Tyco and Eversheds, version 2.0
May 19, 2008 | Filed Under Law 2.0, New Services
The best way to sustain a competitive edge is to improve on something that’s already innovative.
Tyco and Eversheds announced today an expansion and upgrade of their multi-jurisdiction legal services agreement. The initial agreement caught the attention of many in January 2007 when Tyco took work done by 250 law firms in many countries and entrusted it to one firm, Eversheds.
I covered the first version here, and did an update earlier this year.
The new deal finds Eversheds adding new work to the mix:
During the next phase, Eversheds will continue handling high-end Tyco work such as the recent multi-jurisdiction Ancon business divestiture and the major restructuring of Tyco businesses in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA). Additionally it will bring new performance-based efficiencies to its regular commercial and compliance work.
There are some new wrinkles and Tyco-driven metrics as well:
Of equal significance, the new phase of the engagement provides Eversheds with substantial bonus incentives to meet pre-specified client satisfaction and diversity targets and achieve proactive litigation avoidance - in other words, promoting and encouraging behaviours that are counter-cultural at many traditional law firms.
Many lawyers aim for perfection and certainty, whether due to training or native disposition. What I find intriguing here is that Tyco and Eversheds are clearly learning on the go, working through issues that always arise when you are creating a template instead of copying one.
UK publication thelawyer.com has more.
Stay tuned, later this week I hope to bring forward some additional insights.
What if the Law were more like Lego?
January 28, 2008 | Filed Under Law 2.0, In the News
I realized this morning that I’m almost as old as Lego (R); today is the 50th anniversary of the little brick that sticks.
I was weaned on the old-school Lego, and my sons spent many a lazy afternoon with slightly upgraded versions as well (although they preferred the basic stuff). Today’s varieties are almost unrecognizable from where things started.
As you’d expect, Lego’s lawyers are watchful over those who would copy these iconic products.
So I got to thinking: what would the law be like if it were more like Lego? Here’s my top seven:
1. All the pieces would fit together.
2. You could share parts of it with others and it would always work.
3. The best things resulted when you didn’t follow the directions.
4. If you spent hours with it, it wouldn’t cost any more.
5. It worked as well alone or in a group.
6. You could extend it easily in new and creative ways.
7. And you could just as easily tear it apart and start over.
I did learn early on that the big red ones just look like hard candy.
Even Google today is getting into the act:
(Update: Gizmodo has a cool Lego timeline.
Google Docs Roils Legal Tech - II
September 21, 2007 | Filed Under Law 2.0, Technology
After thinking about why Google Docs may matter for the law, a few thoughts.
One key is to foster working together with a simple interface (compatible with Word, Excel and PowerPoint) at a near-zero price point. That doesn’t mean other application providers are SOL, it just means that the expectations of users have gone up. Many people have Gmail as their personal webmail app, and may start to wonder why this makes it easier to move things forward than some high-priced custom software that requires extensive training and expensive support.
It also makes more people comfortable with software-as-service, which is popularized by salesforce.com.
Getting back to the law, note what is happening here. When you make working together easier, you don’t just do things better. You also do fewer things faster and therefore much cheaper. Much of the business model of the legal industry is based upon doing too many things slower.
This is really all about collaboration, and I’ll give mention to a prime mover (along with a legal example) to subscribers of the monthly newsletter, Wired GC -Select next week.
But in the meantime, the regal legal ship of state sails on with confidence…
Google Docs Roils Legal Tech - I
September 18, 2007 | Filed Under Law 2.0, Technology
If a picture is worth a thousand words, a short video is probably worth a few more:
Here’s the link if you’re reading this off a feed.
So this use of Google Docs involves documents, but it may not even be the best part. Note the video mentioned that you can share presentations (i.e., PowerPoint). Here’s a view of one that someone already figured out how to embed in a web page, with chat enabled.
Think about this for a moment or two, and the legal applications that it “presents.” I have a few ideas already, and I’ll roll out at least one of them Thursday.
Microsoft is probably still reeling from yesterday’s EU antitrust ruling. Google putting a few major chunks of Office in the cloud may be more important in the long run.
I love the low-tech way this idea is presented (designed by commoncraft). It’s about time there’s more substance and less glitzy form to how ideas are expressed on the Internet.
Barbarians Behind the Publisher’s Gate?
September 11, 2007 | Filed Under Law 2.0, Technology
Publishers targeting professional markets have long relied upon high-ticket subscriptions to hard-copy publications to produce good returns for their investors. The times have been a-changin’ and may now be doing so even faster.
The New York Times has a story about Reed Elsevier (they of Lexis/Nexis), and its plans to place various premium medical journals behind the gatewall of a “free” website called OncologySTAT.com. If it sounds like a play for online ads, it is:
Elsevier hopes to sign up 150,000 professional users within the next 12 months and to attract advertising and sponsorships, especially from pharmaceutical companies with cancer drugs to sell. The publisher also hopes to cash in on the site’s list of registered professionals, which it can sell to advertisers.
The good doctors would be well advised to read the site’s privacy policy.
The story goes on to confirm the plight of many publishers:
Although Elsevier’s medical and scientific journal business is profitable, revenue is flat and online readership is growing faster than print subscriptions.
If successful, Reed Elsevier reportedly plans to roll this model out to other medical medical specialties. Can a legal application be far behind?
With no offense intended to the ad at the right (it’s now a bit more svelte, by the way), I think the attempt to monetize eyeballs with online ads is a difficult thing to do well (or profitably). Some experts talk in terms of “banner blindness” and others are even figuring out ways to block ads entirely.
Delivering information digitally is not only seductive as a business model, it’s also demonstrably cheaper for the publisher (no costs of printing and mailing, for starters). Many users like it as well, unless they prefer installing new bookshelves to handle the paper-bound influx. Digital also facilitates better search.
Ideas like OncologySTAT.com may be trying to buck the long-term trend that most information will be free, and only insight and interpretation will gain a premium. If you have the leading website in a market or on an issue, maybe the ad thing works. But only for a while, since new sites sprout up all the time.
The recent sales of professional publishing assets (like ALM to Incisive Media) show that some think it is time to take money off the table. It will be interesting to see who got the better part of these deals.
Search
Powered By
Links
| ||||
 | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
