Sneak Peak at Q3 Staffing Survey

After a long, uncertain summer, it appears that the dam is breaking for the E-Discovery industry. The Cowen Groups Q3 Staffing Report found that 35% of major law firms, and 29% of F500 Corporations, anticipate adding staff by years end. In both sectors, nearly half of respondents worked more hours in Q3 than Q2, 2009 – largely due to additional workflow.

Firms and corporations have realigned their strategy to focus on cautious expansion while simultaneously recognizing that continued reliance on existing staff can create long-term staff burnout and exodus.

If you’d like a copy of the report or a full rundown on the 175 law firms and 55 high fortune companies that were surveyed, please contact me (David@CowenGroup.com).

Q3 Staffing Trends Report

For the past year, The Cowen Group has been surveying the marketplace to determine staffing trends, in light of the tough times law firms, vendors and corporations have gone through.  We have just launched our Q3 survey and have some preliminary “tidbits” to share with you.  The good news for all, is that only a small fraction of our surveyed database plan on reducing staffing the upcoming quarter.  Next Wednesday we will have the comprehensive results of the survey to share with you, including data on work load, outsourcing, etc.

As I look forward, I realize that the data that we have is significant for all, but there are many other issues that concern our industry and we have the opportunity to examine those issues in depth.  I have partnered with Jeanette Slepian , former Sr. VP Sales and Marketing at Fios, to develop a comprehensive survey of our industry which will identify leading trends in not only staffing but spending on related litigation and e-discovery services.  What professional and IT-enabled services will law firms and corporations be investing in?  Will the trend of “vendor consolidation” gain further momentum in 2010?  These and numerous other critical issues will be analyzed in our first annual forecast. Stay tuned for more details.

P.S. Congratulations to Jared Coseglia, our Senior VP, for the first Episode of his Career Corner Podcast posted on ILTA… John Kapp (Shearman & Sterling), Jeannie Larrea-Manzano (Wachtell Lipton) and Brad Schaffel (WilmerHale) share their insight about the exciting evolution of their careers in the litigation support industry. Listen Here

Working Longer and Harder

In my session at ILTA on the future of Litigation Support, I asked how many people were working longer and harder today compared to six months ago. 70% of the group raised their hands.

This show of hands, combined with recent data collected by The Cowen Group, indicates that the Litigation Support industry has hit the bottom of the recession (I can’t speak for the entire legal industry or the economy at large). Most litigation support professionals are working harder and longer for one of two reasons:

1)      Because staff cuts have forced them to do the job of two or more people; or

2)      Because their organization has experienced a net increase in work.

Working long and harder, month after month, is not sustainable. Eventually, litigation support and E-Discovery departments will need to add headcount and expand their ranks. Is this expansion happening yet?

We invite you to participate in our Q3 Staffing Trends Survey which will be distributed next week. In it, we ask the following three questions:

1)      Are you and your team working harder and longer compared to three months ago?

2)      Do you plan to add headcount, reduce headcount or keep staffing levels the same between now and the end of the year?

3)      What is your greatest challenge entering the 4th quarter of 2009? Technology, Workflow/Process Improvement or People?

The Cowen Group’s Q2 Staffing Report found that nearly 1/3 of surveyed Litigation Support departments in the AmLaw 200 planned on adding staff before the end of 2009. I am looking forward to reporting the most recent data next week.

VENDORS NEED TO LEAD

New technologies and process have made, and are making great strides/improvements in reducing the volumes of data that must be reviewed by someone somewhere. Whether you’re in-house, onshore, farmshore or offshore – the quantity of documents to review is finally beginning to drop.

Unfortunately, the ability to fully utilize these new technologies & processes – Clearwell, EnCase, Recommind and others – is a different story. There simply are not enough people that have a deep and meaningful experience with these tools/technologies to satisfy the industry’s needs. The talent is scattered – some Corporate, some Vendor and a fair amount within Law Firms.

Why don’t we have more deep talent? The industry has simply grown too much too fast – there just hasn’t been time for the appropriate amount of talent to be trained and developed.

