Increasing Efficiency

Agile Web Solution’s hugely popular 1Password launched its iPhone app partner yesterday. 1Password is the go-to password/secret manager for Macs and can now be called the best password manager for the iPhone.

Initial Impressions

When you first launch the program, it prompts you to set an 4-digit unlock code to access the main program and another “master code” to access some of the more sensitive information contained inside the program. This can include everything from your login information and saved forms for websites to secure notes to “wallet” type information.

To use the program, you enter your 4-digit unlock code and then you view some of the saved content. You can choose whether to have that saved content be subject to entering the master code or now. By default, anything that is imported from your 1Password computer information is tagged to be “master-code” dependent. This is helpful because otherwise you’d have to go into every saved item and configure it. Truthfully, if you’re serious about security, there is absolutely no reason why every item in there should be anything but master-code locked.

Like a few of the iPhone apps out there, 1Password makes wonderful use of the ability to open a browser page. That permits you to the website (in all of its Safari-like glory) using your secure login information, without switching applications.

While I would like to see something stronger than a 4-digit passcode to access 1Password, that concern is mitigated by the ability to lockdown absolutely everything in the program with the master-code (which can, and should, be long, complex, etc.)

It looks like Agile Web is looking to make the iPhone version of 1Password a paid-for application. Fine, I guess, if people are buying it standalone. The fact that it is an iPhone application also means that hoards of Windows users will now have, er, access to this great application, but I think that the iPhone version should be free to existing Mac 1Password license holders. Let’s see if they do the right thing.

Chuck Newton, who runs the Third Wave Lawyer, recently had a post on his thoughts about the Macbook Air and further on about the value proposition of using Apple products or Macs in the Law Office.

Chuck makes the usual commonly misguided points about Macs, which makes even the reluctant-fanboy in me feel the need to respond. So, let’s take these one at a time:

Chuck says:

I am all about cheap and I hate cell phone bills coming in in the hundreds of dollars a month. That is also the reason I have been unimpressed with the MacBook Air. I am not into novelty and design as an excuse to take money out of my pocket. That ended with me when I bought a Pet Rock in the 70s. Apple is all about being the end thing, and some lawyers like that. It is pretty. It is cool.

Well, I guess that one lawyer’s experience is hardly dispositive of an issue, but let me tell you about the cost of my Apple products (I’m assuming you’re points concern the non-cross-platform items, i.e. not iPods or iPhones). I run a small law firm in New Jersey that has 4 attorneys and 2 staff members. Put aside the issue of whether I need all of these people or the overhead for a second and let me tell you that the entire office uses Mac computers. Here are the ages of the computers we have: 1 laptop (Macbook) from 2006, 2 eMacs (all-in-ones) from 2000 and 3 PowerMac towers from 1998. That’s right - I have 3 computers that have been functioning for 10 years. So, the average money I spent in hardware per year for the last 10 years for those users was $200 per attorney. For the “staff” computers the cost is much lower (maybe $50 per attorney per year). If one is all about cheap, you can’t do better than that.

At the same time, in the last two years, I have spent $0 in IT costs and about 15 minutes in down-time when I thought one of the eMacs was broken and drove to my neighborhood repair dude (who fixed a loose internal connection, charged me nothing, and had me back in the office working in those 15 minutes). So, in running the firm, I have almost no down time and no upkeep costs simply because of the fact that I’m running Apple machines. When I worked for a firm that used Windows, they had a bevy of “loaner” laptops for the folks whose machines needed repair. I needed the loaners anywhere between 2-3 times per month. Imagine what that would have cost if I was running the large firm.

Finally, and I only disclose because I think it’s relevant to the conversation, about $0.50 of every dollar goes to profit. There is no way I could maintain that kind of margin if I were running Windows machines. I don’t have any IT firm on retainer to help me to stay running. The shelf life of my computer hardware is ridiculously off the scale. I finally upgraded some machines because if their inability to run the newest software (which is 4 generations beyond what it was when they were first purchased).

The point is - there is no way I could agree to the position that using Macs in my law office presents a higher cost proposition than Windows.

Chuck also says:

And, these lawyers are willing to burden their practices with the costs of apple products (both as to purchase price and in operating it in this Windows environment in which lawyers must too often compete).

First, as a true fanboy, I’d have to take you to task for not capitalizing the “A” in Apple (you are off Steve Jobs’ Xmas list). But, my second point is that that statement is just wrong. I have a number of clients who have been with the firm longer than 10 years. We’ve never used anything but Mac products. We’ve never needed to have a Windows machine to operate in the Windows environment (which of course I will admit is the case). Between the Mac’s native ability to create, read and comment on .PDFs and the number of free (FREE) office suites that create, read and edit Word and Excel documents - there’s never a translation problem. In fact, clients were surprised to learn that we run a Mac environment precisely because there was never a problem.

