Henry Davis York Conveying legal know how to meet your clients needs: a Henry Davis York case

study
6 March 2012 Sarah Walters Director of Legal Resources

Introduction

Henry Davis York and KM at HDY

Legal KM and clients needs and demands

Some current ideas and problems HDY case studies of KM and clients the good, the indifferent and the bad

Some conclusions

Henry Davis York

HDY is a medium-sized corporate and commercial Sydney-based firm with 54 partners and nearly 400 staff HDY was established in 1893 by Henry Davis. Henry Davis began work for the Bank of NSW and so Westpac is our oldest client Specialty areas: insolvency, financial services and government work

We are famous for our expertise and our relationships

KM at Henry Davis York

Precedents as a function has been established at the firm formally for about 15 years The Legal Resources Group was established in 2009 from precedents (4), KMLs (5) and the library (5) KM at HDY: Knowledge management is the series of processes by

which a working organisation's knowledge and experience are captured

in a way that is useful and accessible to all members of the organisation Current (summary) KM strategy: centralised team of litigation and transactional KM specialists responding flexibly to group, firm and client needs

Conveying legal know how to meet your clients needs

The obvious questions:
what are a given clients KM needs? Issues with discovering this What are we trying to achieve? What is the client trying to achieve?

Examples of client needs:

Making inhouse lawyers more effective and efficient
Managing the budget as a cost centre Improving lawyer skill levels Creating or expanding knowledge banks, collections etc Ticking a box??

KM and clients
KM a business concept about 20 years old Very prevalent in professional services firms and also other industries

such as manufacturing and energy and resource companies

Therefore some clients will have a knowledge of KM or their own KM systems and strategies; some none at all

Some are keen to jump into KM; others can be wary or dismissive

Some news from London

The KM Legal Conference in May 2011 all about relationships

3 major trends
Requirement to do more with less Emphasis on technology Increasing importance on KM offerings for clients

Further news from London

A client panel observed:
Each year legal departments budget are maintained or suffer cuts Clients dont like to pay for lawyers to learn Clients only want to pay for services once! Conservative clients appreciate what they see as safe innovation KM is emergent at all times given changing client needs so a proprietary approach to KM products or services is incompatible with this Clients are usually pleased to consider KM support and offers

KM and clients at HDY

HDY partners often keen to differentiate by offering KM services to clients Traditional method of offer: in the VA section of tenders What offered? Often:
Training Current awareness Knowledge collection

Assistance with internal knowledge processes

Technological support

The big issue: relationships how, why, with whom?

Some issues with KM and clients

Articulating the reasoning and ideas behind KM offerings to clients What are we trying to achieve?
Relationship building and strengthening
Understanding client and objectives Differentiation More work

What are clients trying to achieve?

Advantages as outlined above Ascertaining this is the ideal

Some HDY case studies

Examples of KM offered:
Precedents Assistance with internal KM strategies and practices Training of various kinds Knowledge/advice collection and package delivery Current awareness and CA services

A KM helpdesk
Technological assistance and solutions matter management, extranets

An existing relationship is essential to success, which presents its own internal conundrum, of course

Examples the good

A newish large banking client
A fortuitous relationship formed in 2007 Requested current awareness provided 2 days embedded in the KM function of the bank Understanding of KM function, legal function, business function Offering of modification of HDY KM strategy, precedents to fill internal gaps, general knowledge, ideas about how to harness IT, offer of HDY style manual The relationship continues between the 2 KM functions What does this mean for HDY and the client?

Examples: the good

A combination of KM and technology HDY offers bespoke matter management software packages to clients HDY KML introduced to client through billable work, them became software expert Acting for receivers of a large insolvent childcare company:
700 childcare centres to be sold
DD, deadline, interstate and reporting and Christmas issues Client feedback that they had never experienced such a streamlined workflow This was all billable work

Examples: the good

Offering innovative training to an established accountancy client Relationship present; client delighted at unusual training on billing

narrations
Relationship strengthened, client feels special, repeat appearances

Training generally to a variety of clients good trainers are

remembered and help create ties that bind

The indifferent

Two established banking clients required collection and package

delivery of pertinent advices

Huge amount of work, good job Once done, no further connection, information or benefit or, no news

good news?

The bad
An established large banking client
A KML asked to attend a meeting with a partner and 2 client reps KM interest instigated by the bank No time to prepare. Both sides underprepared and lacking knowledge and understanding. No KML/client relationship

Another established banking client

Some previous KM training offered and delivered. Connection between HDY KM trainer and library manager of the client HDY partner offers further training and KM support to library managers manager. No repsonse!

The advantages of success

Relationships are deepened and strengthened Another angle on the client, further understanding

The client feels collaborative and that we are innovating or at least

attempting to do so

Client legal groups can better manage on reduced budgets

We can learn how beneficially to share client objectives

Brains are connected business and personal benefits

Some observations
Conveying legal know how to meet your clients needs is a very mixed bag, requiring a variety of types of effort, and with varying outcomes, but worth it A good relationship facilitates doing this and, circularly, relationships themselves benefit Relationship-wise, KM secondments look appealing but are as yet untried at HDY. Theory: look and learn, then offer, not the other way around Conveying legal know how: just another way to meet our clients needs?