Consulting is one of those professions with a mixed reputation depending upon the practices and ethics of those who practice it. Accordingly, the recipients of consulting services either praise expert advice and insight, or complain about high priced advice that is not very useful. Here are my views on what makes for good and bad consulting.

Let’s start with the good … as a court management consultant with considerable experience in the field, I’ve learned to apply a few rules and practices to help ensure successful conclusions and happy customers. Here are a few:

Put yourself the client’s shoes – It sounds trite, but it’s true. If you’ve never been on the receiving end of a consulting engagement, it’s hard to envision how it feels. The difference between a client thinking that you “get it” versus thinking you’re clueless often rests on how you approach your work. Try to be helpful, do no harm and produce results that are tangible and solve real life problems. It sounds easier to do than it is.

Act like a practitioner – Some engagements seek an academic study in which current processes are extensively documented and research is provided as to possible solutions. However, it is a mistake to approach all engagements as if they are college research projects that produce lengthy narratives on what the client should already know about the current situation. As a court manager, I wanted a consultant to cut to the chase and start fixing my problem rather than telling me about the jurisdiction and demographics of my court.

Gear solutions to the readiness of the organization – Let’s be truthful … not all organizations are optimal performers. Crafting solutions that are beyond the capability of a client to successfully implement is a waste of time and effort. Use Mazlow’s Hierarchy of Need to assess the level at which consultant solutions are geared to improve the likelihood of successful implementation.

Under promise and over-deliver – This is easier said than done, but it is critical to a satisfactory outcome to refrain from over promising. What makes it even better is if a consultant goes the extra mile or produces more than the scope of work or contract requires in order to please. Excellent reputations are built on this practice.

OK, you heard the good … here is the bad. Some of these were gleaned from TechRepublic.com, a favorite source:

Act like staff is in your way – Try to remember that it is you intruding on staff when you are conducting a site visit and not the other way around. Acting like you’re a big shot, your time is more valuable, and your disruption of workflow is taken for granted are disastrous formulas and just plain bad manners. It is much better to ramp up your listening skills and engage staff into identifying problems and vetting solutions.

Being a boor – It is unacceptable to bring to a work assignment your personal views on religion and politics, and it is never acceptable to flirt or introduce sexual connotations. The first faux pas exhibits bad survival skills; the second is grounds for civil liability by creating a hostile work environment.

Lacking transparency – Whatever minor satisfaction is derived from acting mysteriously or giving the client the impression that you will reveal your findings at a time of your choosing, is far outweighed by the clients right to know how your engagement is going and what the likely outcomes will be. Always telegraph your intentions and always give an exit interview to key contacts so they know what to expect. If your proposed solutions are not workable, you are better off knowing that earlier rather than later.

Copy and paste – When I first started as a consultant, I assumed I could easily copy and paste responses to bid invitations and final reports from my previous engagements. I soon found out that every project is different and rarely can one narrative easily fit multiple circumstances. A limited amount of sharing “lessons learned” is inevitable, but copying and pasting whole portions of previous products is unwise, unethical and can be downright embarrassing if you’re so lazy as to fail to remove the previous client’s name and references from the content.

In these tough economic times, more displaced workers are considering hanging out a shingle and becoming private consultants. I strongly advise a lot of research and preparation before taking this leap to ensure that your new career is as rewarding to your clients as it is to you.

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Coffee Quill blog

Microsoft describes their OneNote software as a digital notebook that provides people one place to gather their notes and information, powerful search to find what they are looking for quickly, and easy-to-use shared notebooks so that they can manage information overload and work together more effectively. I describe it as a great productivity tool that can even help ME get organized.

OK, I am opening myself up to the Microsoft skeptics who will accuse me of sidling up to the evil empire, but good is good and from the moment I started my first OneNote notebook I was hooked.

