Trust but Verify

I am fascinated by this story in which a person managed to persuade at least five television stations to put him on the air to demonstrate his prowess as a yo-yo champion. I understand that producers for morning shows have to fill their air time and I understand the desire to fill that air time with a yo-yo champion. That is something unusual and could be entertaining.

However, I am baffled by the fact that these stations apparently did no research before letting this guy go on live television. Obviously, this did not work out well for the stations. In one instance:

At WISC in Madison, Strasser was booked and ready to go on “News 3 This Morning.” But things took a strange turn when Strasser said on the air, “Do you want to hear a scary story?”

Colin Benedict, the station’s news director, said the anchors were confused. They thought a yo-yo champion was supposed to be on.

Instead, Strasser started talking about his personal story of alcohol and drugs.

And the yo-yo tricks? Benedict said Strasser tried one but the yo-yo fell apart and onto the studio floor.

That was enough for WISC. The anchors took over and Strasser was off the air.

What did this guy do to get on the air? He sent the stations an email:

In each case, producers at the television stations received an e-mail from Joe Guehrke, saying he represented Strasser and ZimZam Yo-Yo, “the world’s first ‘green’ ” nonprofit toymaker.

Guehrke told the stations that Strasser, whom he called a “master yo-yo artist,” would be in their area to bring his environmental message and “zany sense of humor” to kids.

Guehrke wrote in one e-mail to a TV station that Strasser was a dynamic talk-show guest who comes “equipped with a roster of amazing yo-yo tricks, juggling and fun tips about how kids and adults alike can take small steps to make the world a greener place.”

The e-mail solicitation stated that Strasser was a runner-up for Rookie of the Year in 1995, grand champion at the Pensacola Regional and was nominated for the Walt Greenberg Award in 2000.

There is no Walt Greenberg Award in yo-yo, and there is no evidence Pensacola ever hosted a yo-yo tournament or that Strasser won a rookie of the year award.

Maybe I am strange, but when I am contacted by someone or some company that I have never heard of before, the first thing I do is Google that person.

According to the information in the news story, it appears that a reasonable web search would have revealed that this guy was not who or what he claimed to be. If you can’t find a reference to the Walt Greenberg Award anywhere, that should be a pretty good clue that it does not exist.

The internet is a powerful tool and it is good for things other than legal research and Twitter. Keep that in mind. There is nothing wrong with listening to what people have to say. However, it is someone that you have never dealt with before, take the two minutes required to run a Google search and see if the information you find (or do not find) supports what the person is telling you.

Remember STFW. (If you don’t know what that means, Google it).

Multiple Monitors Does Not Mean Multitasking

I am a big proponent of using multiple monitors. Given this, you might be surprised that I agreed with much of what John Heckman had to say in his recent post Dual Monitors and Multitasking–A Contrarian View. John explains:

I recently reorganized my office and wound up with an extra monitor. Since “everybody” swears by dual monitors (or more) I thought I’d give it a shot. Much to my surprise I found the extra monitor distracting and somewhat annoying. After using the second monitor for a couple of weeks to see if it would grow on me, I finally dumped it.

This will probably stir up vigorous protests, but in thinking about it, I realized that dual monitors is a special case of multi-tasking. While I can see certain cases where it would be useful, in general I think people are kidding themselves if they think they are being more productive when multi-tasking. Some exceptions include things like sending emails on your Blackberry during boring meetings (which by definition aren’t very productive anyway), or having multiple documents displayed side by side when you are trying to consolidate them.

John then goes on to talk about a Stanford study that shows that humans are not good at multitasking. And that what we often think of as multitasking is really just dividing our attention between multiple things for short periods of time.

The fact of the matter is that “multitasking” in a real sense (or as a computer would understand it) does not really exist. What multitasking really amounts to is that you divide up your time into more or less small “slices” and simply switch rapidly from one “slice” to another. You are still doing one thing at a time, but switching back and forth in rapid succession. So if you “multitask” by doing four things in twelve minutes, you actually focus (for example) on each one of them three times in one minute “slices.” For better or worse, human beings simply do not have quad core (or even dual core) brains.

