Digital White Papers

ANOTHER LOOK AT PRECEDENT MANAGEMENT good clause library. Since fully automated document assembly only helps the first out of the drafting gate, how could we ease the laborious and timeconsuming task of reviewing documents prepared by others? KMS applies sophisticated search and analysis software to deconstruct, analyze and compare existing deal documents. It helps speed the process of identifying common and divergent clauses, and by flagging expected terms that are missing. We are excited about the potential this new technology holds for improving the process of generating templates, building clause libraries and benchmarking both internal and external documents. on billable attorney time was the biggest barrier to robust precedent collections, from both the cost and availability perspectives. Improved precedent management required shifting, to the extent appropriate and practical, some tasks from high-priced attorneys to either technology or quality, required greater investments in money and time than technologies that presume a degree of informed judgment by seasoned attorneys. So, for example, generating a reference standard with alternate clauses that would be valuable to experienced attorneys likely has a lower entry cost lower-cost resources, or some combination of the two. A companion tenet was that some degree of attorney input and expertise in the precedent generation and maintenance process is critical. Informed decisions about how and where to focus attorney efforts would be a significant component of effective precedent management. than converting a moderately complex agreement into a questionnaire-driven automated template. Of course, factors such as ease-of-use, anticipated volumes and many other business drivers may trump entry cost in specific decision-making. WHEN DO YOU DO WHAT? The third prong of our initiative involved crafting a framework to guide us in targeting appropriate and cost-effective solutions to specific use cases. Again we enlisted the added brain-power of a recognized expert in the field, Kingsley Martin, to challenge our thinking and help us make sense of the many moving parts to the puzzle. Knowing Kingsley is the principal of KMStandards, we imposed a strict product-agnostic requirement on his engagement. As many of you know from personal experience, Kingsley is a true knowledge management thought leader with no qualms about adhering to such requirements. Our precedent plan was built on several basic tenets. First was a reaffirmation that the demand Another foundational principle, although not a hard and fast rule, was that implementing fully automated solutions for use by less-experienced attorneys or non-lawyers, without sacrificing Finally, we extensively explored possible resourcing models and new roles not only for supporting and administering the various technology tools, but also for assuming the more routine template-creation tasks historically performed by billable attorneys.

• Cover