Information Overload – Email Organization 101

I’ll admit it, I get in upwards of 100 emails per day, and they are often in the form of a string of conversations. Email is a way to save time, but is your Inbox getting the best of you? Microsoft Outlook gives users a variety of tools, such as folders, flags, and priority to organize the plethora of emails we receive each day, however, how many of us actually use the tools available to us and which ones are worth setting up? Maybe I’m behind the times; maybe everyone uses Microsoft Outlook best practices, but it seems to me when I get a peek at people’s Inboxes, I see either a gazillion emails, a gazillion folders and/or no organization at all.

I’ve been using Microsoft Outlook for some time now, and although I don’t profess to be a Guru, I do think I have a good grasp on organizing the Inbox so emails are accessible and intuitively dispersed. The following are a few tips and tricks I’ve picked up along the way. Please keep in mind that these tips are for standalone versions of Microsoft Outlook 2007 or higher.

  1. The folder system seems to be the best way to organize emails (as opposed to using different color flags), but how you set them up really depends on your industry. A law firm would organize emails very differently from, say, a software company, e.g., folders grouped by client vs. by client helpdesk number.
  2. Subfolders are okay to use where they make absolute sense, otherwise forgo them. Folders should be intuitive and finding information should be simple. When you have folders, mixed with subfolders, the information is further buried. Sometimes over-organizing can get the best of us. Think about what’s going to work when you look for “that email from Suzie Soandso” 12 months from now.
  3. I don’t know about you, but when I have too many emails in my Inbox, I get Inbox anxiety. I read article years ago about closing one’s Inbox during the day to get work done. I just don’t think this is feasible anymore. Email is the primary form of business communication and to close the Inbox would just make me get behind. So, with that said, the constant stream of email can be contained using common sense. I try to deal with emails right away or pass them along to someone who can. If I cannot, I flag it until it can be dealt with. Once I respond, the email is either filed or deleted – very simple.
  4. SPAM is an Inbox reality, too. If you have a good anti-SPAM system, you are in luck, but there is always the one or two that slip through. Honestly, I try to never use my business email when I sign up for outside information, etc. I actually have a generic email address set up for this. This is not to say I don’t sign up for newsletters or special offers on my real email account; I just try to keep the junk at bay. If you are receiving a lot of junk emails via your real email account, the best thing to do is enable junk and email filters or, simply, unsubscribe.

As always, please feel free to share your Outlook best practices and good luck in your organization endeavors!

It might be unintentional …. and still cost your firm $1,000,000

A billing attorney runs a SDN search in Conflicts and although it appeared as though the client’s name is OK, and proceeds to open a matter. However, when opening a matter, very little might be known about a client and as the matter unfolds more complexities enter the picture. Firms are now dealing in a global economy, what appears to be straightforward, may not be.

 Is the firm safe from the $1,000,000 unintentional representation of a SDN terrorist person or organization? I don’t know the answer to this, risk is sometimes very difficult to assess.

 The question here is a matter of best practices, to at least manage the risks. I suspect there are many firms that do not even conduct SDN searches. There are no guarantees, but a million dollars is a lot of money.

 What are your law firms “best practices” and how often do you run a SDN search AFTER a matter is open?

 Post your comments on my blog on how your firm manages this potential risk and I’ll publish the results on a future blog posting.

 To learn more details on OFAC and the SDN list check out some of my previous blog postings on the topic.

Check here

and here

and here

Internal Benchmarking and Business Tools – Where do you rank?

The term ‘benchmarking’ gets been tossed around a lot about this time of the year as firms develop their 2011 budgets. What does it mean to your firm? To most it is the process in which firms compare cost, hours recorded or the quantity of work against another firm of similar demographics or size. The gauge is somewhat the same across the board; people use surveys from providers such as Redwood Analytics or Altman & Weil to see where they rank, but how the information is used is another story.  

There are two categories of benchmarking, internal and external. Internal benchmarking is more of an individual thing. This is usually based on the use of business intelligence within the firm.  Individuals, departments and offices can view their ranking in productivity, performance to budget, value to their clients, and other criteria. Many times this analysis drive best practices as a result of fixing poor performing segments.

External benchmarking compares the firm to other firms to find out where they rank by revenue, profit, diversity, pro-bono work or other metrics. Tools such as benchmarking surveys – Lexis Firm Insight 3.0 compiles some of this information on a quarterly basis – are a great way for firms to see where they rank on a more competitive basis, on a group and individual level.

Some of the most useful information is how a firm ranks the profitability of areas of law and even clients. Understanding what to measure and how to measure the “measurables” (if that makes sense), are the most important parts of the process.

Below are a couple of tools firms a firm can use internally to utilize the valuable information already stored in their time and billing software. These tools can help measure and apply the benchmarking information:

Business Intelligence
I’ll start out by saying not all time and billing software systems come equipped with Business Intelligence, but, for the most part, the mid to up-scale systems provide this module.