I now create generalized notebooks for my various work areas such as business, education, professional associations, etc. and within each of those notebooks I create tabs such as partnerships, advertising, website, etc. I can then create multiple pages within each tab representing different projects, initiatives and clients. It is on these pages that the magic happens.

While getting a bunch of emails may be expedient communication, tying them together into a cohesive file isn’t easy … except with OneNote. You also have the option of loading shortcut icons with word documents, excel files, PDFs and even graphics to augment your one-stop virtual file can. Here is a sample work page showing a variety of notes and files to give you an idea:

I admit that I don’t use the collaboration feature that allows you to post selected OneNote files and authorize multiple users to access and update them. I can see how it could be a benefit, but I haven’t had much luck with these tools in the past. For instance, I gave Microsoft Office Groove a shot and wasn’t impressed with its clunky interface and not-very-intuitive interface. However, I am reserving judgment as Groove morphs into SharePoint Workspace because the early reports are that the software improvements are substantial.

Samuel Johnson,the great English lexicographer and essayist, once noted that Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves, or we know where we can find information upon it. And if you’ve ever had to rummage through email folders trying to find that important set of instructions or a critical piece of information, you’ll appreciate OneNote’s organization and searchability.

So I agree that Apple reigns king in innovation and cool, but once in awhile Microsoft actually strikes productivity gold. They sure did on OneNote. And the fact that it’s bundled with most Microsoft Office suites is the real payoff. I seriously doubt that I would have purchased this tool on my own, but trying it out as part of the Office suite hooked me as a loyal user.

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Microsoft OneNote

Our good friends at the National Center for State Courts’ Jur-E Bulletin covered the new online jury system for the US District Courts. 52 districts out of 94 have the system up and running with an expected 81 to fire it up by the end of the year. All I can say is WHOOPPEE !!!

The eJuror Program is appended to the courts’ Jury Management System and allows jurors to respond to summons, answer qualifying questionnaires, update personal information, check when they are supposed to appear, request an excuse or deferment and select alternative service dates online. Wow !!

The pilot courts reported that 33% of the test jurors chose to use the system and the Administrative Office plans to track the data over the rollout period to see if the number increases. The Travis County (TX) District Clerk’s I-Jury program showed a disproportionately high number of citizens used their online services compared to demographics that indicated the elderly, the poor and Hispanics would likely not use the Internet. The Clerk’s Office anecdotal evidence showed the previous manual system requiring an initial personal appearance for qualification and subsequent appearance for the actual service was so unpopular that traditional technology have-nots found alternative ways to access a computer just to avoid the hassle.

I’m particularly pleased with the development because this means the feds have raised the bar for state trial courts by offering online jury services as a baseline E-court delivery application. It will be a lot harder now to argue that virtual jury services are too hard or not worth the effort.

Coincidentally, I have been called for jury duty at my local court and only offered in-person, phone or fax as methods of managing my service. I would MUCH prefer to surf my way through qualification, postponement and service confirmation. I plan to bring this development to their attention.

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Norman Rockwell’s The Holdout at Global Gallery

At approximately 4:30pm on Saturday, January 9 we had a 6.5 earthquake in which the epicenter was too darned close to our house on Humboldt Hill in the shadow of Eureka, California. I had just finished packing for a business trip to teach an ICM Managing Technology and Technology Projects course for which I planned to fly out at 6am the next day.

There were no injuries or structural damage to our home, although there was considerable breakage despite being pretty earthquake savvy and strapping or otherwise securing most of the items in the house. We lost a lot of wine and spirits that we thought were securely stored in the garage, a flat screen TV took a five foot swan dive despite being strapped to the wall, and one of our tropical fish escaped our attention until it was too late to discover it had sloshed out of the tank along with a lot of water.

In all, we have no complaints and thank the powers that watch over us. As a former Los Angeles County Marshal’s office executive buddy of ours once noted, enjoy your good health … the rest you can buy. We cleaned up the major stuff that night despite a power outage that lasted several hours and I left the next day. My wife had the unpleasant task of handling the rest of the cleanup in my absence. To say I owe her big time is gross understatement.

