important concern that advocates of the virtual business model must address.  We intend to take up these concerns in subsequent posts.

Note that the most frequent response essentially has to do with coming to understand how virtual paralegals contribute to the firm’s success, and about how to manage the business relationship.  The other responses are really subsets of this primary worry.  Note also that cost was the least-cited concern.  This implies that attorneys are aware of the payoffs in reduced overhead through using independent contractors.   However, understanding the value of the virtual model depends strongly on familiarity with how it works, and how it can be integrated successfully into a practice.

We virtuals have work to do in responding adequately to these concerns.  We invite comment from attorneys and paralegals about this unscientific survey, and about relevant  issues it does not address.

Paralegal Associates looks forward to hearing from you.

Why, oh why are two sessions that I want to attend scheduled for the same day and time?! There was Do The Right Thing, which had to do with ethics, and Industry Trends — 9 to 5. Since I can’t be in two places at once, I had to chose.

Session One: Industry Trends — 9 to 5 with Judith Finnegan, CLM

First, Judith Finnegan is hilarious and a great presenter. Her presentation was on trends in the legal field.  She discussed how the generations are changing and how the legal profession is changing in response to that.

Highlights:

• In the past 2 decades change has been prevalent in the legal field
• 77% of attorneys have a smartphone
• 50% of attorneys use smartphones for legal research
• over 34% of jobs in legal field created since 2001 are now gone.
• on 2/12/2009, 800 people were laid off from law firms nationwide that day.
• Attorney-Secretary ratio has grown: 3.5 sec per 2 attys (McDermott Will & Emery in DC)
• Legal Secretaries/Paralegals are the next highest expense, after rent.
• Generation X is currently 30% of workforce
• More attys are part of Gen X — Self-sufficient, telecommuting

I really enjoyed this session.  I found some of her statistics surprising. Also, she provided a comparison of the different generations.  Based on her breakdown, I’m technically Generation X (by one month) which surprised me since I thought I was Gen Y, but go figure.

Take away: In order to remain competitive & marketable, change must be embraced, not resisted.

Focus Session 1: The Economy, the Changing Law Firm Environment, and the Role of the Modern Legal Professional

This focus session was a great follow-up to the presentation by Judith Finnegan. In the session we answered 5 questions:

Q1: other than layoffs, how does law firm downsizing affect staff ?

Q2: what steps are law firms taking in order to reduce or cut expenses?

Q3: How does staff cope with and reduce stress in the face of law firm downsizing?

Q4: In light of layoffs, what resources/training/services do you need?

Q5: what do you think the law firm of the future will look like? In 5 years? In 10 years?

I would love to hear your opinions.  Feel free to leave a comment answering any and all of these questions.

Focus Session 2: The Lean, Mean, “Green” Machine

This focus session discussed “going green” and the challenges faced in trying to get law firms to do that and what action some law firms have taken already to do so.

Q: What comes to mind when asked how to make your workplace more environmentally friendly?

Q: What are you doing or being asked to do be more environmentally friendly in your offices?

Q: Does your firm/workplace have an established procedure for its sustainability structure?

Q: What is your biggest question or challenge about going green?

One attendee commented that that clients are starting to look and see how green are the offices of their attorneys. Law firms might want to take that into consideration.  You can follow the NALS Green Team on Twitter for tweet tips about how to go green!

I would love to hear everyone’s thoughts on going green.  Leave a comment below!

Session 2: Computer Forensics — The Net by Matthew Sant, Esq.

This session brought to us the “dark side” of the net. The session covered “who or what may be on the other end” of the Net.

• DoS attacks: an attempt to make a computer resource unavailable to its intended users.
• Targets: high profile websites ex: banks, credit cards, search engines, social media.
• First one occurred in 2001…took them a week to figure out the source
• Hacking implies unauthorized intrusion
• Some hackers are hired to test vulnerabilities of sites
• Identity theft is the deliberate assumption of another’s person’s identity, usually to gain access to their finances
• Phishing is an attempt to fraudulently acquire sensitive information by masquerading as a trusted entity in an apparently official communication

That ended the educational sessions for the day….all that was left was

The NALS Foundation Purple Carpet Gala!!! Again, the food was amazing!! The evening consisted of Board Members and Trustees dressed up at characters and the “audience” got to vote on who was the best actor, etc. We had a Tigger, a Scarlett O’Hera and Rhett Butler, Miss Piggy, Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz (two of those actually), Mae West, and Carmen Miranda to name a few. It was an entertaining evening. I tip my hat to those who dressed up as characters.  They really committed themselves to what they were doing…just like any good Legal Secretary/Paralegal would do.

Day Two was, for me, focused on technology. Session one, which was also the Keynote session, was focused on how to properly redact documents.  The second session discussed how to be safe on the Internet. The day ended with the Welcoming Party, but more about that below.

Keynote Speaker: Gavin W. Manes, Ph.D.

Redaction: What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You

Any Paralegal knows all about Production of Documents. They love the sound of the Bates Stamp! A big part of producing documents is redacting information that is privileged. Every paralegal has gone home with hand covered in sharpie from redacting. Dr. Manes of Avansic gave a great presentation on redacting the correct way.  Here are some highlights:

• Number one litigation problem is preserving and producing digital evidence
• Rules and Regulations are changing the landscape…such as Rule 34
• Paralegals are going to become a little ‘nerdy’ as the industry changes and becomes more electronic.
• 40% of jury members don’t own a computer at home
• You want to think when the fax sends that it is deleted from the memory, but it’s not. it is still in there!
• Metadata: information about a document that you can’t see in the current view

Dr. Manes did a demonstration in a document that had been redacted using Adobe. He showed that even if you use Adobe to “black out” portions of the documents and send them as pdfs, there is a way for the person on the receiving end to highlight the text and see what you blacked out! Wow! I think I’ll stick to using a sharpie and then photocopying and then scanning.