And to be truthful… I do not see much real training going on.

We’ve been here before. During the late 1990’s, when Microsoft and Cisco were taking over the world - corporations were installing new versions of software every 6-12 months and demanded employees with Microsoft and Cisco certifications. Understandably, when corporations (or anyone) spend millions/billions on new technologies and business process improvements, they want more than the local copy shop boys.

Back then most/many corporations paid for their employees to get those certifications. It was in their best interest and significantly cheaper than paying recruiter fees. Certification, $6,000 vs. recruiting fee, $25,000… it’s a no brainer. And many tech gurus paid for their own training because it represented a clear career path up.

Yet here we are 5 years into this E-Discovery explosion (2004 – 2009), in a reportedly $4B industry (growing/shrinking?) and there is no organized /recognized training.  If we do not address this issue/opportunity, we will return to the War for Talent we just witnessed from 2004 – 2008.

There is something terribly short sighted going on here.

 

What’s the solution? Ask me what I think vendors need to be doing in order to lead this industry.

 

I will be at ILTA from Sunday, August 23rd to Thursday, August 27th and am speaking with Joanne Lane , Ellen Polhamus and  Ruth Hauswirth on Tuesday at 1:30 PM on “The Future of Our Litigation Support Profession: What Lies Ahead?”

 

http://ilta.ebiz.uapps.net/personifyebusiness/EducationalProgram/SessionDetails/tabid/187/Default.aspx?productId=948

 

The answer is easier then you think.

 

David Cowen

Executive Search & Market Analysis

“We Know The Right People...  Right Now”

www.cowengroup.com

www.opportunityknocksblog.com

Godin's Great Job: Growing Your Customer Base

I thought you might appreciate the below Seths Godins article on growing a customer base…

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/05/deeper-or-wider.html

If you want to grow the size of your customer base, you need to confront the buffet dilemma.

Any decent buffet has foods that please 85% of the population. Meats, cheeses, potatoes... the typical fare.

Once your business hits a natural plateau, it’s tempting to invest in getting more people to come. And what most buffets do is double down. Now, they have bacon, plus they have beans with bacon and turkey-wrapped bacon. Now, instead of one chocolate cake, they have three.

This is essentially useless. You haven’t done anything to grow your audience. The base might be a little more pleased, but not enough to bring in any new business. And the disenfranchised (the vegans, the weight watchers, the healthy eaters, the kosher crowd) remain unmoved and uninterested. And one person like this out of a party of six is enough to keep all six away.

So, there are two ways to go. Much deeper, or a bit wider…

Deeper would mean a bacon-focused buffet, a dozen bacon dishes, including chocolate-covered bacon. Deeper would mean a chocolate-obsessed dessert bar, ten cakes, fondue, everything.

Deeper gets you people willing to drive across town to visit you. It’s remarkable. It’s not like every other buffet but a little bit bigger. It’s insanely over the top. People will bully their friends in order to get them to come.

The other choice is wider. Instead of adding a handful of dishes that mildly please the people you already have, why not add brown rice and tofu and vegetarian chili? Now you’ve opened the doors to that last 15%.

This thinking isn’t available only to buffet owners. It works for summer camps. Resorts. Conference centers. Spiritual institutions [and E-Discovery firms]. It works for any business that seeks to attract customers that come in groups where people have different wants and needs.

 

.....Do you have the right talent in place to execute your growth strategy?

 

E-Discovery dodges the bullet...

Of the 2100 layoffs since January 2009, less than 3% (60) have impacted E-Discovery and Litigation Support professionals. See Layoff Tracker for specific details.

Here's a quick overview of how we see E-Discovery staffing in the first quarter...

#1 - Most AmLaw 200 firms are holding off on permanent staffing.  This will increase the demand for contract employees and outside vendors for their E-Discovery work.

#2 - Corporate E-Discovery headcount remains flat as they continue to wrestle with budget cuts, layoffs and in-house E-Discovery planning. This should be good news for vendors and outside counsel.

