The 1998 Law Firm Technology Survey

What are the hardware and software trends among the state's law firms? How do they use computers in their day-to-day work, and how do they think those uses will change in the near future? The third annual technology survey tracks computer use in Wisconsin law firms.

By Dianne Molvig

Editor's Note: To view figures referenced in this article you must have and/or install
Adobe Acrobat Reader 3.0 on your computer.

Listen in on lawyers' conversations about computer technology and you're likely to hear a wide range of sentiments. Some have embraced computers, others are resigned to their presence in today's law office, and still others shun these machines ­ or at least view them as being useful solely to support staff.

Providing a formal sort of "listening in" on attorneys' attitudes toward computers is the State Bar's 1998 Law Firm Technology Survey. Now in its third year, the survey provides a glimpse into Wisconsin lawyers' expertise and comfort level in using computers. Of the 1,780 attorneys who initially received the survey, 654 completed it, for a 37 percent response rate. Surveys went out to a stratified random sample of firms in order to get a representative cross section of the state's attorneys. This sampling technique divides a population into subgroups ­ in this case, firm size ­ and then randomly selects participants from each subgroup. Of those responding to the survey, 52 percent worked in law firms with only one attorney, while 34 percent said their offices had two to five attorneys, and 15 percent indicated their firms had six or more attorneys. Single attorney firms were slightly underrepresented in this year's survey responses.

"Many lawyers, and I think the general public, still view computers as complicated and difficult to learn," notes Milwaukee attorney Tim Muth, who practices in computer and Internet law. "I think it reflects the fact that the computer and software industries still haven't done a good job of making their products user-friendly. There's probably still a fair amount of justified computer phobia out there."

Lawyers often revealed those kinds of frustrations in the survey section devoted to write-in comments. In fact, many respondents summed up their feelings in one word: "Help!"

Digging deeper for reasons behind their frustrations, the survey found that the number-one barrier lawyers said they face in adopting technology is lack of time ­ time to research new technological products and applications, and to learn how to use them adeptly. (See Figure 1.) Wisconsin lawyers aren't alone. The "no time" lament is one that Denver attorney John Tredennick, author of the American Bar Association's two-book series, Winning with Computers, says he hears often as he travels nationwide talking to lawyers about law office technology.

But, saying you have no time to learn about computers is like being "so busy chopping wood you can't sharpen your ax," Tredennick contends. "Lawyers are too busy to learn how to speed up their efficiency. I hear that all the time. But it's the worst excuse around. You don't have time not to learn this stuff."

If that sounds like a challenge to the legal profession, it is, Tredennick says. He adds that "the microchip revolution is right up there in the top five" of the major developments in human history, along with such events as the invention of the wheel and the printing press. "For people to wince at it is a shame," Tredennick says. "This technology is liberating. It's an exciting time to be alive."

How are Wisconsin lawyers faring in the revolution? The remainder of the survey's findings provide some insights.

The "Net" catches on

One of the survey's key findings was a substantial jump during the past year in Wisconsin attorneys' use of the Internet. Nearly 72 percent of respondents said their firms now have Internet access, up from 50 percent last year. The 22 percent increase is double the proportion of lawyers who stated in last year's survey that their firms planned to get on the Internet in 1998. (Please see a related article on the Internet's ethics implications for lawyers elsewhere in this issue.)

Lawyers use the Internet to find case law, statutes, article citations and texts, expert witnesses, and more. But the possibilities go far beyond that, Tredennick points out. "The key to the Internet is that it provides a collaborative tool the likes of which we've never seen before," he says. "You can have collaborative extranets, in which you work together with outside counsel and your clients, and collaborative intranets that allow you to share work product and your firm's most valuable resource, which is your knowledge base."

