The Jolly Contrarian

Lawyer acceptance factor: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Lawyer acceptance factor (view source)

Revision as of 15:19, 3 February 2023

472 bytes added ,  3 February 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
 
(12 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{A|design|
{{A|design|
[[File:Wife appreciation factor.png|450px|thumb|center|If you want to get it in the house, consider your [[stakeholder]]s.]]
{{image|Wife appreciation factor|png|If you want it in the house, consider your [[stakeholder]]s.}}}}{{dpn|/ˈlɔːjər əkˈsɛptəns ˈfæktə/|n|}}
}}In the olden days when hi-fi envy was still a thing, spoddy anorak types would speak of the “spouse appreciation factor” — the kind of attributes that would see that new pre-amplification gain-stage attenuator make it through the door without the missus hitting the roof.


Generally, an awesome total harmonic distortion rating wouldn’t cut it.  It had to ''look'' nice, which meant “acceptably unobtrusive” and ideally ''invisible'', but failing that, artfully-applied walnut veneer, a minimalist fascia and a resemblance to mid-century Danish lounge furniture would at least put you in play.
A [[UAT]] multiplier for a [[legaltech]] implementation computed by considering the ratio between:


We mention this because the same goes, with feeling, when asking experienced lawyers to embark on a “user change journey” which has in mind a destination watched over by [[legaltech]] machines of loving grace.  
:(i) Features the user wants, understand and use,  
:(ii) “Features” ''management'' wants, understands, and expects ''her'' to use, and
:(iii) Things the user habitually does that the [[legaltech]] will henceforth oblige her to ''not'' do, or do in a different, more effortful or perverse way.


They’re a stubborn, recalcitrant lot, are our sibling lawyers.  
===Hi-fi and the wife acceptance factor===
In the olden days, when hi-fi envy was still a thing, spoddy anorak types would speak of the “wife appreciation factor” — the kind of attributes that would see that new pre-amplification gain-stage attenuator make it through the door without the missus hitting the roof.
 
Generally, an awesome total harmonic distortion rating wouldn’t cut it: it had to ''look'' nice, which meant “acceptably unobtrusive” and ideally ''invisible'', but failing that, artfully-applied walnut veneer, a minimalist fascia and a resemblance to mid-century Danish lounge furniture would at least put you in play.
 
===Legaltech and the lawyer acceptance factor===
We mention this because the same goes, with feeling, when asking experienced lawyers to embark on a “user [[change journey]]” which has in mind a destination watched over by [[legaltech]] machines of loving grace.
 
They’re a stubborn, recalcitrant lot, our sibling lawyers.  


The way they see it, they are already ''on'' a journey, it is [[tedious]] enough as it is, and they are not interested in being sent on some [[M.B.A.]]-initiated diversion intended to convert them into button-pushing [[Who breaks a hamster on a wheel?|hamsters]].<ref>This is either a mixed metaphor, or a new one. Can hamsters push buttons? Would they, if they could? Who knows.</ref>
The way they see it, they are already ''on'' a journey, it is [[tedious]] enough as it is, and they are not interested in being sent on some [[M.B.A.]]-initiated diversion intended to convert them into button-pushing [[Who breaks a hamster on a wheel?|hamsters]].<ref>This is either a mixed metaphor, or a new one. Can hamsters push buttons? Would they, if they could? Who knows.</ref>
Line 14: Line 23:


Mobile [[email]], for example, caught on so fast it barely counted as an “[[innovation]]” at all: it went from science fiction to the commonplace, skipping a phase transition, like dry ice subliming to CO<sub>2</sub> and within six months had become something everyone whinges about.   
Mobile [[email]], for example, caught on so fast it barely counted as an “[[innovation]]” at all: it went from science fiction to the commonplace, skipping a phase transition, like dry ice subliming to CO<sub>2</sub> and within six months had become something everyone whinges about.   
Likewise, fax, the internet, automated [[document comparison]], remote working, [[e-discovery]] and a host of other neat recent tricks. All water off an eagle’s back.


But — and ''therefore'' — these are not the applications management complains that lawyers ignore. If anything, lawyers use them ''too much'', and the technology department will periodically engage in pitched battles with the rank and file to ''remove'' this “bloatware”: “do you really need a separate change comparison application? You know there’s one in [[Microsoft Word|Word]], right?” — cue [[exasperated Kermit face]] — must you look at blogs,<ref>Some of which are quite useful, amirite??</ref> cat videos and social media?  
Likewise, [[fax]], the internet, automated [[document comparison]], remote working, [[e-discovery]] and a host of other neat recent tricks. All water off an eagle’s back.
===Workplace anthropology===
But — and ''therefore'' — these are not the [[legaltech]] applications management complains about. If anything, lawyers use them ''too much'', and the technology department will periodically engage in pitched battles with the rank and file to ''remove'' this “bloatware”: “do you really need a separate [[Track changes|change comparison]] application? You know there’s one in [[Microsoft Word|Word]], right?” — cue [[exasperated Kermit face]] — must you look at blogs,<ref>Some of which are quite useful, amirite??</ref> cat videos and social media?  


There is, yes, a [[paradox]] here. It is, as yet, a hypothesis, but has scope to graduate into a law of worker entropy.
There is, yes, a [[paradox]] here. It is, as yet, a hypothesis, but has scope to graduate into a [[twelfth law of worker entropy]]:


{{Quote|''The more useful a software application is to a lawyer, the less value management ascribes to it.  Conversely, the less a lawyer cares for an application, the more important it is to management that she does so.''}}
{{Quote|''{{Twelfth law of worker entropy}}''}}


The innovations which draw sardonic [[Sabotage|clog-throwing allusions]] tend ''not'' make a lawyer’s life easier but, rather,  [[tedious|duller]]<ref>“[[AI]]” based [[NDA]] reviewing tools do this: however dreary reviewing a [[confi]] is, it at least offers you an afternoon’s petulant pettifoggery, and few lawyers will pass that up: reviewing a machine’s attempt to review an NDA takes even that meagre degree of fun out of it.</ref> or just ''worse'', if they are imposed to make ''someone else’s'' life easier — usually a bean counter’s.
The innovations which draw sardonic [[Sabotage|clog-throwing allusions]] tend ''not'' make a lawyer’s life easier but, rather,  [[tedious|duller]]<ref>“[[AI]]” based [[NDA]] reviewing tools do this: however dreary reviewing a [[confi]] is, it at least offers you an afternoon’s petulant pettifoggery, and few lawyers will pass that up: reviewing a machine’s attempt to review an NDA takes even that meagre degree of fun out of it.</ref> or just ''worse'', if they are imposed to make ''someone else’s'' life easier — usually a bean counter’s.
Line 27: Line 37:


{{Sa}}
{{Sa}}
*[[User acceptance testing]]
*[[Change journey]]
*[[Change management]]
*[[Innovation]]
*[[Innovation]]
*[[Legal tech landscape]]
*[[Legal tech landscape]]
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/65508...71552"