Web-Tones

Are ideas worthless?

Link: Paul Buchheit: Ideas vs Judgment and Execution: Climbing the Mountain. Paul does a nice job here of shedding some light on recent conversations of interest regarding startups. But additional light is shed by some of the commentary. Why? Because perhaps what Paul was commenting on was what others "said, but not what they meant." Huh? That is, to understand what is said, you often have to understand the context. Take away the context and the words have less (or no) meaning.

This is similar to understanding a line of cases that help shape important precedent. You must understand the entire line to understand what is being "said"--reading the cases in isolation will not produce the right understanding. You have to follow the "linked list" up and down to get the context.

Case law represents an abstracted communications system (a language). Studying the law is like studying a foreign language, except it is written in English, which makes it "doubly confusing." The is true of the online universe as well, unless you are immersed in the context you don't "get" what is being said.

Old school executives are hopelessly out of touch because they have not mastered the new language. Learning a new language is tough. It is probably the most complex and important technology that man has ever invented (of course that might be given man too much credit but I will have to leave that for another post).

If the CIA likes it, why wouldn't a law firm?

Link: Google has lots to do with intelligence. Search as a concept and technology is SO BIG that we have just started scratching the surface of what it can do. I wrote about it in Search, KM & the Practice of Law and probably understated the case.

Why would I pay thousands (often hundreds of thousands) to have search functionality when I can get the world's best search technology for next to nothing in some cases (e.g. Google Mini, Google Desktop, Google Apps)?

How much time is spent within law firms searching for stuff? Some significant percentage, all day, every day. Who pays for the inability to search effectively? Clients. Think there may be some competitive advantage to improving this capability? The days when you could keep clients in the dark are long since over.

Wake up and smell the search!

Can't Live Everywhere Online!

Link: Loic Le Meur Blog: My social map is totally decentralized but I want it back on my blog. I think that Loic has got it right. I don't want to "live" in twenty different places online, although I might want to hangout in that many places or more. I want a gateway to all those places (via single sign-on) and I want that to be from my personal space (aka web-tones).

Habeas verbus ad subjiciendum

Ironically this week, just after posting about the fear of legal discovery in a world gone mad with out of control communication (Here), I heard of exactly that: a friend of mine who was named in a wrongful termination suit and was terrified. Not that he felt he had done anything wrong. But with no clear retention policy in place, and no good method for archiving, he had no idea what was or was not out there.  Had he deleted something years ago that was still available through back up?  Was his Exchange server and backups the only place his emails existed, or were there old pst files saved somewhere?

The requirement to comply with discovery, the cost of doing so, the cost of not being accurate, and the fear of the unknown - what might I have that I don't know I have or don’t know where it may be is daunting. I’m not a JD, so I leave this up to those of you who are, but I would think a client would be well-served by counsel that advised them in this area before the need arose.

The stakes are high and demand robust solutions and processes that insure when faced with a writ of Habeas verbus ad subjiciendum we don’t show up to court empty handed. - Chris Saah

Web Content Management Goes Open Source

Link: Pirillo Starts Large Scale Community CMS Project. So what? Well here is the so what. The search engines (is there still more than one?) love quality content. However, quality content is hard to do even with the best Content Management System (CMS) and almost impossible to do without one.

Try developing more than a handful of pages in raw HTML and then managing the resulting site, it gets old quick. A CMS makes a daunting task more manageable and more accessible to the masses of business people (read lawyers) that might want to "give it a go." Why? Because search engine optimization (SEO) first requires that you have something of value to optimize, instead of just the "brochureware" found on most legal websites. An affordable (and "kick ass") CMS will help take your site to the next level. Sure Typepad and Wordpress do an adequate job today, but what Chris appears to be attempting will "kick it up a notch."

Stay tuned...

Welcome "Senor Saah!"

I have been encouraging Chris Saah to lend his voice to the conversation for quite some time now. As CIO of a distributed organization with well over 1000 employees, he lives in the "trenches" and has both the "scar tissue" and the IT wisdom that goes along with it.

