A group of librarians from The Private Law Librarians Special Interest Section (PLL SIS) of the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) and The Law Librarians’ Society of Washington, D.C. (LLSDC) have been brainstorming ways to promote the value of law librarians. The idea is to demonstrate to lawyers, the “C” level and other professionals that work in law firms not just the traditional value to the practice of law, but to show how law librarians can be strategic allies in supporting the business of law. Continue reading
It is widely acknowledged that in law as in other businesses, the best rainmakers are also relationship builders. They connect with people. They seek out friends old and new and ask: How is your business? What problem can I help you solve? What can I do to help you succeed? What can I do for you personally? They listen and they act. Continue reading
By MaryAnnWacker, Reference Librarian and Josie Morgan, Manager, Business Development at Bracewell & Giuliani
At Bracewell & Giuliani, the Library has developed a collaborative relationship with our Business Development & Marketing Department. We provide them with sophisticated business intelligence (BI) and competitive intelligence (CI) on a daily basis. While this work is primarily nonbillable, it is some of the most rewarding and satisfying research the librarians undertake. Most importantly, the firm recognizes the impact that our research has in identifying and bringing in new clients to the firm and staying abreast of the competitive legal landscape. Here at Bracewell, we have three reference librarians for a firm of almost 500 attorneys. Our Marketing group is organized by practice with managers for energy, banking/finance, trial/technology, etc.
A valuable service the Library provides to our litigation section and the Manager of the Trial and Technology group is a daily court alert that provides newly filed patent/copyright cases from Courtlink. This feed generates requests from our attorneys for copies of new complaints.
From a due diligence perspective, we are called upon for information on prospective clients and for upcoming pitches. We refer these types of requests as “you ring, we fling” requests given the fast turnaround that is demanded. We use tools such as Lexis AtVantage, Bloomberg litigation reports,Hoover’s, D&B, and news sources to complete these requests. In order to work more efficiently with Marketing on these requests, we copy the manager for that attorney’s section with the search results. This helps the managers stay in the loop and keep up-to-date on all happenings within their groups.
Recently we added social media to our arsenal of resources we search to obtain background information on individuals. Our biography package now consists of information from our standard news sources, as well as LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, and photographs from Google images. With this information in hand, our lawyers are well prepared for any meeting.
To support the growing needs of the Marketing department, we work with the firm’s Communications Manager and monitor all mentions of our firm in the press and social media outlets. The Library uses Lexis Publisher and Google news alerts to send out a daily e-mail to all firm employees which includes every mention of Bracewell’s name in the press.
From a competitive intelligence perspective, the Library provides league tables to the Marketing Manager who supports finance and banking. Some of the resources we use include Thomson Financial, DealLogic, Bloomberg, and MergerMarket.
Marketing and the Library have also taken the time to get to know each other on a personal level through casual lunches. This has benefited both groups by knowing what is happening in each other’s department, plus it creates a dynamic where you aren’t just employees at the same firm but you care about what is keeping each other busy at work and after (movies, travel, DSW!). It also helps each department understand what the workload is like on the other side and that your requests may not be the only ones flooding respective inboxes.
A direct benefit to the Library of our collaborative relationship is that the librarians gain access to databases purchased by Marketing such as Energy Acuity and PitchBook. We are really grateful to have access to these (pricey) resources.
In addition to the services we provide, the Library plays a professional development role by training all new Marketing staff members when they arrive at the firm. This provides a great opportunity to start off on the right foot. The new employees then become ambassadors for the Library, sharing capabilities and sending attorneys to us for their research projects and requests.
The Library’s romance with Marketing began several years ago when we took on the task of compiling a weekly newsletter which included energy-related news in the Caspian region. We sent it out to clients for a while with just an e-mail. When Marketing heard about our efforts, they offered help with newsletter software to make The Caspian News look more professional and increased the distribution list using InterAction. This got the notice of important partners at the firm and it turned into a very high profile endeavor. I knew our efforts were appreciated when the entire Marketing Department showed up in the Library and surprised us with cupcakes to celebrate the newsletter’s 100th issue!
Marketing knows they can always depend on our quick response and valiant efforts. When they know we are responding immediately to their requests, they can get information to the attorneys in a timely manner which makes everyone look good. Our attorneys are then able to impress the firm’s clients, as well as prospective clients, because of our efforts as a unified team – not as two separate departments.
