Lawyer acceptance factor: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "{{A|design|}} When implementing any change, and particularly one involving technology, it behoves one to consider how it will present itself to the lega..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{A|design|}} | {{A|design|}}When implementing any [[Change adoption|change]], and particularly one involving [[technology]], it behoves one to consider how it will present itself to the [[legal eagle]] whom you expect to use it. | ||
Contrary to received wisdom, and however vigorously they may, as a class, declare themselves proudly prehistoric when it comes to technology, lawyers are ''not'' universal Luddites, and will hoover up any tech they come across that makes them get where they think they are going faster. | |||
Mobile [[email]], for example, got accepted so quickly that it barely was an innovation: it went from science fiction to the commonplace | Mobile [[email]], for example, got accepted so quickly that it barely was an [[innovation]]: it went from science fiction to the commonplace instantly, skipping a phase transition altogether, like dry ice subliming to CO<sub>2</sub> to the point that it is hard to credit it was ever novel. Likewise, automated [[document comparison]], remote working, and a host of other neat recent tricks. | ||
But those innovations, however brilliant they may, in the abstract be, that ''don’t'' make a lawyer’s life easier: that are imposed on her to make ''someone else’s'' life easier — usually a [[bean counter]]’s — and ones that deprive her of her [[autonomy]], or reduce her to a form-filling, button-pushing functionary — expect these to take a little while longer<ref>i.e., until the [[Omega|Apocalypse.]]</ref> to “catch on”. | But those innovations, however brilliant they may, in the abstract be, that ''don’t'' make a lawyer’s life easier: that are imposed on her to make ''someone else’s'' life easier — usually a [[bean counter]]’s — and ones that deprive her of her [[autonomy]], or reduce her to a form-filling, button-pushing functionary — expect these to take a little while longer<ref>i.e., until the [[Omega|Apocalypse.]]</ref> to “catch on”. | ||
{{Sa}} | {{Sa}} | ||
*[[Innovation]] | |||
* [[Change adoption]] | * [[Change adoption]] | ||
{{Ref}} | {{Ref}} | ||
Revision as of 09:50, 4 October 2021
|
The design of organisations and products
|
When implementing any change, and particularly one involving technology, it behoves one to consider how it will present itself to the legal eagle whom you expect to use it.
Contrary to received wisdom, and however vigorously they may, as a class, declare themselves proudly prehistoric when it comes to technology, lawyers are not universal Luddites, and will hoover up any tech they come across that makes them get where they think they are going faster.
Mobile email, for example, got accepted so quickly that it barely was an innovation: it went from science fiction to the commonplace instantly, skipping a phase transition altogether, like dry ice subliming to CO2 to the point that it is hard to credit it was ever novel. Likewise, automated document comparison, remote working, and a host of other neat recent tricks.
But those innovations, however brilliant they may, in the abstract be, that don’t make a lawyer’s life easier: that are imposed on her to make someone else’s life easier — usually a bean counter’s — and ones that deprive her of her autonomy, or reduce her to a form-filling, button-pushing functionary — expect these to take a little while longer[1] to “catch on”.
See also
References
- ↑ i.e., until the Apocalypse.