Reprinted from the October 2002 issue of "Lexpert, the business magazine for lawyers." Used with Permission

No Participation without the ‘Sizzle’
by Dan C. Felean   |  Printer Friendly Version

Ask any lawyer if he or she prefers substance or sizzle, and you can easily guess the response. “Don’t waste my time with sizzle, just dish out the substance and get out of my way.” After all, who has time for window-dressing, and who among us wants to admit to being influenced by the style or manner of presentation? Give us substance and you can ignore the rest!

But, while this is an admirable intention, it is exactly what is wrong with many information systems built for lawyers today. After a considerable investment of time and money on intranets, extranets and portals, a lot of firms and companies concerned by the lack of bottom line results. Many of these systems have failed to attract and retain the interest of their intended audience. Although intranets and portals were billed as an investment in improved access to information, some say they ended up with more stuff they couldn’t find or use.

The absence of sizzle is one of the principal reasons that systems destined for use by lawyers fail to live up to expectations. By sizzle, I refer to all those factors – other than the hard, cold information - that affect how information is presented to and used by a lawyer. The concept of “usability” was a popular topic a few years ago when everybody was launching their first corporate Web sites. But, given the generally low usage and participation in both corporate and law firm portals, it’s worth looking at the role and value of sizzle again.

A History of Boring Information Delivery
Traditionally, law office software systems were designed for heads-down production by back office data specialists. The data entry and inquiry screens were created to be dull and efficient, using all the space possible on one screen to save time. Similarly, information inquiries tended to follow the standards of accounting reports, with dense columns of numbers and abbreviations. In this setting, spending time on presentation “sizzle” simply interfered with productivity. And since the primary users were law firm staff, they could be required to use it regardless of the lack of so-called “user-friendliness.”

However, as more lawyers demanded access to current, relevant information about their business, practice and clients, law firms took advantage of Web technologies to empower the users with more information.

Web opened the possibilities
The Internet, e-mail and portal technology forever changed the volume and manner in which we receive information. Delivering information through an intranet or extranet portal opened up an unending flow of information that was previously buried in accounting, research and other databases. Not only could a lawyer get access to multiple sources of information, he or she could usually get it in one place, learning only one interface (the browser) with one password, and the information could be personalized to specific needs or interests.

Even better, the creation of portal pages became so easy, that more businesses started designing their own according to their needs. Law firms and corporations were no longer subject to the design decisions of a distant software vendor. The end of dull, lifeless information seemed in sight.

Be Careful what you ask for…
Unfortunately, the democratization of information delivery often results in one of two extremes: either all sizzle with not enough substance, or dry, dense substance with little attention to sizzle. Neither extreme is acceptable to a serious law firm user, and neither will generate the kind of participation and benefits expected from this technology investment.

The creation of fun, animated pages has limited value in most law firm systems. It usually fails to take into account the intense, analytical personalities and expectations of a legal audience (Not everybody thinks in phrases like “including, but not limited to …”). However, the other extreme is often just as bad. In some firms, the intranet developers didn’t simply ask the lawyers what they wanted; they actually let them design how the information was to be presented. This resulted in some of the most incredibly detailed, dense, substantive Web screens you will ever see (but will never read). Just as too much pizzazz can become irritating, the lack of uniform standards and usability has doomed these dry, dense systems to disuse.

This is especially true with delivery of information on a computer screen. Studies show that reading from the computer screen is 25 percent slower and 79 percent of users scan the page instead of reading it word-for-word. Poorly designed portal pages can quickly drive away lawyers who have no time to waste.

Simply put, just because you can design a screen or form, doesn’t mean that you should. Information system design, presentation standards, navigation and layout are tasks better left to those with expertise in communication and design. The lawyers’ role is to express clearly what they need, what they like, what they find stimulating or clear, and what they don’t like. Then turn it over to professionals to present it according to established standards of usability in a clear, concise and consistent manner.

Interesting things are more easily consumed
There is a middle ground, one we can call good communications sizzle. As David Weinberger, co-author of the Cluetrain Manifesto, said, “Entertainment is not the opposite of information… it is information that stimulates interest in itself. Put another way, he says, “We find interesting things interesting.”

Lawyers are not immune to sizzle, if sizzle means better packaging of information, easy usability and good communication techniques. So, let’s look at how your firm or department can inject a bit of life to make the experience of imparting or acquiring information a little less burdensome.

Creating Usability
According to usability advocate, Jacob Nielsen, one of the oldest guidelines for useable interaction design is to increase the user's sense of control and freedom. Let the user view a summary to decide if he wants all the detail. Let the user turn on or turn off notifications and features that are not universally applicable. 

Secondly, when in doubt, keep it simple. He also says to avoid those elaborate animation and graphics that do not enhance the understanding of the information. Start with basic functions before crowding the system with all sorts of options. “Google” (google.com) is still one of the best examples of an intuitively simple interface that employs very sophisticated technology behind the scenes.

Most importantly, Nielsen recommends watching the users use your systems or portal, whether it is a legal practice page, a precedents database or any other knowledge source for lawyers. Consumer product manufacturers have long recognized that focus groups are a key determinant of acceptance and usability "Look at what they do, what they do not do, and where they fail," says Nielsen. “Listen to what the users are saying and how they behave." After you've tested five users, he says, you've gathered 80 percent of the information you need to succeed.

Adding Presentation Sizzle
Can financial information be more effectively presented as a chart, instead of a column of numbers? Is there an alternative to a dense list? How about leaving some white space to help users quickly recognize what is on the screen? Isn’t a picture (image) still worth a thousand words? If most people scan a computer page, are you using summaries, titles, headnotes, etc. to help them locate relevant material? Are you taking advantage of three-dimensional nature of the Web to present information in layers of detail that welcome the beginner and challenge the veteran?

Marketing and communications specialists can be your allies in evaluating the strengths and weakness of your current portal. Often a little tweak, some standardization, some white space or a facelift can transform dry data into useful information by making it more obviously understandable and useful to more people.

Get what you paid for
Unlike production systems, intranets and portals have to compete for the attention of a very tough audience. Lawyers are now information consumers, and, they have to be convinced of the value and utility of portal information sources. Similarly, the people controlling the development and direction of the law firm portal have to recognize that it is not enough to simply dump the information. If an item is not easy to understand and effortless to access, or if there is not enough substance to make it worth the effort, you will not be able to attract and retain the interest of a busy professional who has no time to waste. Then what happens to your firm’s investment in portal technology?

In the end, an investment in presentation and usability sizzle will create a higher return on your prior investment in substance. More attractive, stimulating intranet and portal pages will bring return traffic, increased participation and more leverage of information and resources. In the process, you may even learn to enjoy the information experience.

Dan C. Felean a principal of PensEra Knowledge Technologies, a national consulting firm that specializes in knowledge management strategies and technologies for law firms and corporate law departments. See www.pensera.com.

© 2002 PensEra Knowledge Technologies