In short, he simply has more insight into people, process and platform than anyone I know. If you missed his lead post (a few down) you can find it here. Now that Chris has broken ground, it is my sincere hope that he will grace these pages often. The Internet(s) will certainly be the better for it.

Plantation or the Law of Private Agreements?

Link: Rough Type: Nicholas Carr's Blog: Meanwhile, back at the plantation. Nick writes a populist post for the Internet masses (musicians in this case) which is not exactly what you might expect from him. It is quite well done and manages to "pull at the heart strings" for the little guy (in all sincerity it does). And while many us have similar sentiments for the "sharecroppers" of the world (either having been among them or watched our parents labor in those fields)--the argument Nick makes is fatally flawed.

The musicians who "licensed their works" did so obviously because they thought that they would benefit from doing so. The fact that the other party to the "contract" benefited more, leaves them no real room to complain. This does not have the markings of a "contract of adhesion" where the "little guys" had no other alternative but to sign on the dotted line. They freely entered into a private agreement. Private agreements (i.e. contracts) control most of what occurs in the business world on a daily basis. They allocate risk, not after the fact, but at the time the contract is made. Sans some kind of illegality or fraud, they are a critical part of the legitimate engine that drives commerce as we know it.

Aren't book publishers a kind of plantation owner? Large corporations? Newspapers? The point is that we can't start denying a party the benefit of the bargain without it having much broader implications with respect to the society in which we live. A society (despite its shortcomings) that has produced arguably the best standard of living, for the most people, that the world has ever known. It can and should be improved. There are iniquities in the distribution of wealth that "scream for a solution" in a civilized society, BUT contract doctrine is not the place to muck with "social engineering" experiments.

Pandemic in the Verbosphere

{I'm honored to be invited as a guest blogger by my good friend Carlos, and hope that my contributions will be worthy of the Leyva-man and his Web-Tones.}

I remember hearing the results of one of those studies a few years ago that measures worker productivity. It found that the time it takes to write a business letter had actually increased compared to with the same study done in the early 80s. Of course the natural reaction is: “How can that be?: It seems implausible that a letter written using Microsoft Word with cut, copy, paste, delete, and all of the other capabilities could take longer than one written using an IBM Selectric, carbon paper, and Wite-Out. The study also found the reason: the average letter was now revised 6.5 times as opposed to a couple of times back in the day.

The volume of written communication – the “Verbosphere” if you will - is out of control. Some companies may include the avian influenza pandemic as a possible concern in disaster planning, but all companies of any size must include the document proliferation pandemic as part of their operational planning, especially in “paper” heavy industries like Law (Carlos’ space) and Real Estate (my space).

This disease affects businesses at every level. If the biggest challenge of an operations manager in the 70s and 80s was to keep his accounting and POS platforms up, the 21^st century’s biggest challenge has got to be email. (I know at our company, the disaster recovery time frame for email is far more aggressive than for accounting). If the greatest fear a company has is an IRS audit, then I would contend a close second (and perhaps greater at some companies) would be a legal discovery involving communication by multiple users, at multiple offices, over an extended time period. And going back to the illustration about the business letter, one of the great robbers of office efficiency has got to be the time it takes to find the relevant communication on a given topic. In a March 2005 study by Microsoft on office efficiency, Dr. Larry Baker wrote "In my three decades of studying what makes workers productive, I've found the most crucial skills are their ability to efficiently communicate across all kinds of boundaries, share important documents and manage the increasing volumes of information."

I believe the key to finding a vaccination for this disease that is growing asymptotically is in developing fully integrated solutions. First the technology must be integrated. Dealing with email, document management, and collaboration as separate platforms only addresses half the problem. Sure, I may implement a vaulting solution to deal with the fact that my email volume doubles every year, but why is it doubling? Is it because my teams are collaborating via email? By sending revisions back and forth to multiple people rather than creating the document in Sharepoint or a Wiki and developing it there? Likewise, I may deploy a document management solution for all of my contracts, leases, and financials, but if the security lacks the granularity or business logic to accommodate how the documents are shared in real life, I will still have people attaching pdfs to emails, rather than pointing intended recipients to the DMS platform.

