Please note this is where you should really suspend cynicism. This article focuses on an approach to plan, design and automate a system that embodies your IP and processes. This process more about drilling down and identifying all the moving pieces in staff minds when they draft documents than it is about handling documents.

These sorts of systems are typically designed to simplify the decision making process to the point where a user is not required to know the outcome of answers, but simply has to "fill in the boxes correctly".

A simple example would be including a Form 1 Notice of Interstate Service. A simple system would ask you if you need one. A system that makes many decisions for you would simply compare your issuing state to the other party's state and include the Form 1 if there the states are different.

Desired Result

You have identified one or more practices which you believe will yield high returns when programmed fully (that is, the majority of documents necessary are able to be produced automatically by your system, without post assembly editing). You are looking for a process something like:

• New instructions come in from a client and user is provided with either a data sheet to enter or a dictated list of pieces of information to enter.
• Each document is produced with a minimum of data entry, as the system already knows the "mundane" data, and retains all data entered on the matter which was used to create previous documents.
• The system caters to the majority of possible permeations of each document, providing options for a user to check or select, as relevant to the matter they are currently working on.
• The system will warn when options entered are inappropriate or will disallow inappropriate decisions entirely.
• Only required variables will be presented to the user - if the variable is visible it needs an answer.
• The content of resulting documents is based almost solely on options checked, selected or entered into the system and not post assembly editing.
• Staff eventually become comfortable with the concept that "data in = correct document output".
• Proofreading of documents is done by reading an extract of the data entered into the system, rather than minutely scanning and checking every document, paragraph and phrase.

When asked by a layman "What do you do for a living Ian?" my response is "I program a lawyer's brain into their computer". And this system is exactly what I'm talking about. It is the slow, painful process of taking everything a lawyer or paralegal does across the board in their area of practice, and programming the majority of it into a rule & logic based system that produces documents. This is a serious level of investment. Thinking you wish to undertake this type of project and bailing out half way through, or cutting corners to "save money" is going to substantially reduce ANY return you would get from such a project - be warned - this is not quick, easy or cheap. It is serious investment for generous returns, if planned for and implemented properly.

To put it in perspective, you would undertake this if you have 50 matters or more (on high volume libraries) active matters per month for each separate project library. You would also adopt this approach if you are handling 5 or more "deal" type matters per month where you charge more than $10,000.00 per (rough figure, off the top of my head). You are looking at either producing ridiculous amounts of documentation for a large number of matters with small amounts of effort and minimal professional staff management OR you are looking to drastically reduce your production of a first draft on high end transactional matters. There is rarely a middle ground here.

Approach

You want serious sam stuff. Here's a possible approach:

• Pick what you think is your most profitable area of law. I'm not talking about pin the tail on the donkey - I'm talking about hard figures. Any document assembly consultant will be happy to discuss this with you without cost as they will feel it is likely you will retain them if their advice is sound. In any event, figure out which area of practice is going to be the money maker.
• You knew it was coming - get a consultant. No ifs or buts. Even if you have "an experienced document assembly person" in-house, get a consultant. In-house personnel have largely dealt with one set of circumstances and requirements - your firm's. Consultants have dealt with a multitude of needs, approaches, requirements and results. They will have a far broader view of what you may or may not need, and may save you thousands of dollars, even if they are simply a guiding hand.
• Read the developer section on this website- there is too much to cover in a single article.

It is impossible to develop and build a system without knowledge and experience. Far too often, document assembly is done poorly, simply because some basic steps were done in haste, or not done at all. Our "Developers of Document Assembly" section will deal with many of the processes and approaches that can/should be used to create quality systems however, there is no way to post a complete and total checklist to build a good document assembly system.

Downside to this approach

The drawback to this approach is obvious: development time and related risk. It takes dedicated time to convert a lawyer's thought processes into system that produces correct documents first time in the majority of cases. It takes time to gather all the templates and client versions of documents that will form the raw material for it. It takes time to review each template and create a master template that contains all the client version differences in it. It takes time to design a programming structure that will produce the necessary data in the correct format. It takes time to test it, refine it and perfect it. It takes time to ensure that correct input = correct output.

And at the end of the day, if the developer is not highly skilled, or professional staff were unsupportive, or support staff did not provide adequate feedback and constructive criticism, or adequate planning and structuring was not done, there is real risk as to whether the system will return an investment. Like many investments, it is merely a case of higher investment (and ante) to generate higher returns.

Benefits to this approach

You produce a system that was built by one or more experts doing all the thinking that they ever have to do for a majority of their matters - from then on the system does most of your thinking for you. Even better, support staff can produce the same high quality of document with less time expended dictating instructions to them, even if they've only worked for you for a week!

You don't need to re-draft every single clause in a contract or lease: you select the appropriate options from an indexed list, which inserts the correct paragraph(s) or clause(s) at the appropriate places (I am not referring to simple clause libraries). The resulting text from these options are stock standard, as settled by your finest legal minds for that area of law. Or perhaps (for example) you are dealing with leasing, and there are 20 different signage options, spread across 3 categories depending upon the type of lease. A few clicks and the appropriate wording appears, as required. Once this process has been refined and perfected, your staff are spending considerably less time to produce a higher quality of document. Flat rate billings become not only possible, but the only option as your system has been programmed to automatically handle the circumstances and complexities of (for example) 80%+ of the matters that hit your desk.

If you know and are confident that 80% of matters can be "factory lined" through your document assembly system, you can flat rate fees to a client so that you are not limited to the static profit ratio of an hourly rate. Leveraged profit. Real profit.

Even better, once "trust" is gained in the system and the system has proven that correct input = correct output, the resulting document doesn't have to be read from start to finish, only the options chosen and the data entered has to be checked. This is possible. We're not saying that lawyers are replaceable - they are not. No matter how much you program a system, there will always be scenarios and variables that haven't been catered to. There will still need to be quality control and supervision - that is a given. But if you can cover a majority of scenarios in a document assembly system, you can reduce your staff's total contact time with documents, allowing more productive work to be undertaken, without increasing staff levels and overheads. Things like marketing your system as a means of getting new clients, increasing levels of service to existing clients and billing more with less expenditure.

Is it easy? No. Is it doable? Absolutely - I have done it and more than once.