Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Legal Evolution graphics, Year 1

3,750 views

Published on

Graphics published on Legal Evolution during Year 1
uploaded May 2018

Published in: Law
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Legal Evolution graphics, Year 1

  1. 1. Graphics from Year 1 Posts 001 to 048 May 2018
  2. 2. May 2018 This slide deck contains graphics published on Legal Evolution during its first year of operation. You are free to download and use this material on the condition that Legal Evolution PBC is acknowledged as its source. Sincerely, Bill Henderson Editor, Legal Evolution
  3. 3. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  4. 4. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  5. 5. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  6. 6. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 The special relationship between innovators and early adopters is reflected in the Legal Evolution logo.These two groups make up the light blue portion of the bell curve. This is a population more than one standard deviation from the mean in terms of willingness to adopt a new idea or innovation. When this group (roughly 1/6) meets with relative success, the rest of the social system eventually follows.
  7. 7. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  8. 8. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  9. 9. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  10. 10. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  11. 11. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  12. 12. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  13. 13. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  14. 14. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  15. 15. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  16. 16. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  17. 17. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  18. 18. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  19. 19. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  20. 20. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  21. 21. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: Alan Bryant, Sr. Associate General Counsel – Legal Operations and Outside Counsel Management, Walmart, Inc.
  22. 22. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  23. 23. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Agenda-Setting Matching Redefining / Restructuring Clarifying Routinizing I. INITIATION II. IMPLEMENTATION THE INNOVATION ADOPTION PROCESS IN AN ORGANIZATION #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 General organizational problems that may create a perceived need for innovation Fitting problem from organization’s agenda with an innovation Innovation is modified and reinvented to fit organization; organizational structures altered to accept innovation Relationship between organization and innovation is defined more clearly Innovation becomes ongoing element of organization’s activities, and loses its identity Adapted from Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations Fig 10-3 (2003) Adoption Decision
  24. 24. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  25. 25. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: Ron Friedmann, “Law Firm Profitability + Service Delivery: What the Altman Weil Survey Says,” Prism Legal, June 21, 2017
  26. 26. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: Ron Friedmann, “Law Firm Profitability + Service Delivery: What the Altman Weil Survey Says,” Prism Legal, June 21, 2017
  27. 27. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: Henderson & Parker, The Five Strategies of Highly Successful Firms, American Lawyer (Jan 2017)
  28. 28. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Innovativeness(y) Centralization (x) Innovativeness(y) Centralization (x) Innovativeness(y) Centralization (x) Panel 1 Initiation Panel 2 Implementation Panel 3 Adoption Success (strong negative relationship) (moderate positive relationship) (moderate negative relationship)
  29. 29. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Innovativeness(y) Complexity (x) Innovativeness(y) Complexity (x) Innovativeness(y) Complexity (x) Panel 1 Initiation Panel 2 Implementation Panel 3 Adoption Success (strong positive relationship) (moderate negative relationship) (moderate positive relationship)
  30. 30. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Innovativeness(y) Formalization (x) Innovativeness(y) Formalization (x) Innovativeness(y) Formalization (x) Panel 1 Initiation Panel 2 Implementation Panel 3 Adoption Success (strong negative relationship) (moderate positive relationship) (moderate negative relationship)
  31. 31. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Skills acquired by rising 2L students as part of theTech Lawyer Accelerator (TLA)
  32. 32. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  33. 33. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, Fig. 7-1 (5th ed. 2003)
  34. 34. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  35. 35. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  36. 36. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE HIGH IMPACT KNOWLEDGE High impact Highly Dissimilar (heterophily) Very Similar (homophily) Low impact NewknowledgeImpact(Y) Similarity of people communicating with each other (X) Communication & Cultural Gap Knowledge Rich Communication Ease Little or No Unique Knowledge (communication & cultural gaps can be bridged) (some novel knowledge is being transferred) Based on Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations Ch. 8 (2003) Change Agents live here
  37. 37. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Efforts of Change Agent Dependent Variable to Be Explained Rate of Adoption of Innovation Adapted from Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations Ch. 9 (2003) 1. Making contact with clients (+) 2. Client orientation (+) 3. Client empathy (+) 4. Homophily with clients (+) 5. Credibility in clients eyes (+) 6. Working thru Opinion Leaders (+) 7. Improving technical competence of clients (+) Change Agents