Which leads to my second point: The business process needs to be integrated. All of the steps, from how and where documents are created, edited, and approved, to what format they are created in, to how they are disseminated, both internally and externally, need to be considered when developing a solution.

If our technology does not match the process, and what our end users need to do is not a click or two away, they will seek the path of least resistance, circumvent the system, and revert to their primordial ways: email.

.

I wish I could write that I have an instant cure for this. I don’t. Just like developing a vaccine for a virus that constantly mutates, the cure is going to vary between industries and companies. I do think MS Sharepoint 2007 holds some real promise, especially with the degree it integrates with Word. I also know that a key is going to be to develop good document hygiene practices and training our people to use them. Users are going to have to rethink how they communicate and collaborate.

I believe we mastered dealing with large volumes of numerical data in the 20^th century. The real challenges of the Verbosphere still lay ahead. - Chris Saah

Flip: The Zen of Less is More

Link: Camcorder Brings Zen to the Shoot - New York Times. This a brilliant product (low end camcorder) not because of the features it has but because of those it lacks. Almost all of us have experienced "remote control hell"--the sinking feeling that the damn gadget has too many options and ALL you want to do is something very simple. The options are a source of confusion. Confusion leads to lack of use.

Simplicity is one of the reasons that Google succeeded in search where others failed. Hey, ALL I want to do is search. Don't present me with a screen filled with news and other trivia. If I wanted news I would go to CNN or their competition (or today my favorite news blog).

In a world full of complexity and technological sophistication functional simplicity  is priceless!

Making the Case for Law 2.0

Paul Lippe, founder and CEO of Legal OnRamp, makes the case for Law 2.0 here. His primary thesis? Well, it should sound familiar to Web-Tones readers: "cloud computing and Web 2.0 apps will transform the practice of law." OK, but Paul adds some deep insights as to why this will occur. There may be nothing new under the sun but "there are an infinite number of angles that have yet to be explored." Paul argues, and rightfully so, that corporate counsel, the largest purchasers of legal services, will be the prime movers for the "sheep like behavior" of most firms. They are starting to use these technologies in house and are beginning to see the ROI that can be achieved. It will not be long before they starting demanding that there service providers do the same.

Eat lunch or be lunch. You decide.

Google Apps: Raising the Bar

Link: Google Spreadsheets Adds Gadgets, a Directory of Features. Google Apps just keep getting better and we are ONLY somewhere circa 1982 (in PC historical terms) in the evolution of the "cloud." As a recent convert (to the actual platform as opposed to just the concept) this is exciting stuff! Why? Not because I create or use a ton of spreadsheets. I don't and never have. BUT rather because this is indicative of the platform's maturation and the likely pace at which it will progress. In five years PC's, other than as useful access devices, are going to seem quaint (excepts for a few special purpose apps). Most of what we do from a computing perspective will be "on the wires."

What will this mean for the practice of law? It will be transformative. The seeds are already firmly planted. The early adopters are already well beyond the initial learning curve. Eat lunch or be lunch, the choice is yours!

Social Networking Sites for Business

Link: Online Business Networking: 2 Horse Globalization Race - ReadWriteWeb. I believe that the value of these sites for businesses of all kinds is still underestimated. Sure there is tons of press for what the kids are doing on MySpace and Facebook, and there is no doubt that "the kids" have some disposable income, but there are opportunities for "serious" (and not so serious) business people as well, linking with each other AND linking with the kids. Witness how much press LinkedIn has been getting lately.

I suspect that this business value is already being realized by early adopters of the non-tech sort, who are content to reap the benefits and feel no compulsion (business savvy as they are) to share with their colleagues and competitors. This is an example of what Doc Searls calls the "because of" effect, those that figure how to prosper not by developing the technologies, but because of them.

There are some old school attorneys that have likely begun to crack to code, but this pales in comparison to the next wave (and the one after that) of attorneys that have cut their teeth on digital technologies--I fully expect them to completely alter the way law is practiced. I hope that I can run fast enough to keep pace!

Google Apps Rock!