During the course in Ohio, one segment for which I was responsible covered disaster preparedness and continuity of operations (also known as COOP). I ran out of time to cover the prepared material and instead related my tale of woe, leaving the participants with two important points … first, disaster can and will happen to anyone at any time, so preparing is not an option. Second, the National Center for State Courts website has a wealth of information, publications, checklists and frequently-asked-questions on disaster preparedness and COOP, so there is no need to make this stuff up on your own.

One of the class participants noted that as a court technologist she was keenly aware of the need to prepare, and insisted after any major disruption that her staff prepare a Post Event Analysis Report that she calls PEAR. I jotted a note to myself to add this to the class materials to include for future courses, and when I returned home I received a template of a similar report that our local fire agency put together to gauge the effectiveness of the City’s response. For a copy CLICK HERE.

The bottom line is that there was not a single fatality in our community, and injuries were minimal. Sure, there was damage to selected properties, but they were mostly unreinforced masonry buildings whose days were numbered anyway because of their notable failure rate during seismic episodes. Nearly everyone close to this situation attributes the limited effect to preparedness. Since the community has had a long history of being cut off from ingress and egress when severe winter storms and earthquakes strike, people listen when they are warned to take precautionary steps.

Contrast our outcome with the tragic situation in Haiti that suffered a devastating 7.0 temblor days afterward. Obviously, a 0.5 point spread in the Richter Scale is a big difference, as is the lack of appropriate building standards; but the death, injury and damage count is beyond belief. I urge you to consider donating to help Haiti reduce their suffering and hasten their recovery.

A tale of two cities and a PEAR are two important lessons for us all.

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Microsoft clip art

Paul Wormeli at the IJIS Institute is the principle author of an annual Wormeli Report on the state of technology and funding initiatives in the criminal justice arena (you have to be an IJIS member to receive it). This year, Paul has asked that I contribute court-specific content in my capacity as chair of the Forum on the Advancement of Court Technology. Please help in this effort by commenting on this post.

I would categorize court IT trends in three categories: budget-related, infrastructure-related and green.

Budget-related

It is no coincidence that this category is listed first as efforts to cut costs and raise revenue are by far the biggest driver this past year and it looks as if the next year will be no different. In September, the Court IT Officers Consortium made this a focus at their annual meeting, with interesting results. There are a few particular areas worthy of note:

Increased use of electronic audio and video recording to capture the verbatim record – the promise of instant cost savings has pushed this technology to the forefront in many jurisdictions. The main advantage is reduced personnel costs, however, most authorities on this subject recommend staff monitoring of recording equipment in order to render recordings more useful through annotation and to avoid problems with equipment malfunction. I would advise reading the Florida courts’ December 2002, February 2005 and October 2007 reports on this topic to get a full picture of the administrative changes that are needed to support a successful migration of this sort in order to avoid unintended consequences and problems.

Paper-on-demand – as a more pragmatic application of imaging and paperless electronic processing of cases and files. This concept recognizes that it is nearly impossible to eliminate all paper, so produce it when needed and operate electronically to the furthest extent possible.

Video and teleconferencing – to cut down on meeting, training and travel costs.

Revenue enhancement – both by acquiring accounts receivable software and outsourcing collections and collection-related tasks such as noticing and skip-tracing.

Website service delivery – recognizing that reducing staffing and courthouse closures mean less customer service unless these services are available in alternative delivery methods. Static websites are becoming more dynamic and interactive with e-filing, fine payment and service delivery taking a higher priority than in the past.

E-filing – although this has been around for a long time, there is increased attention to begin if a court has not in the past, and to expand if courts have already put e-filing to limited use.