#3 - Vendors are proactively and in some cases aggressively looking for talented sales and client services professionals. Good news for talented individuals that find themselves with a shaky firm.

The use of contract and temporary workers is typical during recessionary periods. If permanent staff cuts go deeper then contract staffing and outsourcing will continue to increase.

While this is not great news if you've been laid off it does offer firms the opportunity to hire experienced talent that is highly motivated and affordable.

I would like to continue gathering valid data points on staffing trends in the litigation support and E-Discovery community. But for this I need your help.

I'm particularly interested in hearing from Human Resource Managers and decision-makers at firms that have had layoffs and/or are using contract staff to fill in the gaps left by layoffs.

Please get in touch with me by e-mail at david@cowengroup.com. All contacts and communications will be kept confidential. 

Legal layoffs impact on E-Discovery

During recessionary periods the use of contract and temporary workers increase dramatically.

If you are looking for top talent that is availble immediately take a look at these 2 Litigation Support professionals that are ready for assignments...

 

Candidate #1: 

Litigation Support Analyst - $60/HR                                       

- Two years within an AmLaw 50 and 3+ years with a Tier-A Service Provider

- Designs and maintains Concordance, IPRO, Access and LiveNote databases.

- Utilizes Discover-e for native file and PST/TIFF conversions.

- Trains attorneys and paralegals on document review systems.

- Creates trial presentations and performs audio/video conversions.

- Serves as the main point of contact for vendors tasked with ESI processing/production.

FULL RESUME CLICK HERE

 

Candidate #2:

EDiscovery Litigation Support Specialist - $45/HR

-  Processes over 600GB of data.

-  Produces and runs small production in house using IPRO and LAW.

-  Manages all users and partitions the review workload throughout the firm's paralegal staff.

-  Trains attorney and paralegal on Concordance and LAW 5.0.

-  Manages all users and partitioned the review workload throughout the firm's paralegal staff.

FULL RESUME CLICK HERE

Black Thursday - 800 Law Firm Jobs Lost

Legal Layoffs - 800 Law Firm Jobs Lost in One Day

Almost 800 associates and legal staff nationwide returned home jobless Thursday after eight firms conducted mass layoffs, citing an unprecedented downturn in demand.

And the bloodletting is likely to continue. See Layoff Tracker for specific details.

Despite these record layoffs, contract staffing is actually on the rise. A recent poll by The Cowen Group revealed that demand for temporary Litigation Support, Paralegals and Contract Attorneys rose 15% in the month of January. Especially at AmLaw 200 firms with large complex litigation departments.

The use of contract and temporary workers is typical during recessionary periods and as these staff cuts go deeper contract staffing will continue to rise.

Managing Up, Up, and Away!

We’re instilled with the belief early on that we can accomplish anything as long as we work hard, work long, and work to deadline. However, in this more service-oriented work environment, understanding and incorporating the thought processes of those above you is just as important to the future of your career your own production.

If you are one of our clients or candidates you have heard this from us on an ongoing basis. Relationships are the fuel powering every day transactions. Developing alliances throughout your firm, not just your direct departmental contacts, will provide you the support you need to learn and master the political climate that you’ll navigate. But the most powerful and influential compatriot to have on your side is your boss. By understanding your boss’s point of view, as well as assimilating it into your style, you are signaling to them that you’re ready for advancement. What will come across is that you have the ability to think and strategize beyond your current position.

This is the process of Managing Up.   

Here are some helpful questions you can ask yourself to assist yourself into isolating what exactly is imperative to your boss:

  • What details does your boss pay attention to first and foremost?
  • What is expected from the people in positions you want to move into?
  • What questions do they ask of their direct reports and why?
  • What is their leadership style and how do they make decisions?
  • By which methods do they prefer to be informed of status updates (email, phone, in-person, etc.)?
  • How does your boss’ management style differ from yours? And what can you utilize in your own dealings?

The last query is the most critical. The real test to pass for the promotion you desire is if you are flexible and perceptive enough to adapt to your boss’ needs. What is important here is to remember that it is your job to develop a relationship with your boss, not the other way around, while demonstrating to them that you have the ability to function at a higher level...