Why? Because of anywhere/anytime/any device(soon) access to all the necessary basic computing infrastructure that any small to medium size business might need! All the e-Bilities are in place: scalability, reliability & availability. In addition, the apps are highly functional today and are only going to get better as they mature.

The new Google Sites wiki functionality (now part of Google Apps) is amazingly easy to use (i.e. all wsywig). But, what has so far been under reported is that you get Google search functionality as a "built in" part of the deal. Sure, this feature is an obvious one to include, BUT the implications of having world class search functionality as part of your organization's Intranet are more powerful than I anticipated, and I "geek on this stuff."

For example, a law firm could track all matter documents (PDF or otherwise) in one centralized location and have all them "searchable" after a few clicks. Simply create a new site (in minutes) for each matter and you have the "foundational building blocks" for a world class document management system. All of this at a cost of $50/user per year. To say that this is an amazing value is an understatement!

Worried about security? Who isn't? But do you really think that your documents are more secure in that server room down the hall? Just ask 2/3 of the lawyers in New Orleans whether or not they think that is true. When is the last time you verified that your nightly backups were working up to snuff? What would happen if all of a sudden you needed to add three new offices nationwide?

It's the architecture that matters and the "cloud" is unlike anything that has come before it. It looks like it is a two vendor race and if anyone doubts that Google will be a serious competitor in this space (for businesses of ALL sizes) then they simply do NOT get it!

Musings on cloud computing--finding the onramp!

Link: Ericsson predicts demise of hotspots | InfoWorld | News | 2008-03-10 | By Mikael Rickn�s, IDG News Service. Ok, here is where the rubber meets the road. I am in the process of launching a "digital business" of sorts and considering all the usual options for telephony, collaboration suites (including email), front office & back office functionality and other similar "startup issues." Much of the advice that I have pointed to in recent posts is therefore both timely and relevant, personally.

This startup will be have multiple locations from day one, and therefore computing logistics are more complicated, or at least they would have been in the old universe. I have found everything I need on the cloud, competitively priced and from vendors that are proven and around for the long haul.  I considered some "old school" functionality, because some of the offerings I was looking at were arguably more "mature" in this space.

But, I quickly punted on this idea. I want everything (and I mean everything) available on the cloud, accessible anywhere/anytime there is an available internet connection, and as the link above implies, that will soon be everywhere that I happen to be with a laptop or a phone. If I want to add an employee/partner in California, Alaska, Paris, or Argentina, I simply plug them into the existing infrastructure and give them a virtual extension from my VOIP provider, and bingo, they are on board.

I assume that they have a PC, a cell phone and the ability to connect. I don't provide any of that. They are required to use the tools that they already own, sure we will be happy to expense cell phone minutes where the VOIP line is not tactically feasible, but that is the exception rather than the rule. I don't care what their favorite device or OS is. Want to use a Mac, or Linux, that is completely up to you. Want to use a Blackberry, a Treo, or an iPhone--knock yourself out.

I am confident that this is the right way to go? 100%! Will there be some bumps in the road? You bet. But they will be surmountable. The cloud is the future and is only going to get better, and better. The ability to scale the infrastructure, for a fraction of what it would have cost in the old universe, is enough to convince me that this is the only way to go. I want to leverage enabling technologies, but I do not want to manage the speeds, feeds, wires and the rest of what goes along with it. I have been there and done that, and for me that game is over!

More Startup Advice

Link: A Couple of My Rules for Startups - Blog Maverick. Mark Cuban jumps in with more startup advice. Many of these rules apply to all startups, including law firms. The beautiful thing about the Net (at least one of them) is that you can get quality information from people who have been there. This is not "fad advice" but advice from people who either have lived it, or are living it.  Of course, not all of it applies for every startup--these "rules" should not be taken as formulaic--it is simply quality information that you can't find anywhere else, including the b-schools. Why? Because academics often live in a parallel universe--that is, they are often looking at and teaching the past.

How to save money running a startup (17 really good tips)

Link: How to save money running a startup (17 really good tips). Asttorneys thinking about going solo or starting a boutique firm (apparently many are) could benefit from "groking" this list. Keep your burn rate low and more money goes in your pocket, or you have more to spend on things that really matter.