Another point that should be made is that running Macs allows me to better compete with other lawyers because of the superior way in which they allow me to be creative. A few concrete examples - my proposals, presentations and work product is better on an order of magnitude as compared to my fellow Windows-using colleagues. Part of that can be done with software that comes right with the computer (and should be deducted from any comparison on price) and other costs as much as $29. Now, others can say that all of that flourish is unnecessary, but I would argue it’s what contributes to the thought that all lawyers are boring (and I don’t mean you, Chuck - anyone who posts as much good jazz as you do can’t be boring - but you get my point). Without shipping it out to trial presentation firms, graphic designers or marketing gurus, I can create all kinds of great brochures, stunning “powerpoint” presentations and even my own letterhead at no or little costs. Plus, I have fun doing it. The hardware and software allow me to work (serve as tools) and I don’t have to spend any time learning how to use the tools - there’s inherent value in that. As an example, if the difference between a micro-notebook running Windows versus Mac OSX natively is truly $1,400 as suggested (and I would take issue with that), and you spend more than 10 hours tinkering with stuff that you don’t want to be tinkering with - haven’t you made that money already?

Actually, let me address the cost difference comparison being suggested. To say that a sub-notebook running Windows (and I’m familiar with most of them) is comparable to the MacBook Air is to purposely discount or ignore any of the advantages of the Air. For instance, most of the Windows machines compromised by reducing the size of the keyboard and screen size (and quality). For people who think that pecking things out with their thumbs is frustrating, try typing on a slightly-smaller-than-usual keyboard where nothing is where your muscle memory is telling you it is. The Air, on the other hand, has a full-sized keyboard, and as a writing machine - that’s crucial for me. The other thing about screen size and quality I can see if people don’t want to pay more for that. I would suggest that a screen that uses LED and saves battery life is preferable to one that doesn’t (forget about the environmental advantages - just focus on spending more time working, less money on batteries) and that’s worth something to me.

Finally, there’s no way that I would recommend an Air to a new-convert as their sole working machine (and here I open myself up to a price counter), but the Air is really more of a second machine. What you want (and I know you want one, Chuck) is a Macbook. It’s an excellent laptop, only about 5 lbs., and powerful enough to run your entire office. In fact, until last week, it served as my only computer for the last 2 years. It’s never been down, it’s never given me the blue screen of death and I don’t have to spend my precious time tinkering with how to get it to work “right.”

So, if you give me enough time and enough of your ear, I promise I can convince you to switch. In fact, it’s almost sacrilege that a cost-sensitive, solo-practitioner who’s at the bleeding edge of how to be a lawyer is using anything but a Mac. In fact, you should listen to our podcast (which I recorded, produced and published for free from my Macbook) to hear some other, more notable, folks tell you the same thing….you do have an iPod, right? Here’s the link.

See - I even managed to avoid being a reactionist-jerk in my response. That’s better than average for challenging a Mac-fanboy to a duel.

Posted by Victor J. Medina,
Medina, Martinez & Castroll, LLC

No pithy title. No lazy link love to another review. Just a straight up review of the software that most likely saved my career.

I have had a problem with my hands for quite some time. As a lawyer, I do a fair amount of typing, whether that’s for e-mail responses or in drafting letters and agreements. At the same time, I spent a number of years playing the piano recreationally. All of this has resulted in me having a dull pain in my hands whenever I type too much after a long day.

Before I switched to Macs, I ran a speech recognition software called Dragon Naturally Speaking. It was pretty good, but the law firm that I worked for got me the “legal” edition of the software, which I think was a few versions behind the really good software. After I switched to Macs, the only piece of software that was out there for speech recognition was iListen by MacSpeech. To be frank, it wasn’t very good. In fact, with all due respect to MacSpeech, it was terrible. So, for the last two years, I have been writing things out longhand, typing everything, and generally living with the dull pain that resulted.

As many people who are interested in speech recognition software know, MacSpeech announced that they were launching a new speech recognition software called Dictate. This was really important news because rather than relying on the old Phillips engine that powered iListen, MacSpeech had been able to license the engine that powered Dragon from Nuance, and that was what was going to be running the new Dictate software. They made this announcement at MacWorld, even winning a Best of Show award for Dictate. I was very excited and placed my order right away.

Then, I spent the next month and a half checking the status of my order two or three times a day. Finally, last night, I learned that my copy of Dictate was shipping out and would arrive today. I installed it right away and have been playing with it for the last three hours. As you might have guessed, I’ve been drafting this entire review using Dictate.