…their level!  

Job Security in a Slowing Economy

With only 5 full months of 2008 on the books, the list of casualties from the slowing economy is growing.  The Department of Labor released statistics Friday revealing that the legal sector lost 1,100 jobs in the month of May.  These figures, when added to the 1,900 losses from April, indicate a volatile job market.

Despite this sharp reduction in workforce, I continue to see solid growth and demand in e-discovery and litigation support across the AmLaw 200. 

 The Cowen Group conducted a quick poll on Monday of litigation support/e-discovery hiring trends among 20 global law firms.  Our poll revealed the following:

  •            65% are aggressively hiring litigation support staff.
  •            20% are on plan and will continue to staff.
  •            15% are cautious and/or scaling back.

These results are precisely what I saw last year at this time. Indicating healthy hiring activity in the litigation support space despite the sluggish economy.

Although several clients acknowledged a decline in business and case loads, they were quick to point out that the increase in size, scope and complexity of cases were keeping their headcounts high.

Several of the firms polled responded that they were adding services and staff to their litigation support practices this year. 

There’s nothing like the DOJ, SEC, FBI and a sub-prime meltdown to give one a sense of job security. 


That Hiring Thing

You don't have to be an expert to know that the economy has hit a serious bump in the road.

Meanwhile, the jitters have spread throughout law firms everywhere. Budgets are being trimmed, headcount is being carefully controlled, and nothing is moving on the fast track.

So what does this all mean for key staffing? The good news is that litigation support hiring remains steady as she goes. Most of my clients are being asked to do more in-house work. This means maintaining current litigation-support staffing levels--or even adding meaningful key team members--is the play of the day.

That's good news in a downward market. What's your firm's power plan? Let me know

Your New Role, Raise & Staff

IP continues to grow at double digits and so does the demand for Litigation Support talent required to perform such work.

As law firms continue to add talent and clients to their IP practices, Litigation Support professionals will see a dramatic increase in workflow and new client demands.

And I do not mean scanning and coding. IP clients are highly sophisticated and demand more.
This means meeting your firm's clients.

The client's CIO will demand to meet you and the rest of your firm to be sure that you can handle the case. This includes your knowledge of various strategies, data collection options, online tool selection, server space, backup solutions, EXPERIENCE with similar matters and the firm wide talent to handle the case.

The lawyers have the easy role here. Try spending 2 hours being grilled by a Biotech CIO in Indianapolis. It’s 5 o’clock somewhere.

The King & Spalding link below is just example of this war for talent. The hidden story is how the role of Litigation Support will change and become more critical to winning the assignment (top line revenue) and ultimately the case.

Yes, the case. IP clients don’t tend to blink. They go to court and litigate.

Need more budget for staff, tools and training? Here is your business case:

King & Spalding Raids Rival for IP Talent [From The Daily Report Online, registration required]

King & Spalding, looking to beef up its intellectual property and biotechnology practices, hired three attorneys from cross-town rival Kilpatrick Stockton and may be scoping out more hires in those areas.

King & Spalding wants to grow its IP practice group within three years to about 150 members from the current 100 lawyers and patent agents, said King & Spalding partner Courtland L. Reichman, head of the firm's IP group.

Lead, Follow, or Get Bought.

Are Paralegals the Right Choice?

However you want to say it, paralegal or legal assistant, these guys/gals are “IT” as far as litigation support goes. They are the future. And they are “It” without being IT professionals, first and foremost.  How so?

As with any position, you have to find the right person regardless of background. There is a window of opportunity here to create a career path that fosters industry-specific technical growth and expertise for paralegals so the right ones can move into the ever-changing and complex world of Litigation Support. In doing so, even the ones who won’t go in the more technical direction of Litigation Support will only be that much better at what they do.

Let’s face it, only a very specific type of IT professional can potentially excel in the world of Litigation Support. Will that person ever truly understand why electronic data discovery is being done and what these vast document productions are all about? Will that person have the ear of the lead attorney and associates on the case? Will that person be accepted as a biller by the client? Bottom line, is that IT professional connected enough to the business process that determines the technical process for case management?