Session 2: Technology with Professor Jack Lerner

“Everything the Legal Professional Always Wanted to Know About the Internet*”

This session covered what “Legal Professionals Should Know” regarding email and how to maintain privacy and security on the internet.  Highlights:

• FRCP 26(a) electronic items are discoverable
• Net Neutrality: The most useful public information network aspires to treat all content, sites and platforms equally
• Email is not secure (surprising since so many law firms send send documents back and for via email)
• If you have a company owned phone, employers can look at your text msgs & IMs
• User-generated content & web 2.0 is changing our lifestyle and our norms…where does the law fit in with this?

Welcoming Party

Ahhhhh…yes, the Welcoming Party.  I had a blast! The DJ was great, the food was wonderful, and so many people were up dancing and having a great time.  We even got a conga line going. All I can say is that the NALS ladies know how to let their hair down and dance it up. I can’t remember the last time I had so much fun!

Day One of NALS was a hit in my book. First off, thank you to everyone at NALS who welcomed me with open arms (literally). It made me feel very welcomed and a part of the group..and what an enthusiastic bunch!

Session One: Ethics — Sense and Sensibility by Justice Edward Wallin

This was a session about JAMS and ethics during Mediation and Arbitration. Pretty much ethics can be summed up as:

• be honest
• be open
• One problem is if lawyers move to a new firm and finds himself on the opposite side of a case. what then??
• if it seems wrong, don’t do it!!

Session Two: Elder Law — Terms of Endearment by Judge Kim Hubbard

This session was hard to listen to, I will admit. It discussed the physical and financial abuse that the elderly face. It is horrible to think of people taking advantage of  innocent and trusting people.

• Elder abuse can be either physical or financially
• Most common category of people who abuse elders: family
• There a scam artists as well, such as people posing as caregivers, who gain the trust of elderly people and then convince them to sign all of their belongings and finances over to them
• it is rampant in this country, but only 1 in 100 financial abuse cases are reported

Session Three: Criminal Law — CSI: Irvine with Jennifer Contini, Senior Deputy District Attorney

This was my favorite session today. I found it really exciting to hear how a criminal case could go from practically no evidence to DNA turning the case into a slam-dunk.

• DNA evidence has changed cases to the point that people can be linked to crimes without a doubt
• If only working on that case, the DNA results take 36 hours
• people/police officers hesitate to give samples, but they are needed as ‘elimination samples’
• CODIS…national DNA Index System…a DNA database
• They can use ‘cell site evidence’ to track where a cell phone was located, course now they have GPS.

Well, here I am in Irvine, CA ready to attend NALS 2009 Conference. I should be asleep as it is an early (especially for me) day and a fairly long one as well. However, I am so excited that I find myself unable to sleep. I figured, what else is there to do late at night but write a blog post about how excited and thankful I am for NALS to give me this opportunity to cover their conference for them. The session topics range from Ethics to DNA forensics (sounds kinda cool) to technology to “insights into the future of legal support professionals.” In addition to the great sessions, I look forward to meetin in real life all of the NALS people that I have met on Twitter.

If you are at the conference, make sure to say hi.  If you were unable to attend, follow #NALS09 on Twitter and check back here to read about my experience.

This time next week I will be in Irvine, CA gearing up to attend NALS Annual Education & National Forum October 8 — 11th.  I am really excited to attend as this will be my first time attending a legal conference. In addition, I have been asked to be the guest tweeter and blogger for the conference. I will be tweeting during the various sessions and will have at least an end of the day summary post.  I will post more if time allows.

Make sure you sign up for the rss feed so you don’t miss any of the blog posts. On twitter look for the official NALS hashtag #NALS09 and you can follow me @legalninjaKris

See you back here next week and on Twitter!

I’m hearing rumors that law firms may be getting the message about the profit potential of competent paralegals.  Specifically, Jeannie S. Johnston, paralegal expert and CEO of ParalegalGateway.com, has discussed the possible trend toward deferring  junior associate hiring, and instead taking advantage of the productivity potential of paralegals. Since first-year associates are unprofitable, so the story goes, paralegals are a safe bet because they are profitable right away.  They are so profitable that firms could well afford to increase paralegal compensation to better respect their actual value.  Imagine that!

I would imagine (correct me if I am wrong) that any business with a training requirement tied to a new hire is probably going to lose money on that employee in the first-year.  So, one would think that management factors that into an analysis of future positive returns on the investment in a new hire.

I think it would be really interesting to see what the data show regarding the long-term relationship between associate- and paralegal profitability.  If there is a study out there, please let me know.

The reason why I raise this issue is because the legal profession should, in these harder times, look seriously at how its uses paralegal services, and whether paralegal expertise is managed as effectively as it might be.  When firms see paralegals as glorified office assistants at low pay, failing to take full advantage of their training, they are wasting the firm’s resources and hurting profits.  It’s up to management to take responsibility for getting the most payback through intelligent use of paralegals.

Firms will really start to realize the full profit potential of paralegals when they stop insisting that they be employees, physically on call daily in the “bricks and mortar” office.  The huge reduction in overhead and loaded cost associated with aggressive use of contract “virtual” support is proven by a comparative study already available.

Since only actual tasks associated with advancing a case are “on the clock”, the increased hourly rate for a contract paralegal is more than offset by the large productivity increase and reduced overall cost.

A well-managed firm will use virtual paralegals to the fullest possible extent.  This is the answer to the question of the long-term relationship between associates and paralegals.  Virtuals are profitable no matter what a firm decides.