What can I say? It’s fabulous. I mean, I only did the basic training, and I’d be surprised if the software got one word wrong for every thousand that I’ve spoken. I’ve used it so much that my keyboard, which is attached via Bluetooth, has power down and lost connection with my Macbook. If it does miss a word, it is most likely because I’ve gotten lazy with my dictation not because it has misinterpreted the context or word I’ve spoken.

It takes contractions with ease, and laughs at my challenge to interpret capitalized words like iListen, iPhone, iPod, Dictate, Mac ad nauseam. It even does an excellent job of controlling my computer, such as opening and quitting applications, inserting text before and after other text, and switching between applications.

If I’m being fair with this review, and I’d like to think that I am, I should point out that the software has a couple of bugs. These have less to do with the speech recognition part of the software, and more to do with some of the internal functionality of the commands that you can use to make your speech recognition smoother. Specifically, it has a quirky little bug that copies text after an insertion point somewhere higher in the document and places it at the end of wherever you resume dictating. Not being a programmer, I have no idea why this happens. Also, as many other people have pointed out in their preview of Dictate, the program does not allow you to correct a word by selecting it and choosing from a number of options. Though the company has been very clear that it intends on adding that particular feature in a subsequent version.

Why is this important for you? Well, I’m not sure that it is. But, this is ridiculously important for me because it means I can now rest my hands for the better part of the working day. And, I honestly believe that this software has extended my career by at least a few years. Unfortunately, it also means that I have no excuse for being more productive during the day.

Of course, if you use the program long enough, you will be speaking your punctuation in everyday life. And, that’s going to get annoying for your family very very quickly.

Posted by Victor J. Medina,
Medina, Martinez & Castroll, LLC

I”ve been trying out different software programs that implement the GTD (Getting Things Done) method of productivity. I started out using OmniOutliner with an overlay script called KinklessGTD. The problem was ubiquitous capture and processing. It was an admittedly flawed system, but the best one available. Like a fat man trying diets, I’ve tried every GTD solution out there. Some of them were so horrible that I deleted them after 10 minutes of playing around. Others showed promise, so I was forced to keep dual systems going (I never gave up on OmniOutliner). All the while, the folks at OmniGroup had said that they were working on a dedicated productivity and task management software. I got on their alpha/beta list and have been trying it for months. It’s finally ready for release and so I encourage you to pick up OmniFocus.

Right now this is a Mac-only software program, but if you’re among the enlightened, you’re already running on Apple. Here are the reasons I love OmniFocus. First is that it has been developed by a team of GTD devotees who “get” what implementing the system is about. Simply put, GTD (or any productivity method, for that matter) is essentially about three things: (1) Capture, (2) Processing, and (3) Action. If you accept, as I do, that humans are extremely good at stepping up to a widget machine and cranking out widgets, the most effective thing you can do to increase productivity is spend as much time as is practical at one machine cranking widgets before moving on to the next machine. Translating this to work stuff, place all your calls when you’re best suited to do so and read/respond to emails when you’re on the computer.

Anyways, I digress. OmniFocus allows you to do ubiquitous capture anytime you’re on the computer. You just hit a keystroke combination and BAM! you’re inputting stuff into the program. You don’t have to process it right away, just capture it when it comes and move on to your next task. OmniFocus also collect all the stuff you capture in a single inbox and is very user-friendly at Processing that into its contextually-sensitive parts. Finally, OmniFocus plays nice with iCal, Mail.app and other software to allow you to Act on the tasks when you’re in the right setting to do so.

I highly recommend OmniFocus and if you purchase it before January 8th, you’ll get it at a serious discount. I’ve go no horse in the race, no connection to OmniGroup, but if you’re someone looking for productivity software - OmniFocus is tops.

VJM

My wife will kill me for saying so, but her organizational system is a complete failure. Well, she may not kill me because she’s quick to admit that this is so.

I ran across this great article by the Productivity Jesus himself - David Allen.

David tells us that the secret to organization is that….Things need to be where things need to be. Simple, but profound.

I think that the mistake that many people make in “getting organized” is to purchase a bunch of organizational tools (baskets, folders, etc.) without committing to a system of placing things in the system in a way that fits to the needs that one has for that stuff. Typing the last half of that sentence made my head spin around - I can only imagine what it was like for your to read. Let me try it again - I often tell my wife, “Everything has a home - find the home and put it there.” Most of the time, the home is not in your head (though we put a lot of “stuff” in there) and most of the time the home is not the pile in the middle of your desk, unless that’s your in-box. Unless you’ve successfully put stuff in its proper home (a reference folder, on a list of phone calls to make, etc.) you won’t be organized.