Paralegals manage cases. For decades, they’ve managed obscene volumes of paper. So, as the world has become digitized, it’s only natural that they adapt to the medium that contains the potential ‘smoking gun’. Not only is it natural, but it’s essential. Ask any litigator and he/she will tell you that their assigned paralegal must understand the issues of the case, must be connected to the discovery process, and the reasons behind it. In order to manage it, they now have to be able to understand the technology involved—the ways of harnessing vast amounts of electronic data, the complexities of email data, and chain of custody. In addition, they have to know how to handle hybrid cases of electronic data and traditional paper documents that predate electronic storage and are too fragile to be scanned. The ones that are ready to take that understanding to the next level make the most natural litigation support specialists. These are the ones who can leverage their experience in running a case and make the best decisions about electronic data discovery. EDD is so much more than the technical processes behind the computer forensics and data management.

It’s all about the details

Whether you go the route of IT professionals or paralegals to staff your Litigation Support department, you better have individuals who extremely precise, detail-oriented, thorough, and who operate with a sense of urgency with the ability to remain poised under pressure. And don’t forget the value of their interpersonal skills.

Remember, just like with a reprographics center, you can always hire the technical talent to do the underlying work - just as you would for copying and scanning. Only this time, you’re calling in people with higher technical credentials to link databases with images or to use an ASP to turn out vast amounts of email for review.

Finally, many paralegals don’t want to go to law school and don’t want to be a lawyer.

Imagine if there was a forward thinking firm that could offer a career track to these highly talented employees.

Litigation Support Manager Makes Partner?

Complex litigation cases have become so large and complicated that they require an extra set of teams, both legal and litigation support. We now see major to mid-sized law firms and corporations beginning to add head-count, with additional layers at leadership levels.

In litigation support we're seeing a trend toward augmenting the in-house arsenal of talent with supervisors, coordinators and managers -- thereby elevating the current Manager to Director -- which is worth $125k - $250k.

The Cowen Group's ongoing informal salary survey suggests that litigation support directors are now being valued on par with nonequity partners -- and billed accordingly. Not to put too fine a point on it, IT leadership positions now have reached approximate parity with first, second and third year associates.

This is new. And it's happening now because no matter how critical the latest information technology may be, it will never get the job done all by itself. IT is the gateway to successful forensics and e-data management. But it is just the gateway -- through which your talented people pass. So litigation support hiring is more and more about people skills, and leadership that can spark collaborative process, in addition to the familiar technology component.

Make no mistake. It's your people who drive the process -- not legal technology. Litigation support people with deep knowledge and expertise in the use of technology, and litigation support leadership, experienced in the interpersonal process of lawyer-client relations. Together with technology, litigation support people can help accomplish your firm's revenue objective.

And that's what makes litigation support billable -- big time.

We Get What We Pay For

So, why are Litigation Support salaries so far out of whack? Well...

First year associates' salaries are moving up to $145,000. And spikes in associates' salaries are driving numerous other key salaries. Because this trend is not about inflation. It is about supply and demand. In other words, we get what we pay for.

Last year 79 AmLaw 100 firms embarked upon the NYC adventure -- taking a page from the Latham & Watkins playbook. KPMG, Navigant and Ernst &Young busied themselves tallying figures and projecting projections. But old-fashioned accounting will never get Navigant out front in EDD. Because electronic data discovery is nothing like accounting. What's more, clients are beginning to understand that. Clients (i.e., the Fortune 500 -- aka America’s serial litigants) are not getting what they need. They're tired of big bills, missed deadlines, and poor results. And they're making themselves heard, demanding competent litigation support from their law firm relationships -- or they are going shopping.

See my blog: The Fortune 500 Go Shopping

Salaries are rising because demand for elite litigation support is raging, from top firms and clients alike. The supply pool is growing, and will continue to grow to meet demand throughout 2006, as deadlines near for the implementing of new federal regulations in the industry. But truly exceptional talent is still a premium.


