Document Assembly & Case Management Blog

FREE is not FREE.  We in the legal practice management community live in a “bubble”.  Because of our “unique needs” and “limited budgets” lawyers and professional service organizations, have been able to attract a unique set of software tools for drafting our documents and managing our business.  Among these tools are document assembly software packages like HotDocs, GhostFIll, DealBuilder and Exari.  And among the practice management tools are ones like Time Matters, Amicus Attorney and PracticeMaster.  These tools are well developed, with development histories of over a decade or two decades of use.  And these tools are “Rapid Development” platforms that enable developers and consultants to build powerful and highly customized solutions for their clients.

It is true there are OTHER tools that can be used for managing contact information and for automating forms.  These other tools are “free” since many of them are included with the licenses to products many already use.  InfoPath is included with the enterprise version of Microsoft Office; SharePoint Services is included with many versions of Windows Server. And because these tools are “free” and because larger organizations have dedicated programming staff to build solutions with these tools, there is a tendency outside of LEGAL, to use these tools instead. THIS is a mistake.

Over the years of working with HotDocs we have encountered many issues with the basic design of HotDocs, client requests and what not, that have required creative solutions.  And in so doing, we have changed our approach from one that centered around “documents” to one that centers around data and workflow.  In so doing, we have substantially changed the way that we code in HotDocs, using methods and approaches that arise from other coding languages and programming principals.  We have found HotDocs to be flexible and powerful enough to support, for example, the use of common elements across multiple templates, use of templates as reusable objects, using local and global variables, internal databases, and dynamic indexing and cross-references.  Such features are not required for basic template design.  However, there use leads to more user-friendly interviews, more dynamic data entry, and the ability to design templates and interviews that reflect and respond to the data input.

Over the past week, I have dabbled my toes in the world of social networking.  I have not yet activated my facebook profile (bashasys) or sought my “friends”, but I have looked as some of the more narrow market social networking tools.  The problems is that many of the tools are TOO open.  That means lotsa people to follow, lotsa posts to sift through, and oodles of time to waste. For that reason, my recent discovery of “groups” in a number of these sites heralds a change in my opinion of them.

As part of the HotDocs Wizards group on Linked in, I have now made my blog, Document Assembly (and Case Management) available on Linked In.  For those who don’t know about LinkedIn groups, the HotDocs Wizards group is a place where REAL HotDocs developers can meet to share ideas and even business prospected.  In the past two weeks, I have been asked to post two job offerings to the group.  It may be that is only a trickle, but enough trickles turn into streams, and streams feed into rivers.

AS PUBLISHED IN TECHNOLAWYER : With the recent state of the economy, many companies are tightening their belt — and law firms are no exception. But sometimes you have to spend money to make money. According to legal technology consultant Seth Rowland, now is the time to redouble legal document automation initiatives. In this comprehensive two-part series, Seth explores document automation, first from a technology perspective, and then from a business case perspective. This week, Seth explains how to get started, constructing a bridge between mere templates to a full automation system. This article contains 1,684 words.

AS PUBLISHED IN TECHNOLAWYER: With the recent state of the economy, many companies are tightening their belt — and law firms are no exception. But sometimes you have to spend money to make money. According to legal technology consultant Seth Rowland, now is the time to redouble legal document automation initiatives. In this comprehensive two-part series, Seth explores document automation, first from a technology perspective, and then from a business case perspective. Published on November 25, 2008, Part 1 explained how to get started. Today in Part 2, Seth returns to discuss the Return on Investment ("ROI") for document automation initiatives. This article contains 1,929 words.

As a document assembly consultant, I am often contacted by solo or small attorney firms who are overloaded with work, champing at the bit to get a Document Assembly system, realize the value but are understandably nervous at the cost. And, they should be. Creation of a good document assembly system is expensive in both time and money. Your law school education wasn’t cheap, setting up your office wasn’t cheap and setting up a potential profit generating document assembly system that will become absolutely integral to your practice won’t be cheap either.

AS IT APPEARED IN TECHNOLAWYER:

Buying a new pair of shoes is fairly simple — you pick out styles you like, try them on, and go with the pair that fits and looks best. But picking out shoes and picking out a document assembly program are two entirely different animals. In this article, technology consultant and HotDocs expert Seth Rowland takes the guesswork out of your search and arms you with all you need to know about the newest edition of LexisNexis’ popular document assembly software — HotDocs 2006. Seth gives you the lowdown on the pros and cons as well as his wish list for future editions. Whether you’re new to document assembly or an experienced coder, we think you’ll find Seth’s exhaustive review helpful in your evaluation process. This article contains 2,753 words.

In a recent article in the New York Times magazine, it was reported that China had ended a policy of official censorship of the press.  Said the Chinese Government official. We believe that our journalists are responsible journalist who understand what is in the best interests of China.  As such, we no longer require that all news copy be reviewed by government censors prior to publication. This was exciting news ... but it required a reading of the fine print to understand what had happened. And the more I read the fine print, the more I realized that something similar had happened in America, both in the public press and other forums of commercial speech.

In a recent TechnoRelease, entitled “TR: Document Assembly: Let’s Be Frank.”, Roy Lasris, President of Innovative Software Products of Virginia, the developer of Pathagoras, wrote the following

Seth Rowland, a well recognized document assembly guru and multiple TechnoLawyer Contributor of the Year outlines in an article published in the September 27, 2005 TechnoFeature 13 discreet steps needed to implement an effective interview driven document assembly system. Seth implores those who are considering document assembly to find the time to implement all steps. Failure to do so will result in less than an optimal system.

I thank him for that quote. He then continued:

As a busy attorney, you may have neither the time nor the inclination to invest that kind of energy without having a guaranteed outcome. As academically accurate as he may be, Seth’s approach is simply contrary to (1) human nature and (2) the nature of most law offices. If you cannot or will not find the time to do it, then you won’t do it.

It is there that I disagree, both with his interpretation of my article, and his conclusion that real a substantial time investment in document assembly will not be rewarded by substantial multiples in profits for any law firm that makes such an investment.