I belong to a group of professionals who meet on a weekly basis and part of our meetings are spent learning from each other. Typically we learn about the industries in which each of us work, but occasionally that time is spent teaching or learning about other stuff.

The last opportunity I had to teach I spent the time explaining (or more accurately, trying to explain) the virtues of Getting Things Done, the productivity system created by David Allen.

Here’s a great 5 minute video featuring David Allen that probably does a better job of explaining it than I do.

Click here to watch

This isn’t good at all. I’ve been lusting for an iPhone since they were launched. MacBreak Weekly and similar podcasts have been on a constant rotation on my iPod. Oh, and to top things off, last week I met a potential client who owns 6 AT&T stores (so, you know, I’d have a reason to be an AT&T customer…)

Nonetheless, I’ve been able to resist plunking down (now) $400 at the Apple store. I keep telling myself that I’m waiting for a 3G version to come out - that and for my Verizon contract to come up in June.

But if my friend, Grant Griffiths, keeps putting up posts like this- he’s going to cost me money and at least one major eye-rolling by my wife when I show her my new “business tool.”

As an added value, here’s the latest MacBreak Weekly. If you’re at all an Apple fan or devotee, it’s a great podcast - totally accessible by the non-geek:

I was looking through the categories I set up last year when I first launched this blog and I noticed the “Increasing Efficiency” category. And then I noticed that I hadn’t spent a lot of time posting on that subject.

So, with that in mind, I want to take the next few posts and share some of my lifehacks that have helped me stay efficient, productive and the ninja you need to be to be successful at this.

With that in mind, my first recommendation is to view a great Google Talk by Merlin Mann of 43Folders called “Inbox Zero.” Inbox Zero is a set of special posts looking at the skills, tools and attitude needed to empty your email inbox - and then keep it that way. Those are Merlin’s words, not mine. It builds on the concepts of Getting Things Done (which is a subject fit for its own series of posts), most importantly the concept of “processing” - this is whole-heartedly recommended.

If you’ve got the time, here’s the video

There has been a lot of talk on the blogosphere about hiring assistants, spending money on office space, etc.  It can be found mostly here, here, andhere, and in the comments to those posts. 

I may have to turn in my card to the Cool-Kid’s Club, but I disagree with most of the sentiments there about hiring staff.  Well, I should really start from a place of agreement, which is that needless frills are a waste of money, except if that’s what your clients care about.  While it is perfectly possible to practice law without thick, creamy letterhead, or without persian rugs, or without wearing Charles Tyrwhitt shirts and cufflinks, some clients expect it, and if you’re going after those clients, realize you won’t land them without it.  Doesn’t mean that you might not land one or two, but if you’re not meeting your client’s demands, you’re going to have to spend effort convincing them that they want something else (you).

One of the statements that started this discussion was that an attorney wanted to make enough money to hire a staff member.  I agree that the concept is wrong, but I believe that it’s wrong because he or she has the order mixed up.  He should be saying that he wants to hire a staff member to make more money.

Not to patronize, but it is an economic business waste to have the $250/hr person perfoming the $50/hour task.  Here’s the trickier part - most people will say that it isn’t wise to bring in a person to do the $50/hour task unless you can occupy that person with sufficient full-time work to justify the cost.  That’s patently wrong. 

Unless you are satisfied capping your earnings (at either a reasonable number for working less hours or at a higher number for working crazy hours), you will never increase your success doing it all yourself, or waiting for there to be enough work to justify hiring a person full time.  On the other hand, if you have an eye for keeping the total hours you work reasonable, and at the same time, increasing your earnings, you must, MUST, bring on additional people for one reason, and only one reason - to free you to bring in more business.  And you must bring on these people before you have enough full-time work for them to stay occupied.  If it turns out that you don’t have enough work for them, go get it.  Take the time that they’re working on stuff that the firm has to do and spend the time developing business. 

I think that a 33%/33%/33% approach to your work time is a good guide.  The manager of a law firm should spend about a 1/3 of his or her time practicing law and performing client work, 1/3 of the time attending to the administration of the law firm, and 1/3 of the time actively developing business. 

I’m not saying be foolish about it - let’s not go and hire 3 attorneys and 4 paralegals when you’re not busy enough to fill your own day.  But if you can’t meet the 33% rule I set out above (particularly the part about spending 1/3 of your time on business development) because you are swamped with work either on the administrative or the practicing law side - fix that situation with the approprite personnel.

Because I don’t care if you fight traffic tickets or set up IPOs, you need to spend time actively developing business and/or attending to your existing institutional clients. 

I don’t have an ending for this post; I could probably go on for a few more paragraphs.  I’ll leave it alone for now.