Canadian Lawyer

very least, participating in such meetings would go a long way to countering any criticism that the models we draft, or the working habits we promote, are irrelevant to clients. Another way to measure our value is to develop a set of metrics that will show the time saving, quality improvement, and risk reduction of our documents and other things we do. The importance of metrics is all the more obvious if we consider where the topic falls on the paradigm shift that is affecting research and development generally. By that, I mean the transition from knowledge hoarding to knowledge sharing — or wikinomics — in which a "new kind of business is emerging, one that opens its doors to the world, co-innovates with everyone (especially customers), shares resources that were previously closely guarded, harnesses the power of mass collaboration, and behaves not as a multinational but as something new: a truly global firm," as Don Tapscott and Anthony Williams put it in their book Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. While the spirit of wikinomics dominated the Toronto/ New York Knowledge Management Summit, it does not typically characterize the discussions I have had around metrics and knowledge management. This may be because no one cares about metrics but it may also be because metrics belong to that body of knowledge we believe will give us a cutting edge, either for our firm or for our individual value on the market of knowledge management lawyers. In the spirit of the summit, the principles of wikinomics, therefore, are those that I wish to apply to this column. I would like to explore and discuss the specific practices that comprise the research-and-development component of KM and the ways of measuring their benefits. More specifically, I would like to know why, for example, we have not been able to come up with a standard with which to measure our value? Why do topics such as pricing or alternate fee arrangements seem to be left up to marketing and finance when the models knowledge management generates are a key factor in delivering realistic AFAs? In brief, I invite readers to respond to the ideas I put forward and to discuss not only how to innovate but how to measure our innovation so knowledge management is no longer perceived as a cost but rather as a profit centre in a law firm and so that events like the summit can continue to occur and prove KM is not missing the point. Danielle Olofsson is a knowledge management lawyer at FMC LLP in charge of civil law. She has practised law in Montreal, Paris, and Stockholm and is a member of the Quebec and Paris bar associations. She can be reached at danielle.olofsson@fmc-law.com. Her knowldedge management column will appear in every second issue of Canadian Lawyer. COMING TO www.canadianlawyermag.com/ Canadian-Lawyer-TV/InHouse-videos.html Canada's leading CLOs explore their challenges for the year ahead Alaine Grand, Mirko Bibic, AstraZeneca January 28 BCE February 18 Daniel Marion, Anna Fung, Thales Canada Inc. February 4 TimberWest Forest Corp. February 25 Geoff Creighton, Jane Fedoretz, IGM Financial Inc. February 11 VIEW 2013 BlakesView_CL_Feb_13.indd 1 CEDA International March 4 BROUGHT TO YOU BY www.CANADIAN L a w ye r m a g . c o m F e b r uary 213-01-18 11:20 AM 0 1 3 17

• Cover