There is no doubt that globalization will not spare the legal industry. There is only so much that can be done vis-a-vis increasing billable hours or hiking rates. If the infrastructure is done correctly (i.e. along the lines outlined in this list) you could theoretically start a national practice on a "song" + an expresso machine--a bit of an overstatement, but not much.

It is all beta, all the time!

Steve Jobs once said (or is given credit for saying) the following: "real artists ship." Now you can read whatever you like into this quote, but for me it says that you have to build something worthwhile and get it out the door. Nowadays that means build it quick and get some feedback so you can iterate again. It is all beta all the time. The marketplace is far too chaotic to think that you can simply engineer your way to a successful launch of anything, despite the fact the some high quality "engineering" might go into the initial release.

That said, it is important to get certain things right during that initial release (and by release I mean a product, service, or other kind of offering) because your are going to have to live with your decision(s) far longer than you might think. Once you commit resources to  something you become attached to it--and the more resources (e.g. money, time, sweat equity, etc.) the more attached you become.

Technology vendors (and others) often call this phenomenon "lock in."  It may cost you plenty to ante up, but it will cost you even more to switch. That is why when you are creating something new or adopting a complex suite of new technologies, it is important to experiment early and often. In other words you must quickly throw as much "crap on the wall" as you can, and see what sticks, before you pay for it or before you ship. This may sound simplistic, but it is how wicked problems are best solved.

However, this model for decision making is not the way things are normally done by "serious people." It makes them uncomfortable. We are accustom to believing that if we study something long enough we will find the "right" answer. The problem is that we often do not understand the "right" questions to ask. The web is the world's largest library and its ability to shed light on most topics is undervalued, IMHO. Those that are attempting to solve "wicked problems" (which is most of us these days) need to become more effective information consumers. Why? So that we can iterate through the decision cycle a lot faster and more effectively than we have in the past.

1000 Fans?

Link: Kevin Kelly -- The Technium. Kevin Kelly is one of my favorite elder statesman of the web and his advice regarding "1000 true fans" is applicable to any aspiring digital entrepreneur (he is specifically referring to artists) IMHO. You accumulate 1000 high quality customers and you have not only a viable, but more likely a thriving, small business on your hands.

The point is that you don't need to hit it out of the park--singles and doubles are good if you can get them consistently, the lonely triples and occasional home runs are simply gravy. The technologies that Kevin talks about (i.e. mostly RSS and blogs) are now mature and easy enough for the most "technophobe"  to master. All it takes is a little diligence, persistence and hard work. If you aren't willing to do the latter than "get a job!"

Feed the network and the network feeds you?

Link: Innovation comes cheap, says Google engineer Kevin Marks | The Social - CNET News.com. Clearly that is Google's vision vis-a-vis improving the ecosystem. Whenever the ecosystem prospers, Google gets a "little" (perhaps not so little) size of the increased pie. Makes sense for Google, but can it work for others whose footprint is not the same?

Can it work in other industries, far removed from the valley, and not necessarily tech centric per se? Well I believe that the answer is yes and no. It can work for other industries perhaps, but they will be tech centric in their own unique ways, creating their own ecosystems...

Here come the boys from Redmond, again!

Link: Rough Type: Nicholas Carr's Blog: Rumor: Microsoft about to unveil web-apps    strategy. Really, no one should be surprised that MS will move aggressively to "cloud." Remember that Ray Ozzie, the father of both Lotus Notes and Groove, understands a thing or two about collaborative computing. Google has yet to prove that it really understands application integration at the kind sophisticated level that users have come to expect from MS Office. It is embrace and extend, yet again. Google has an opportunity, but this game is just getting started and when MS comes to cloud, they are coming strong. Apps is what they do, this is their turf, and they are not going to give up much without a serious fight.

But in many ways, it doesn't really matter. What really matters is that consumers are going to benefit both from the "innovation wars" and from the "price wars." The really interesting "stuff" will be happening elsewhere...