Canadian Lawyer

w w w . C A N A D I A N L a w y e r m a g . c o m J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 7 19 of being guided by a coach in what good and bad drafting looks like and how to spot excellent constructions of legal language. But we hit a paradox here: On the one hand, recreating the wheel and drafting from scratch is inefficient; on the other, lawyers learn better by doing. Applying precedent language to a transaction is great when in the middle of a deal, but deep smarts is going to happen when specific topics or provisions can be explored and practised over and over again to model- precedent perfection. Guided observation This is one of the preferred techniques of design thinkers — that to understand what someone actually does you must observe. There is a notorious gap between what peo- ple say they do and what they actually do. The best form of learning by observa- tion is shadowing a lawyer or the appren- ticeship scheme, like that of pupillages in barristers' sets in England and Wales. The pupil shadows their supervisor for the first six months watching trials, confer- ences and assisting with paperwork. Sit- ting in the same office means the oppor- tunity for the osmosis of key insights and intuition to pass from expert to novice. The value of listening to an expert deal with a difficult colleague or client on the phone and then discussing the approach (either beforehand or following the call) is incalculable for deep learning. Guided problem-solving Most of us know this technique from our years of studying — the best study hack to pass exams is to answer as many exam-type questions as possible (even those you may have crafted yourself ) under exam-like conditions and then research and mark your answers. Being set realistic client problems to research, explore, draft and practise; gathering samples, understanding different uses and applications of the law in differ- ent contexts and discussing these with experts enable the deepest transfer of the tacit smarts to trainees. Guided experimentation Finally, developing simulations allow law- yers to practise what they have learned and to test theories and experiment with dif- ferent approaches. Moot or mock trials are enduring examples of such simulations in law. They are a fabulous way of transferring tacit knowledge in our firms — encourag- ing that all-important active learning to cultivate the deep smarts. Our KM strategies quite rightly explore converting tacit into explicit knowledge by embedding context and deep know-how (via annotations, etc.) into the precedents and best practices we produce. And we focus on making sure that codified and explicit knowledge is centralized so that it can more easily be found by those who need it when they need it. But we also need to recognize that to successfully transfer the deep smarts to the next generation, we must boldly go and seek out these more active learning methods at our firms. Kate Simpson is national director of knowl- edge management at Bennett Jones LLP, and she is responsible for developing the firm's KM strategy and initiatives. The opinions expressed in this article are her own. Canada's leading in-house counsel discuss how they are helping their organizations innovate for the future BROUGHT TO YOU BY COMING TO www.canadianlawyermag.com/canadianlawyer-tv/InHouse Maurizio Romano Janssen Inc. January 9 Matthew Snell IBM January 23 Katie Jamieson Herschel Supply Co. January 3 Tanya Rothe D-Wave January 16 Untitled-5 1 2016-12-06 3:17 PM

• Cover