Salaries Jump 10%: Who Knew?

First year salaries at top firms across the board are now up to $145,000, writes Anthony Lin, in an article posted at Law.com. Salaries spiked after last week's lead by Sullivan & Cromwell, and not just at New York firms, as expected. Manhattan firms Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; and Cahill, Gordon & Reindel; were joined by the New York offices of Washington, D.C.'s Covington & Burling and Miami's Greenberg Traurig, suggesting that most non-New York firms will follow suit.

Consultants Towers Perrin, Mercer, et al, calculate 3% as the right amount for any salary increase pegged to inflation. But these salaries represent a whopping 10% jump. So what accounts for the disconnect between HR projections and the game on the ground? And why now?

Towers Perrin, Mercer, and their like, produce impressive surveys of salaries in static space. Space that does not move and change. But the world of litigation support and electronic data discovery is dynamic space, volatile and intensely demanding. Salaries move as fast as a New York minute. So the traditonal numbers make old news in the War for Talent.

The War for Talent is pushing up salaries and raising the stakes on proactive, real-world solutions. In this climate it's more important than ever for firms to be able to attract – and retain – the right people, right now.

Beyond The Paper Chase

Steven C. Bennett of Jones Day in New York is speaking truth to power in his recent National Law Journal article posted at Law.com about "Teaching Tech Skills to Lawyers". Lawyers can no longer avoid committing both resources and attention to the specific purpose of becoming "tech savvy". For even among a new generation of lawyers who have been technology end-users all their lives, the range of typical technological understanding is pretty much exhausted by email, cell phones, ipods, and online shopping.

 And why not? "Essentially," writes Bennett, "what law students learn about technology during law school they learn on their own." And veteran lawyers have precious little to choose from in the way of technology skills training sponsored by bar associations, law firms and CLE providers.

There's a reason why interviews with policy makers are staged before a bank of West and Shepards systems, and why law students in 2006 pass DVD's of 1974's Oscar-winnning The Paper Chase from hand to hand. In traditional law firms, and in most law schools, the paper document is still stubbornly regarded as coin of the realm. But its time is already passed.

Relentlessly ongoing technological developments have the potential to increase lawyer productivity significantly. LexisNexis, for example, has just launched its new Toolbar for Attorneys. IT folks and lowly non-legals welcome this customization of a common browser peripheral. And it's just one of hundreds of litigation support technologies that will automate and facilitate the 21st century practise of law. But many senior partners will be flummoxed. That must change, says Bennett, or once venerable firms will find themselves at unrecoverable competitive disadvantage.

Both the corporate community and the courts are out ahead of the legal profession at large on this issue. Law firms are finding -- sometimes the hard way -- that courts and regulatory agencies already expect law firms to be able to file and retrieve information electronically. And electronic communication inside and outside of the firm runs smack into crucial privacy implications of modern data management. So clients increasingly demand diverse technological services and compatibilities from their law firms to maintain compliance.

Lawyers must finally accept the essential value of networking and sharing, even embracing soft-sided principles of knowledge management, in order to remain viable in the current market. Electronic data rooms and shared editing of deal documents must be coordinated to online discovery document repositories. Massive volumes of case information must be captured and sorted, and many a tech-savvy legal assistant or litigation support manager has watched a case crash and burn, only because a senior lawyer mismanaged meta-data and/or discovery documents.

Make no mistake: technology will still be handled by IT and litigation support, but it is no longer acceptable for partners not to understand -- and endorse -- what they are up to -- however much retooling that may require.

Lawyers v. Clients: Kumbayah or ¡Hasta la Vista!?

Law firms are making nice with clients, as usual, but some clients are saying ¡hasta la vista! anyway. What's changed here?

We're now seeing a significant trend, just in the comings and goings of top litigation support managers and directors. Lit support top guns are spending more and more time out of the office. They're visiting clients, in clients' own offices. Because clients are becoming harder to please. Law firms are under ever-greater pressure to prove their capabilities in managing ever-more complex litigation and discovery matters -- which are ever-more technological. So firms are sending top lit support professionals into the field.