Our secret to creating a fun and rewarding working relationship with the Marketing Department is keeping lines of communication open – try asking someone to lunch, stopping by their office, or chatting with them over coffee at Starbucks.
Back in July, OFG published a blog post from the Consumer Advocacy Caucus announcing their intention to form. They are now asking Law Librarian members of the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) to sign a petitition that will allow time to place the petition on the agenda of the upcoming AALL Board meeting for November 3rd-5th, 2011.
Please read the petition below, and if you agree with the position of the Caucus, sign it by emailing your approval to Michael Ginsborg at email@example.com. The names of all signatories will be kept confidential, as explained in the petition. Time is of the essence. We have a short deadline by which to gather signatures (September 16th) to allow AALL time to place the petition on the agenda of the Board meeting for November 3rd-5th. The Caucus’s statement of purpose must be strong and unequivocal so that we can be effective consumer advocates for law libraries.
Reasons For The Petition
1. The Caucus has a strong factual basis for its proposed purpose.
2. Although AALL has three venues on “vendor relations,” none can effectively address unfair and anticompetitive business practices in the legal information industry. First, the Vendor Colloquium did not discuss consumer advocacy, and the membership had no opportunity for digital participation in any of its sessions. Caucus members asked a Vendor Colloquium task force to consider our proposal of a robust consumer advocacy equal to AALL’s promise. The task force did not respond, closing an opportunity for their participation. Second, CRIV does admirable work to help individual institutions resolve complaints against legal information sellers. But CRIV can not use information from these complaints to advocate for a change in AALL policy. Third, despite significant anti-consumer practices in the industry, AALL’s Vendor Liaison has reduced related membership concerns to a problem in public relations. In March 2011, Vendor Liaison Margie Maes reported that unidentified “vendors” were “frustrated with the airing of public complaints,” but hoped that a “vendor relations program” would “stem the flow of that negative communication.” (March 25-26, 2011 AALL Executive Board Meeting Board Book, Tab 17)
3. We need a new approach. Caucus members seek the opportunity to independently influence AALL policymaking in a matter of high importance to the membership. An AALL Caucus would provide AALL members a forum to fully exchange their views on consumer advocacy, and a transparent venue to reach consensus on a policy recommendation to the Executive Board. The Caucus would not decide policy for AALL or act on its behalf. Caucus members seek only to have their voices heard; to open a new outlet for member participation in AALL; and to collaborate with AALL’s leadership in developing an effective consumer advocacy.
4. Over 50 AALL members have twice requested AALL’s recognition of the Caucus. Valuing AALL as their best ally, they have worked with its leadership to develop an acceptable statement of purpose. Former AALL President Joyce Janto provisionally approved their latest submission, but her successor, Darcy Kirk, has rejected it. Darcy suggests that the Caucus accept yet another statement of purpose: “The purpose of the Caucus on Consumer Advocacy is to provide a forum for AALL members to exchange ideas and information regarding the legal information industry and to represent its members’ interest and concerns within AALL.”
5. Darcy objected to the “negative tone” of the Caucus’ latest purpose and faulted the Caucus for suggesting “actions regarding policy.” She says that her substitute purpose “does not prevent [the Caucus] from from making recommendations to AALL regarding petitions.” But it would prevent the Caucus from candidly declaring its real purpose – to recommend a consumer advocacy petition.
6. AALL’s leadership could apply similar objections to any activity our Caucus might otherwise pursue, especially given the recent history of changing positions by AALL Presidents.
7. Darcy’s rejection of the Caucus’ proposed purpose would harm AALL in the following ways:
a. It would violate the implied right of members to engage AALL in matters they find fundamentally related to its mission;
b. It would violate AALL’s principle of transparency and openness;
c. It would create a chilling effect on Association speech, as members will not be allowed to discuss consumer advocacy issues, must less pursue them, for fear that AALL will not approve of candid discussion;
d. It would create the appearance that AALL is afraid of candor in matters that affect sellers of legal information;
e. It would deprive members the indispensable status and perceived “protection” that AALL recognition confers on an activity that some legal information sellers can be expected to disapprove; and
f. It would deter members from otherwise acting together to pursue their vision of a robust consumer advocacy.
8. These harmful consequences prevent Caucus members from accepting Darcy’s substitute purpose. So unless the Board reverses Darcy’s decision, the Board will deny over 50 AALL members an opportunity they eagerly want to participate in their Association; will deprive other AALL members the benefits of allowing the Caucus to organize; and will undermine member trust and interest in the Association.