  38. 38. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  39. 39. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  40. 40. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  41. 41. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  42. 42. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  43. 43. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  44. 44. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  45. 45. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  46. 46. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  47. 47. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  48. 48. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  49. 49. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  50. 50. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  51. 51. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  52. 52. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  53. 53. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  54. 54. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 1.Innovation Trigger: A potential technology breakthrough kicks things off. Early proof-of-concept stories and media interest trigger significant publicity. Often no usable products exist and commercial viability is unproven. 2.Peak of Inflated Expectations: Early publicity produces a number of success stories — often accompanied by scores of failures. Some companies take action; many do not. 3.Trough of Disillusionment: Interest wanes as experiments and implementations fail to deliver. Producers of the technology shake out or fail. Investments continue only if the the surviving providers improve their products to the satisfaction of early adopters. 4.Slope of Enlightenment: More instances of how the technology can benefit the enterprise start to crystallize and become more widely understood. Second- and third- generation products appear from technology providers. More enterprises fund pilots; conservative companies remain remain cautious. 5.Plateau of Productivity: Mainstream adoption starts to take off. Criteria for assessing provider viability are more clearly defined. The technology’s broad market applicability and relevance are clearly paying off.
  55. 55. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  56. 56. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  57. 57. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  58. 58. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  59. 59. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  60. 60. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  61. 61. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  62. 62. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  63. 63. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  64. 64. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  65. 65. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  66. 66. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  67. 67. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  68. 68. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  69. 69. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  70. 70. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  71. 71. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 . . . . . . Partners / Owners / CEOs Associates / Revenue Generators Professional and Administrative Staff Source: Josh Kubicki
  72. 72. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Client Partner Employee Experience Experience + + Design Experience + Design Experience + Design Experience Kubicki’s Trifecta Approach to Successful Implementation Source: Josh Kubicki
  73. 73. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  74. 74. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: Eric Elfman, Onit
  75. 75. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  76. 76. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Food & Beverage (14.6%) Housing (42.6%) Shelter, utilities, heating fuel, furniture, appliances, household supplies, trash collection, repairs, etc. Apparel (3.0%) Transportation (15.3%) Cars, fuel, public transit Medical Care (8.6%) Education and Communications(7.0%) Computers, college tuition, cell phones, Internet Recreation (5.7%) Other Goodsand Services(3.2%) Including legal services Consumer Price Index (CPI) Basket of Goods and Services by Relative Importance (Dec. 2016) Source: Data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, graphic by Legal Evolution PBC
  77. 77. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: Data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, calculations by Legal Evolution PBC 334.5 218.5 0.435% 0.245% 0.00% 0.10% 0.20% 0.30% 0.40% 0.50% 0.60% 0.70% 0.80% 0.90% 1.00% 1.10% 1.20% 1.30% 1.40% 1.50% 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 400.00 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Legal ServicesCompared to Overall CPI-U, 1986 to 2016 Relative Importance of Legal Servicesin CPI Basket Legal Services Overall CPI-U CPI-U Relative Importance of Legal Services
  78. 78. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: data from the Annual Reports of the Illinois Courts, graph generated by Legal Evolution PBC
  79. 79. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Source: Data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, calculations by Legal Evolution PBC
  80. 80. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  81. 81. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  82. 82. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Design Thinking Data Analytics Technology Process / Project Mgmt Business Tools Legal Knowledge & Skill The T-Shaped Lawyer Adapted from R. Amani Smathers
  83. 83. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Graphic generated by Evan Parker, LawyerMetrix
  84. 84. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Graphic generated by Evan Parker, LawyerMetrix
  85. 85. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1 Graphic generated by Evan Parker, LawyerMetrix
  86. 86. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  87. 87. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  88. 88. LegalEvolution.org© Legal Evolution PBC // Graphics from Year 1
  89. 89. Thank You @wihender bill@legalevolution.org

×