Infrastructure-related

Courts are no different than other IT enterprises in their increased attention to virtualization and cloud computing, although these are more trends than reality. Wireless applications and service delivery are also attracting attention, but similarly as a trend as opposed to widespread implementation. Probably the most interest and action is in use of open source software instead of costly name brand products (e.g., Open Office vs MS Office). All of these infrastructure issues are influenced, if not driven entirely, by budgetary concerns.

Green

The greening of business and government is also affecting the courts. The National Association for Court Management published a mini-guide in 2009 on Achieving and Sustaining the Green Court, covering courthouse design, facilities maintenance, energy use, recycling, reduction of solid waste, water efficiency, and the usual related topics; the publication also covers access to IT by staff and the public to make court operations more efficient and green (some of which are covered in Budget, above, such as Paper-on-demand, websites and teleconferencing).

So here the central question … are the operational differences of courts such that the IT trends are significantly different compared to general criminal justice agencies? I would say the electronic recording phenomenon for the verbatim record is one significant difference, and perhaps the depth and breadth of prospective applications for e-filing is another.

I encourage you to add to this discussion to ensure that Paul gets a fully rounded perspective on this fascinating topic. It’s easy, just comment, below!

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Microsoft clip art

Dear Santa … this has been one helluva year, big guy, and all the good little judges, court managers and staff have worked their tushies off trying to deliver quality justice with scarce resources, no raises and an increasingly cranky public that is only surpassed in its crankiness by the funding authorities. So here is my wish list for our courts and the heroes that work in them.

1. A stable, predictable funding source – OK, things are tough, I get it. We all know it’s time to tighten our belts, postpone big ticket purchases and defer widespread raises. However, we cannot exist without some indication of what we can expect in terms of funding in the next few years. We can’t plan, develop programs, react to caseload shifts and respond to public needs if we have no clue whether this is a temporary blip or a full time hell. You’re not closing the police department or fire department, and you should consider courts in the same category of urgency. As the New York Times opined about the budgetary impacts on NY courts, state courts are not just another government agency. They are at the center of the nation’s legal system and enforcement of the rule of law, handling more than 95 percent of all civil and criminal litigation. This vital institution — constitutionally, an independent, co-equal branch of government — has been spiraling into crisis as cash-starved states struggle with huge deficits.
2. Read the rest of this entry »

Both the Associated Press and the San Francisco Chronicle reported this week that the advent of robotics introduces the prospect of legal problems associated with their higher number of contacts with humans.

So, is Robbie the Robot plotting your demise, requiring that you get a restraining order? If your Massage-o-Matic fails to heal your deep tissue kink, does that give you cause for a breach of contract or detrimental reliance suit? If any of these things come to pass, do robots have a legal defense? Most experts say no.

As early as 1985, Robert Freitas opined in Young Lawyer that robots are just inanimate property without rights or duties. Most legal experts cite product liability or legal actions against a robot’s owner as the most likely legal redress. The caselaw to date confirms this view.

The interesting twist on this subject is whether the litigiousness of the United States will stifle research and development of robotics here, leaving us at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to the products and services that are emerging in the field. Some suggest that the US should adopt laws similar to those affecting computers and the Internet, which shield certain legal liabilities in the name of progress.

Still, the use of robots is emerging in healthcare, customer service, home care/cleaning, construction and just about every aspect of our lives. This just creates more opportunity for things to go wrong, resulting in court cases seeking redress.

Once again, society is bringing its ills and technological advances to the courthouse steps, and it will be up to the courts to sort these problems out. Will it present a conflict if the clerk’s office uses a robot to bring the casefile into court?

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Rich Muller of Guy Robot as reported on Neatorama.com

While most of us are carving another hole to expand our belts after a sumptuous Thanksgiving, let us ponder how the future of technology in our courts is determined. The clue can be found on Wednesday, December 2, where the Joint Technology Committee of NACM and COSCA meets in St Augustine, FL.