 The three major components of Business Intelligence software are: data warehouse, user interface for selecting criteria and the presentation layer. Separate from the time and billing system, the data warehouse is a database designed specifically to provider fast analysis of granular data cube-type information about clients, attorneys, billings, cash receipts and expenses. Business Intelligence software allows firms to equip attorneys and other business managers, to gauge and proactively review information from the existing financial system data. This information is pushed to the end user, in a practical format where they can see it easily and compare the stats to others. This is where dashboards come in.

 Dashboards
Dashboards aid in internal financial benchmarking by providing information in a pleasant and intuitive format. The data warehouse can pull up granular information in seconds. Although it’s nice to have information such as profitability and billable hours quickly, in report format sometimes it’s just not convenient to look at. A dashboard provides the end user with an “at a glance” type gauge to see the financial metrics. If the firm provided attorneys with volumes of paper reports, the reports would have little impact, we all know this. When the firm provides attorneys with dashboards that are simple to read, easy to analyze and fast preforming, they will get used and attorneys will be in a much better position to support business decisions and strategic development, and this is only internal use.

I’ll visit external benchmarking at a later date.



What are a few days worth ….. A Lot of Cash!

Law firms are clearly cash machines, truly nice high margin businesses. However, they are somewhat unique in that they operate on a cash basis, collecting cash is really important. Just ask Mary (see my blog postings of July 14 & 15, 2010)

Firms can improve cash flow by implementing best practices and using technology, but what is all this effort worth? If the firm improves collections by an average of 5 days what does it mean in terms of cold hard cash?

This posting will help you understand:

  • How to calculate the Average Collection Period – ACP
  • How much additional cash can be generated by improving the ACP, and a sample Excel report  

Using the Average Collection Period
The Average Collection Period measures the time it takes for a firm to receive payments, thereby determining cash flow.


The above chart can help illustrate the effect that a change in the average collection might have on the investment in accounts receivable for your firm. Remember, accounts receivable represent money that cannot be used for other cash outflow purposes. For example, assume that the average daily billed amount is $10,000 and that your average collection period is 40 days. Now assume that you were able to reduce your Average Collection Period from 40 days to 30 days. From the illustration above, you can see that the reduction in the Average Collection Period reduces the investment in accounts receivable from $400,000 to $300,000. This reduction generates an additional $100,000 annually in cash flow.

 Measuring the Average Collection Period
The Average Collection Period measures the length of time it takes to convert your billings into cash. This measurement defines the relationship between accounts receivable and your cash flow. A longer Average Collection Period requires a higher investment in accounts receivable. A higher investment in accounts receivable means less cash is available to cover cash outflows, such as paying partners.

The Average Collection Period is calculated by dividing your present accounts receivable balance by your average daily billed amount:


The average daily billed amount is computed by dividing your annual billed amount by 360:


Using the annual billed amount and accounts receivable balance from the prior year is usually accurate enough for analyzing and managing your cash flow. However, if more recent information is available, such as the previous quarter’s billings, then use it instead. Be sure to compute the average daily billed amount correctly using the number of days actually reflected in the billed figure (e.g., 90 should be used if a quarterly billed amount is used).


Note to The Firms Liability Carrier – I Know We Did it Right(?)

Nothing keeps the managing partner up at night more than a professional liability claim by a disgruntled client. It’s never a win-win situation, even when you prevail, you lose. It can also be quite costly.

Some assertions of professional liability arise out of claims of conflicts of interest or the lack of ethical walls.

New associates and staff arrive every day, lateral partners bring in excellent books of business … the business of law can be very rewarding. There are times however, that firms may need rock solid proof that conflict searches were not only properly run but that the data available at the time of the search did not show any reason to decline or ask for a waiver.

 Here are some Best Practices for “Proof of Searches:”

  1. All conflict searches must be run through the firms best sources of information, at a minimum the time and billing and practice management systems.
  2. The results of all searches should be a “snapshot, point in time” type record and saved in the conflict system. No user should have the ability to modify the snapshot.
  3. The system must be capable of re-printing the exact details of all snapshots searches.
  4. The search reports should provide a time/date stamp of the search, the search operator, the requesting attorney, the search words with all Boolean search terms, and results from the database itself showing all the “hits” or no “hits.”
  5. The database should store all reviewing and approving attorneys or other staff along with all comments.
  6. The system should allow for a re-run of the exact same search(s) previously used based on newer database content to then determine at what point in time the potential conflict surfaced.

Law firms are required to use best practices and reasonable efforts to identify and deal with potential conflicts. One thing is certain, Best Practices might be much better off than “reasonable efforts.”




Gallery
ist2_5516813-business-people-joining-their-hands ist2_7730216-library-tables ist2_11425109-business-woman-with-colleagues-at-the-back
Follow RainMaker