For example, compare an intranet's capabilities, Tredennick says, to an older system of having a notebook on the shelf containing information about a specific legal issue you work on frequently. The notebook might include pertinent statutes, useful articles, copies of pleadings in prior cases, and so on. "If I have all that in a notebook sitting above my desk, that's handy for me," Tredennick says, "but it doesn't do any good for my partners, unless they know that notebook is there. If they do, they can borrow it. But then the next time I need it I wonder where it went, or when I get it back I wonder what happened to the missing articles."

With intranet connections, that material can be available to everyone in the firm all the time. Solo practitioners can benefit in different ways, through external connections to colleagues. Even though you have no partners to confer with, "you could have the expertise of a virtual group of lawyers anywhere," Tredennick says. Still, lawyers across the country are only beginning to tap into the opportunities for collaboration the Internet offers, he adds.

One attorney who is exploring those capabilities is Bob Hagness, a solo practitioner in Mondovi. "I'm doing work collaboratively with some of my clients," Hagness says. "I'll work with construction company clients on contracts, for example, where it's silly to think I know as much as they do about how some parts of it should be done. Likewise, there are parts I should do." He also collaborates with other lawyers on cases, shuttling documents back and forth through email. "We might exchange drafts several times a day," he says. "We don't want it to take two or three weeks, and have to pick up and put down a file several times to get refamiliarized with it. We want to get it done."

Hagness also sees the Internet as invaluable to him and other solos in "creating a sense of community," he says. "There's no reason to think I'd have more backup than I have right now if I were in a law firm of 10 or 20 or 50 lawyers, because I can go to WisBar or to one of my electronic mailing lists and say, 'I have a problem.' I'll get back some informed opinions from up to a dozen people in a day or so."

Other "Net" news

For many attorneys, WisBar, the State Bar's Web site, is "a playground where they can learn how to use the Internet," says Green Bay attorney Mark Pennow, chair of the Bar's Electronic Bar Services Committee. The survey found that 55 percent of all respondents, and 70 percent of those with Internet access, say they visit WisBar regularly. More than half of those with Internet access check into WisBar several times a month.

"We've tried over time, and will continue to try, to make it user-friendly," Pennow says, noting that WisBar gives step-by-step instructions for searching "with what some may say is a condescending level of instruction. But once you understand how a search engine works on WisBar, you can pop on any search engine, and you'll know what to do when you see blanks with a cursor and a search button ... even without all the explanation and coaching" that WisBar includes.

Attorney Ross Kodner of Milwaukee-based Microlaw, a law technology consulting company, says he's seen a dramatic change in the level of sophistication of Internet use among attorneys during the past year ­ even among those whose computer literacy may be lagging in other areas. "Part of it is that the public information and excitement about the Internet has caused everyone to at least go to look at Yahoo," Kodner says. "If you look at Yahoo, all of a sudden you know how to use Findlaw. If you know how to use Findlaw, that's the gateway to everything."

It doesn't surprise Kodner that the primary hands-on training need identified by survey respondents was learning how to do legal research on the Internet. (See Figure 2.) "Once they get their feet wet they get a sense of what else must be out there," he notes, "and they don't know how to get at it. The more they know, the more they know what they don't know."

Lawyers are becoming more Internet-savvy in a couple other ways, too, Kodner adds. One trend he notes is that attorneys use Lexis® or Westlaw® to do initial searching for primary case law. But once they have the hits they're looking for, they disconnect and go to other resources on the Internet, such as WisBar or federal court sites, where they can get the actual case law for free. "So they're spending less time on Lexis and Westlaw," Kodner says, "being much more cognizant of the fact that the meter is running."

Attorneys also are finding that, because of the Internet, they have clout to negotiate prices on Lexis and Westlaw packages. More attorneys are naming their price and getting it, Kodner reports. "Attorneys are figuring out that Lexis and Westlaw don't have monopoly power," he explains, "and that the Internet is a tremendous negotiating wedge to drive into a discussion with a Westlaw or Lexis representative" to get lower prices on their packages.

Next Page