Most people think technology just happens. In practical terms, technology requires strong oversight, visionary planning, keen strategy and perseverance. Most industries have oversight and planning groups that attempt to address a myriad of tech-related questions such as what standards to apply, where to focus research & development efforts, what is needed to address market conditions and how to resolve conflicts. In the courts arena, that group is the Joint Technology Committee.

The committee is staffed by the National Center for State Courts and comprised (among others) of representatives from NACM, COSCA, NCSC, CITOC and FACT.

Here are some of the many projects on the Joint Tech plate:

Court Technology Framework - a conceptual framework that attempts to portray the complex role that technology plays in court operations.

Court IT Standards - common guidelines to describe how data exchanges, e-filing and case management systems are developed and deployed.

Data exchanges – the courts are being asked to adopt varying sets of standards so that data exchanged with external agencies comply with uniform formats. Some of these dynamics include the Global Justice XML Data Model, National Information Exchange Model and Information Exchange Package Documentations.

I am privileged to serve on this committee as an advisory member on behalf of the Forum on the Advancement of Court Technology representing the courts’ private sector partners in IT. While there are many challenges ahead with courts facing budget shortfalls amid calls for more services and demands for more data, it is groups like the Joint Tech Committee that somehow grease the wheels to get it done.

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Microsoft clip art

ADDENDUM: For a PDF of the minutes from this meeting, CLICK HERE

The National Center for State Courts’ ever informative and entertaining Jur-E Bulletin brings us jury related news this week that is also related to the swine flu. How you ask?

Philladelphia’s KWY news radio reports that a young man serving as a juror in the early stages of a medical malpractice trial (of all things) complained of swine-flu-like symptoms resulting in the declaration of a mistrial in order to safeguard the health of those who may have been exposed to the fellow. The problem? He was faking it to get out of jury service! YIKES!!!

In a wise ruling, the judge in the case ordered the miscreant to sit in a trial court for three days to observe the justice system and hopefully to see how juries operate.

I will refrain from editorial comment on the moral lessons from this soap opera, but suffice it to say that if you can’t spot at least five of them you aren’t paying very close attention.

In the spirit of Thanksgiving, let me say that I am thankful to live in this great country and to have the honor to work in our system of justice. I wish you and your family a holiday in which you enjoy the many small blessings of life.

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Jay Adkins blog

The great Court Information Technology Officers Consortium (CITOC) held their annual meeting immediately following the 2009 Court Technology Conference in Denver and one of the powerful items on their agenda was to go around the room and ask how technology has helped to weather the recent financial storms. The responses were revealing.

Here are a few …

• Ask staff how to regain one hour per day – some suggested taming Internet surfing, social media and email as great places to start. This is an odd juxtaposition of technology helping and hindering productivity.
• Move archived files (especially microfiche files) online – staff complained that helping folks to use the fiche readers alone was a major effort.
• Install video equipment in court to use both as an alternative means to capture the verbatim record and for videoconference training and meetings.
• Use Voice over IP to reduce long distance telephone charges.
• Redefine the role of court staff into two career tracks: management and “professional decision resource” in a judicial support capacity.
• One jurisdiction created 16 business reengineering teams with an IT staff person on each.
• Create “skinny” files that rely as much as possible on electronic processing – in this application, just the essential documents were housed in a physical file jacket, mostly for judicial processing.
• Raise revenue using a variety of compliance techniques.
• Centralize paper submission functions and use them as the gateway to migrate to electronic files.
• Use open source software instead of costly name brand products (e.g., Open Office vs MS Office).
• Use and encourage filing agencies to migrate to e-citations as much as possible.
• Delegate routine judicial functions such as distraint (overdue tax) warrants to clerical staff and automate the process as much as possible.
• Beef up data transfers in as many applications as possible.
• Enhance the courts website identifying high touch points with customers as prime applications.
• Add “auto-populate” features to case management systems to cut down on the need for excess key stroke data entry.
• Migrate to Paper-on-Demand.

These are wonderful places to start. Anyone wish to add to the list??

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = Microsoft clip art