Integrating KM: Are you feeling lucky?

A masterclass detailing how the integration of knowledge-management data and applications can enhance client-facing systems and increase competitive advantage.

By Ali Shahidi, regional director of information technology, Bingham McCutchen LLP

Knowledge management (KM) in its broadest definition has long existed in law firms in the form of vertical applications. Such applications typically serve one purpose and serve it well. Take the example of a library card catalogue, which is considered to be the most basic form of KM application. A non-integrated vertical application – the library card catalogue in this case – is focused, simple, efficient and easy to use. Such an application requires minimal user input, minimal user training, does not produce any unwanted results (white noise) and gets the results that one is looking for fast. A non-integrated vertical application consistently produces highly relevant results. Additionally, such applications are almost similar to the ‘I’m Feeling Lucky’ feature/button of Google, with 100 per cent relevancy, 100 per cent accuracy and perfect ‘luck’.

Where is the value in integration?

Audit of KM applications and evaluation of KM processes in law firms typically reveals that there are:

Many silos of vertical knowledge;
Multiple instances of vertical-knowledge processes;
Multiple non-integrated vertical-KM applications.

Although each one of the knowledge silos, knowledge processes and KM applications have sufficient depth, there is minimal integration across them. For example, a typical law firm has extensive data in each one of its financial, document management, case management and marketing applications. Each one of those applications contains valuable historical data that can be used to extrapolate future vertical decisions from past activities. There is a clear limitation when dealing with each one of those applications only in its own context. Once those four applications in this case are integrated, the value of the information that can be extrapolated from the integrated platform quadruples. It is through knowledge integration that basic operational applications can be turned into a true business-decision-support system, a system that can answer complex (and sometimes very political) questions such as: ‘Whose work product has had the most favourable outcome for the most profitable client?’ ‘Which marketing activity has had the most impact on the most profitable client?’ ‘What is truly my least profitable work-product/practice group business?’ ‘What will the future hold?’

How to integrate

The general-purpose enterprise-search applications, such as the Google Appliance, are not successful in solving the integration challenge in law firms as they only attempt to connect and correlate the underlying data (and not the processes) across disconnected entities and systems. Categorisation of data through custom-built taxonomies for information portals is another method of integration. This method lacks automation. Information portals may have process integration but lose their functionality as information gets lost and those who need answers cannot find them. Contextual-search applications are more successful in guiding users toward the answers. Such applications search across the underlying data matrix and the process matrix to produce meaningful, value-added ‘integrated’ results. Regardless of the integration approach, there is no substitute for the human element and intelligence in using ‘actionable results’ to take ‘actions’.

Automating data and process integration

In addition to implementing an integrated contextual-search application, the key to successful KM integration is automating the process of intelligent-data collection from user-facing applications. In the case of a user-facing search application, lawyer search behaviour can be monitored to improve relevancy and integration. Online legal-research providers use their extensive user-search metrics to make business decisions and forecast industry trends. In addition to searching and working on work-product, there are many other activities that lawyers take part in during the course of a day, which can be additional integration triggers. For example, phone calls made or received can automatically populate marketing activities; e-mails sent or received can automatically populate case-related activities; work-product or e-mail content can automatically populate expertise databases. As with any technology investment, one has to be mindful of the point of diminishing returns. How much integration is too much? A highly-integrated KM platform that integrates many systems and processes becomes a vertical application itself because of security and data access limitations. In addition to managing ethical walls across integrated applications, law firms are internally very protective of the data that can be exposed across ranks, practice groups and operational departments.

Last word in integration: Competitive advantage of client-facing integrated KM applications

Clients are, and should be, the ultimate beneficiaries of KM integration efforts. In a highly competitive environment for legal work, law firms that add value by behaving as business advisers in addition to acting as legal advisers have a better chance of maintaining their existing clients and getting new ones. Law firms’ historical knowledge of their clients’ business is therefore a highly marketable asset. For many leading firms, such business advice is now in the form of integrated client-facing KM applications. Those applications present information and knowledge about the clients’ businesses in more ways than before. Law firms that succeed in presenting the knowledge of their own client back to the client will have a competitive advantage over others. Integration of KM data and processes makes that ideal a possibility.

Ali Shahidi is regional director of information technology at Bingham McCutchen LLP. He can be contacted at ali.shahidi@bingham.com