Canadian Lawyer

tech Support By Daneille Olofsson Quantifying value through time codes L ast November, Matthew Whalley posted on the LinkedIn discussion group Knowledge Management for Legal Professionals a presentation he authored with Ian Rodwell entitled ���Valuing Value-Add,��� in which they compare the respective perceptions of clients and lawyers of the ���value-added��� services lawyers provide their clients. Among the observations Whalley and Rodwell draw are, first, the divergence between clients and their lawyers with respect to the efficiencies generated for clients by ���value-added��� services (lawyers believed the potential efficiencies to be much greater than the clients) and, second, the need for a better understanding by lawyers of the value of the services they deliver outside legal advice. Although their presentation addresses the client/lawyer relationship, the questions it raises could just as easily be put to the relationship between knowledge management lawyers and their law firms. Could it be we overestimate the efficiencies knowledge management provides for our firms? Does the time saving generated by our models and precedents really justify the resources allocated to creating these documents? Would it not be more efficient to spend our time developing a technological platform that would enable the lawyers to access their favourite model more quickly? In other words, maybe getting our lawyers to the knowledge they need is more valuable than generating it. Whalley and Rodwell���s presentation 16 April 2013 www.CANADIAN raises excellent questions it does not purport to answer. Instead, it calls for a next step to be the compilation of ���robust empirical data about the cost provisions of certain services and the likely return on investment.��� In other words: better metrics. The call for better metrics is by no means novel. I have even heard general counsel of a large corporation claim to have asked his team to shift its focus away from RFPs and alternative fee arrangements in the coming years to concentrate to our various projects, be it designing an intranet, drafting a model document, or piloting new software. Coded time entries is a project that brings together at least three law firm support departments, two of which (practice management and business development) frequently suffer from a lack of empirical data. The first is practice support. Coding our time enables us to map our processes with some precision with a view to improving them. For example, it lets us generate data that Better metrics, however, are only possible if we can agree on what we are measuring and if we measure it consistently. on pressing outside legal counsel for better statistics on what they do. Better metrics, however, are only possible if we can agree on what we are measuring and if we measure it consistently. This brings me to the topic of task codes and their utility. What I mean by task codes is the process whereby lawyers enter their time using a specific code that corresponds to a particular step in a transaction or litigation file. For a billing lawyer, this means breaking down what they do into ���work packages,��� assigning a specific code to each package, and using this code when entering time so as to ultimately be able to measure the time and resources required to complete each package. For a knowledge management lawyer, this means applying the same methodology L a w ye r m a g . c o m reveals where bottlenecks occur in our files and should spark a discussion on how these can be resolved and production improved for the next time. Has too much time been spent drafting documents? In which case, is a better model required? In the context of knowledge management, have we over-researched a clause or under-piloted a project? The second function of coded time entries concerns finance. These entries provide lawyers and finance with some insight into the actual cost of each step in a transaction, thereby making alternative fee proposals less of a guessing game and budgets more accurate and easier to adhere to. It also provides a more credible explanation when overruns occur since lawyers can point to specific steps in a transaction that did not go

• Cover