More than anything else, workflow is method by which an organization can formalize and codify its policies and procedures in the systems that it implements to support its practices.  But in practice, workflow seems to be manifest as large-footprint technologies that are out of the reach of all but the largest firms, because its costs are so astronomical.

Why should implementing a technology that designed to use and present systems you already own and use be such an expensive proposition?  Even systems that advertise workflow components built-in seem to use tremendous poetic license in making those claims.  Most current IP Management systems claim to have “robust” workflow functionality; but absolutely no IP Management system on the market today can so much as provide a built-in faculty for automating a task (say, opening a new matter) based on an external trigger.

Workflow is the opportunity to make transformative practice changes.  We should have higher expectations.

My vision for automated docket clearance would go something like the following. Please note, all current “next-gen” IP Management systems (the thin-client, web-based collaborative models) are built to manage the following process; they’re just not deployed with any imagination:

1. Lawyers would log in to their “My Matters” screen in the morning and review their due dates for the day (or week or month – we should all be clearing dates well in advance, right?)
2. For each due date, the lawyer would review the matter, complete the due work, and then annotate the docket item directly with three pieces of information: 
   1. A Clearance Instruction (this should be pre-defined dropdown list in the system)
   2. Clearance notes
   3. An attached electronic copy of the original work product or scanned physical document (in the integrated document management system)
   4. An instructed due date would automatically fall of the lawyer’s To-Do list.  An empty To-Do list for the given period indicates that the Attorney has completed his work responsibilities.
   5. An instructed due date would automatically be routed to the Docket Department for review.  Since the firm has placed policies on the routing criteria, the docket department can be assured that the information requirements to clear a date have been completed.
   6. The docket department logs in to their “Outstanding Due Dates” screen in the morning. This is the list of all completed To Do Items from the Attorneys.  Reviewing and completing the date clearance removes the dates from the Docket Department’s To-Do list.
   7. The process is completed in real time, and with no paper being routed. All actions, triggers, and documents are tracked and audited in the system for future reference.

Initiative # 5:  Automated Docket Clearance

Well, I might be stretching the definition of “quick and dirty” here, but I really think that one of the most transformational changes an IP practice can make is to leverage their IP Management system to implement a workflow for the automation of the docket clearance process.  Docket clearance is fairly routine across all IP practices; the basic is premise goes like this:

1. Attorneys receive their docket reports on a regular basis, say weekly and daily, and each day, they must review and “clear” their due dates for the day by a given daily deadline, usually between noon and 2:00 pm. 
2. The docket group begins to make phone calls around noon to all attorneys who have not yet responded to their deadlines for the day. 
3. Attorneys clear their due dates by marking up the docket reports (in reality, this is likely the secretary performing this task), and then sending a copy of the filing or correspondence to the docket department for review. 
4. The docket department will often need additional information or clarification of responses; several back and forth phone conversations ensue.
5. The docket department then “clears” the due dates by entering the response date in the IPM system and annotating it with the Attorney’s notes. 
6. The whole process is generally completed by 5:00 or 6:00 pm.  (This is ideal, though. Many IP practices run clearance backlogs in days, weeks, or sometimes even months(!))

All current generation IP Management systems advertise workflow capabilities, yet none actually address this “low-hanging fruit” – is there a more “boots on the ground” process to tackle??

Initiative # 4:  Review your docket progressions

In my many years of working with IP docket groups, both in-house and in law firms, I’ve observed that there are as many approaches to managing docket progressions as there are IP practices.  Some have little structure and docket most actions as “ad-hoc”, while other engineer every possible interaction with the docket system to anticipate every plausible scenario.  Of course, you can likely predict that my suggestion would be to find a balance that’s middle-of-the-road.  What I can say is that most every IP practice can benefit from a review of their docketing procedures. 

I generally recommend that all IP dockets be governed by policies and procedures agreed upon and published by a docket committee.  It’s possible to meet every practitioner’s needs with today’s modern IP management systems, but so many progressions configurations get convoluted by over-engineered processes.  The results are overly complicated and long docket reports that, to the dismay of risk managers everywhere, are largely ignored because they’re impractical.  My suggestions for corralling the docketing beast:

1. Use your progressions as a framework:  don’t over-engineer the process, and allow well-trained docket staff to manage exception scenarios.
2. Focus your dockets on official dates and compliance with regulatory requirements for reminders, extensions, etc.  No non-official dates in the docket, and no personal dates.
3. Use integrations with calendaring and messaging system to accommodate individual needs. By integrating your docket system with Outlook Exchange, you can push deadlines to users, and allow them to manage reminders, ticklers, etc. individually in their own calendars.  They can also use the Outlook calendar for managing case-related appointments, but appropriately separately from the firm official docket.