More importantly, lit support can smooth out the dialogue -- when there is any -- between lawyer and client. Back at the firm, lit support hears lawyers complain that the client just doesn’t get it: "We know what we're doing. Documents! Briefs! We've been doing it this way for a century!" In the field, clients tell lit support that the law firm just doesn't get it: "I'm on a budget here! Why can't they handle the discovery electronically? Why can't they coordinate with our IT system? What am I paying for?!"

The ability to speak a language that is understood by both lawyers and the clients they serve is increasingly unique to litigation support. So more and more lit support directors are pulling Kumbayah duty -- bridging the gap with expert hand-holding.

Meanwhile, back at the firm, there's a draft whistling through the vacancy created by frequently offsite senior lit support personnel. Staff toils away diligently as usual, but with no one at the helm -- no one to manage the care and feeding of their ever-increasing numbers. This trend is creating the need for a second tier of lit support management. At the same time it is driving up billables for litigation support directors -- up to the level of senior associates, and even into partner range.

The demand for qualified lit support professionals has never been greater. At The Cowen Group we expect the current explosion of new media information technology only to intensify that demand throughout 2006, heating up the "war for talent", and the pressure for fluent communication between lawyers and their clients.

It's All About the Talent

Reporting recently on Fulbright & Jaworski's annual survey of litigation trends, Legal Times revealed that EXPERTISE is the top factor corporate counsel looks for in their outside litigators.

Technology can be bought, but it won't work at all without technological expertise. And top firms understand it's really all about something more than mere expertise. It's talent. Talent, as any Fortune 500 CEO will testify, is more crucial than any technology. With the right talent -- i.e. the right people -- you'll be able to implement and stay current with whatever technology is right for your firm. Because what's really right for your firm is more than either the technology or the expertise to implement it. It's the talented people who understand not just leading edge technology, but also, what unique and time-tested cogs and wheels make the firm tick like a well-oiled clock.

Talent can also be bought, of course, but, again, we're talking about people here -- that elusive recipe of secret ingredients that may or may not meet even the most meticulous Myers-Briggs prognostications. And here's the thing: no amount of money or incentive will purchase the right people if you can't FIND them.

Cloaking! What is it good for?

"...Absolutely nothin! Say it, say it, say it again, now..." (Apologies to the late great Edwin Starr)

About this time last year the blogosphere lit up with natterings about an uptic in lateral hiring. How would law firms hang onto their poachable associates? In an unfortunate imitation of the worst of twentieth-century geopolitics, some of the most venerable firms opted to wall in their talent, limiting the contact information about associates provided on their web sites, or scaling back information in law firm directories. Latham & Watkins' web site, e.g., provided direct numbers for partners but only general numbers for associates, and no associate bios or practise particulars.

By June, LawFirm, Inc. was reporting an improvement, or at least a promise of improvement, "within the context of data protection and data privacy protocols," among the AmLaw 100's top 10. And top blawgers acknowledge a movement toward greater transparency throughout 2005.

But as yet another fiscal year turns over, Law.com still headlines with "Cloaking...", the cyber-term for playing hide-and-seek with key information. One signal that the term and practise is standard and persists, is that everyone knows the code. That is, any firm that resorts to cloaking pretty much sends an engraved invitation to recruiters - like carrion to buzzards in the desert. It's true that efforts have been made. At the Latham & Watkins' site there's more associate 411 now - but you still can't find it without a map.

That's a waste of any firm's investment in its own future. Lateral hiring is a serious concern, certainly, and the consequences can be far-reaching. But outside counsel is a boon only when and if in-house resources have been fully advantaged, and when imported talent fills practise area gaps and meshes with a firm's existing dynamic. The costs of attrition are too high not to go deep for talent, before going wide. And the more that partner-worthy associates are put to work on high-visibility matters for core clients, the less "poachable" they will be.

Besides, didn't you know? "Something there is that doesn't love a wall (thanks again, Robert Frost)..."