The needs of the many vs the needs of the one

This University of Pennsylvania study is intriguing. It basically says there is a conflict between "what's good for individual people and what's good for groups." I instantly agreed and my brain immediately went to Spock saying that "Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." My brain then went back in time to the first installations of document management software and CRM and the fear, uncertainty and doubt it generated in senior partners. What was good for the firm, was not felt to be good for all the individual senior partners. It is interesting that in law firms, we often drop back to "what's in it for me" when the larger firm arguments fail. Read more at REAL KM: The conflict between what's good for individuals and groups

- o/|oo|\o -

Epic failures

Bob Ambrogi lists Atrium, QuickLegal, ROSS Intelligence, LexisNexis Firm Manager and Gavelytics as the "five of the most momentous legal tech fails of the last 10 years." My first thought was ClearSpire wasn't on that list. The names are escaping me at the moment, but there was also a DMS here in the states some biglaw firms invested in that failed big time. And didn't a UK firm a few years back spend millions and millions trying to turn Microsoft SharePoint into a legal DMS before ultimately abandoning it? One could argue Microsoft's Matter Center was also huge failure as well (except maybe that Epona picked up some of the pieces and made it a success). Do you agree with Bob's list or would you add different tech to the epic failure list? Read more at LawSites: The Five Most Momentous Legal Tech Fails

- o/|oo|\o -

Certifiable

Olga Mack explores the question of AI certification for lawyers. Spoiler alert, her answer is the "it depends." "For example, it may depend on the individual's career path, area of specialization, and how they intend to apply their knowledge of AI in their legal practice." There are dangers with certification as Olga alludes to as "More Learning Less Doing," where there is little to no real world application of those certified skills. I guess I'm looking at this slightly differently. Are we talking general certification in AI? Release schedules of new software is more compressed then ever. So are we talking about certification in specific AI like ChatGPT 2.0? If so, what value does that hold in the world of ChatGPT 4.0? And what about certifications for technology tools that are used much more frequently - the DMS? Word? Outlook? Read more at ABOVE THE LAW: AI Certification For Lawyers: Navigating The Knowledge Conundrum

- o/|oo|\o -

Jeffrey Brandt, Editor

Connect with me on LinkedIn Jeffrey Brandt
Follow me on Twitter @jeffrey_brandt
Follow all the PinHawk highlights @PinHawkHappens
Website: PinHawk.com

Affiliations:
ILTA Strategic Partner Liaisons - NetDocuments