Initiative # 3:  Automated Correspondence

You might note by the fact that this is my third installment document assembly-based improvements that I think this is a major functional cornerstone for any process improvement initiative.  And again, if you’ve mostly kept up with technology over the past 5 or so years, you’re likely to realize that most of your enterprises systems already installed provide this functionality built-in.  So, in addition to creating documents to leverage your existing information systems, why not automate their use as much as possible?

So how do you automate correspondence?  The key is to initiate “triggers” in your systems to send an email or formatted report (or letter) to a recipient whenever you perform an action in the system.  Here are some “real world” ideas:

1. Send an email to clients to advise them of new correspondence from the PTO whenever you docket new mail (with a scan of mail attached).
2. Send an email to clients to advise them when you’ve completed a filing (with a copy of the document, of course).
3. Send a confirmation message to a client (or an agent) when you’ve opened a new matter in your system.
4. Send an acknowledgement when you’ve closed a matter in your system.

I think you get the idea.  In practice, everything we do in our systems is reflective of some communication we have with clients, agents, agencies, or partners.  We can automate all of those correspondences, realizing real practice efficiencies, to be sure, but also managing risk by ensuring that the communications have in fact taken place.

Initiative #2:  Get a handle on your Forms

Continuing our last discussion on document assembly, few tasks are more important than to review and “certify” all client-facing and official form document formats.  Most firms use a mish-mash of forms cobbled together over many years, developed by different attorneys across practices, acclimated from acquired practice groups, or added to the repertoire by previous “process engineering” initiatives.  Today, however, these forms libraries are generally unwieldy, and rarely represent current firm policies or regulatory office requirements.  Believe it or not, there are still a preponderance of firms that are using proprietary document formats for USPTO official filing forms.

Get a handle on your forms!  It’s time to pull them all out, review them, and revise them all.  Establish a current set of “approved” forms goes a long way to making work more efficient, and to mitigate risk.  It’s about more than making the forms look good (although a uniform and attractive set of correspondence do go a long way to establishing brand identity) – use the opportunity to formalize and codify practice policy and procedure. You’ll ensure that not only the appropriate language is used, but also that the correspondence in fact occurs.  These are all also strong functions of an effective risk mitigation strategy as well.

“There are two problems: One is that that market is gone because no one has money to speculate,” Laurie said. “The other problem is that the platform was inherently inefficient for high-value transactions because of the limited opportunity for diligence.”

I think I took a stronger stand on this, but essentially Laurie and I agree.  Of course, I think there’s still lots of room for imagination in solving the real IP issue of our day:  how do we get good ideas and innovation to market without having to own a bank to fund the process?  Are we suffocating innovation with ”business”??

Initiative #1:  Document Assembly

One of the easiest ways to realize true technological advantage from the systems you already own and manage is to leverage them for the propagation of information in the work product you create every day.  We generally call this competency “document assembly.”  But the notion is simple:  users generally re-create the information stored in your IP management, case management, accounting, CRM and other systems many times over every day.  Virtually every current system in each of these categories provides some document assembly functionality.  So it stands to reason that one of the easiest ways to gain quick technological leverage is to expand the use of document assembly to incorporate all routine forms, transmittals, and client correspondence. It can cut work times on these documents by an average of 85%.  Now, what if we charged a fixed billable rate for each form? . . .

Now that the business of law has been challenged in the most fundamental ways by the current economic crisis, one thing seems glaringly obvious:   corporate clients are flocking en-masse not to the large Mega-firms with the top-of-the-food-chain lawyers, but to the mid-size and regional firms. Large law firms are laying off lawyers in numbers never before seen, cancelling summer associate programs, deferring first-year starts, and even cutting salaries.  All discretionary spending at large law firms has all but ceased.  Mid-size firms, however, are thriving!  They’ve always known that they could provide the same quality service as their large firm counterparts at a fraction of the price, with less leverage, and provide more time for relationships with their clients. 

Their clients are noticing too.