I agree with everything that he has to say here. Multitasking for humans just means we do more things less well. However, that is not a reason to abandon a multiple monitor set up. Now, if you are using your multiple monitors to monitor Twitter, constantly check your email, follow your Facebook friends, watch the stock ticker, and monitor the score in your favorite game, you are likely not increasing your productivity at all. In fact, I feel pretty comfortable that your productivity is abysmal.

However, I do believe that multiple monitors can benefit many attorneys. An example of this how I use multiple monitors in my practice. At my office, I work with a three monitor set up. I have my laptop monitor along with two external monitors. the external monitors are the same size and resolution.

The external monitors provide more space to work on and they are my primary working monitors. On my laptop, I keep open my time and billing program, thus helping to ensure that I do not forget to keep track of my time. I also use this monitor to stash any programs or documents that I have open that I am not using at the moment.

I use the monitor in the middle as my main working monitor. In my experience, when I am working on something, I am almost always looking at something else. Sometimes it’s other pleadings, sometimes it’s discovery documents, other times its legal research. Regardless, it is usually something. This something, is what I have on the left monitor.

Thus, I regularly use multiple monitors, however, I am not using it for multitasking, I am using it to keep the information I need to do my job in the best position for me to work with it.

Obviously, my set up will not work for everyone. However, I think it is something to consider.

Note: I believe that John acknowledged these benefits in his post.

What Going Paperless Means to Me

One of the problems that I have when describing my paperless practice to others is the fact that my practice is not really paperless. I use plenty of paper. In fact, a couple of days ago, I mailed out close to 100 pages of paper in court filings and courtesy copies. Because of this, I have, at times, had trouble explaining exactly what I am talking about.

Fortunately for me, I have found the answer I have been looking for. I recently checked out the About Page on the Going Paperless blog by Molly DiBianca. In that About Page, she explains:

Although there seems to be a whole lot of chatter about what exactly a “paperless office” is, exactly, I’d suggest it’s not so complicated. Certainly, I still use paper. And plenty of it, truth be told. The “paperless” part is not that paper is not used–it’s that paper is irrelevant. In a paperless office (at least as I’ve defined it), there is no reliance on a paper file. Everything (and I mean everything) is filed electronically using a document-management system.

This system didn’t come together overnight. It took practice and tweaking. It also took dedication to build the trust in the system that is necessary before abandoning paper files altogether. But it does work and, honestly, it’s really easy to use.

I think this encapsulates the idea of a paperless office perfectly. Yes, I have and go through plenty of paper in my office. However, that is because the systems of third parties make me do so. For me, however, the paper is irrelevant.

The more I think about the concept of a paperless office, the more I am starting to believe that it is a state of mind much more than a process. Sure, you have to implement proper processes to make sure that it is working properly. However, a paperless office must first start in your mind.

You must convince yourself that you do not need the paper version of a document to work with it. Once you start down this path, I believe that you will quickly discover that it is, in fact, more efficient to work with an electronic copy of a document than with a paper copy. However, you will never reach that discovery if you do not first shift your state of mind to an understanding that you need not rely on the paper files.

Renumbering Your PDFs

I work with PDFs a lot. I can’t tell you the last time I pulled a paper file to look at a document in it. Instead, I look only at my electronic copy of a file. Navigating in a PDF, however is not always the easiest thing to do, especially if the creator did not include bookmarks or other reference points.

An additional problem can arise when you are working with a document that has different styles of page numbers. An example is a brief, that may include pages i through x for the prefatory matters and Arabic numbers after that.

At her blog Going Paperless, Molly DiBianca, provides a useful, easy to follow, step-by-step tutorial on how to remumber your pages in a PDF.

The process she describes is easy to do and it is post I definitely recommend that you check out.

Second Monitors Allow You to Work Smarter

I know that I have written about this concept a lot. Thus, rather than blathering on about how much a second monitor can increase your efficiency, I will point you to an excellent post from Laura Calloway, the PMA for the Alabama State Bar. She begins:

If you’re not already doing so, one of the most productive (and cost effective) technology changes that you can make is to add a second monitor to your computer. Adding a second monitor is inexpensive, (generally under $200 for the monitor and an additional video card, if you need one). If you already have an extra one lying around the office, so much the better. And unlike lots of other technology upgrades, adding a second monitor won’t tie up a whole afternoon – or longer – and make you want to pull your hair out.

Go here to read her entire post.