Conferencing in a Law Firm
by Vince Kimball

Gallagher & Gallagher -- the law firm that I work for in
Boston, Massachusetts -- is a twenty attorney firm specializing
in insurance defense work. We have about twenty-five support
people and are associated with a four or five person private
investigation firm which handles investigative work for us and
for some of the insurance claims offices in the Boston area. We
have been using our conferencing system for two years.


APPLICATIONS
------------

We use our network for two principal applications: a forum
for discussing case handling and legal issues and a vehicle for
client communications.

We post a discussion item on each new case summarizing it,
and the attorney handling the case adds responses as the case
progresses describing what is happening and his impressions of
the case. Other attorneys are kept informed of what is happening
in the office and are free to add comments and ask questions.

We also post discussion items on legal issues of note and on
cases and articles from outside sources that the attorneys have
found interesting.

Our second application is client communications. We have set
up a conference for a client organization which needs close
contact and cooperation between its main office, ourselves, and
a service company. Each of these groups is up to fifty miles
from the others. The nature of computer conferencing has
greatly improved the development of this client's business by
providing a communications channel that does not depend on each
key player being present with all of the others at the same time
for decisions and status reports to be made and that keeps a
written record of discussions, commitments, and actions.

LESSONS
-------

What have we learned from our experiences with computer
conferencing? I think we can draw three general lessons.

First, one must have a clear purpose in mind for computer
conferencing in a given organization. Computer conferencing did
not work for us until we had defined some applications that had
a definite structure. We had to create the habit of using the
conferencing system rather than using the telephone or waiting
for a face-to- face meeting. Moreover, we had to gain the
support of some senior people in our organization as active
participants in order to promote use of the system. When a
partner decides to use computer conferencing to coordinate a
project, this action does a lot to convince other people to take
a hard look at the concept. It is much easier to gain the
support of senior people if you can show them a clearly defined
application with significant benefits.

Second, computer conferencing does not eliminate the need
for other channels of communication such as face-to-face
meetings or telephone calls, but used in conjunction with them
it can make the whole process of communication more effective
and efficient. By handling the aspects of a project that can be
recorded in written form via computer conferencing, one can
reduce the need to endure the delay and disruption of other
forms of communication. Attorneys are not required to fly in
from halfway across the country or even drive across the state
to determine the status of a project or wait a day or two to
contact a colleague who has some needed information or
expertise.

Third, to make computer conferencing a success, one must be
ready to take advantage of all of the leverage available and to
provide enough support to allow new users to become quickly
comfortable with the system. We should not be too surprised to
discover that people who already have experience with personal
computers have less trouble learning to use computer
conferencing systems than those with little or no computer
experience. One or two guided sessions using the system and
quick responses to whatever questions arise during the first few
weeks of use are all that is required for those with previous
personal computer experience to become comfortable with
conferencing. I believe that those with little or no computer
experience need at least a full day of training, much of which
would be devoted to familiarizing them with computers in general
before proceeding to show them computer conferencing.

HANDLING INFORMATION
--------------------

We use subject indices to keep track of the information in
the system. Each participant, as well as the person organizing
the conference, can create a list of categories and assign items
to one or more of them. The category names can be used in online
commands+ADs- therefore, one can look up and display items and
responses using categories of one's own making rather than
arbitrary numbers or the authors' titles. One simple use for
subject indices is to make a category of all of the items to
which one should respond before a certain date.

TECHNICAL NOTES
---------------

We use the CAUCUS computer conferencing system.
Currently, we are upgrading the power of our Caucus host
system. We'll soon be running on an Everex 386/20 with 8 MB
RAM, a 300 MB hard drive, a Tecmar 125 MB tape drive, a 16 port
board, and SCO Xenix 386.

We have a voice/data PBX built by Telenova of Los Gatos,
California and sold and supported by Wang. A serial cable from
each in-house PC connects with the back of those telephone
extensions equipped with the appropriate jack (and internal
hardware). A user can dial an extension to connect his or her
phone to one of our computer ports. Other ports on our computer
are connected to modems which are in turn connected to outside
telephone lines.