DMS Matter-Centric Architecture Update: One Year Later

Modern Document Management Systems (DMS) provide ways of creating structures for organizing content that go beyond old-fashioned 'folders.' 'WorkSpaces' can contain folders (static containers for content) and stored searches (dynamic, predefined ways of finding current content that meets specific search criteria) organized under 'Tabs.' Security and metadata (document-specific profile information) can be assigned to different levels of the structure, and lower levels can be set to 'inherit' higher-level security and metadata values.

In a law firm environment, it is natural, considering the way matters are handled and taking into account important business processes (including new matter opening procedures and records management requirements), that each matter be allocated a WorkSpace ' leading to the 'Matter-Centric' architectural paradigm. Financial services, accounting and other professional services firms may use similar but different paradigms (typically client-specific or task-specific), and generic types of WorkSpaces may be used in any type of business, such as user-specific Personal WorkSpaces, business-to-business Vendor WorkSpaces, help desk or support services Application WorkSpaces, and myriad types of administrative WorkSpaces.

The power of security management within a WorkSpace and the convenience of metadata and security inheritance make it easier for users to store new content or move existing content into appropriate containers with a minimum of additional data entry.

The fact that WorkSpaces are also Web pages make Web portals and client extranets seamless to users inside and outside the firm, without maintaining redundant copies of content, eliminating synchronization and security translation problems.

Out with the Old'

Many firms are realizing that the intricately designed ' and hotly debated ' document identification schemes developed when the DMS was originally implemented were not really adopted or widely used by end users. Poor document identification can lead to 'provisioning' problems when moving to a matter-centric structure: If document type-specific folders are designed into each WorkSpace, and the actual documents have inaccurate values for this identifier, the document will not be placed into the correct folders during the matter-centric migration. Rather than obsessing about how to correct these problems, a possible approach is to look at it as an opportunity to abandon some or all of the historical schemes, given the lower relevance of this information in a matter-centric environment.

' And in with the New

Increasing Adoption of Matter-Centricity

In the recent 2006 ILTA IT Spending and Budgeting Survey, Matter-Centricity was in the top seven 'Most Exciting Technologies or Trends,' and was the only one that involved a practice concept, rather than specific hardware or software.

As of the time of this writing, about one-fifth of firms that have DMS systems that are matter-centric-capable have gone from non-structured, profile-based content management to matter-centric content management. The bulk of the remaining firms are either in the planning, design or rollout phase. Only a small percentage of firms have stated specific plans to not go matter-centric. Firm size, client profile and other practice-specific issues may indicate that this is an appropriate stance.

Specific catch-all folders (called, e.g., 'To Be Filed' or 'Other Documents') can be created initially within each matter WorkSpace, and pre-loaded ('provisioned') with all documents for the specific client and matter, regardless of other metadata values, whether correct or not. Then additional folders with additional specific metadata values can be created and provisioned, moving correctly identified documents from the catch-all folder to the more specific folder or folders within the same WorkSpace, and out of the catch-all folder. Using this approach, documents using correct metadata or documents with identifiers that will be preserved, can be carried forward to the appropriate new matter-centric structures, and the detrimental effects of incorrect or discontinued metadata vales can be minimized.

New Matter-Centric Design Concepts

Powerful Capabilities of Structures Above the Matter Level

In addition to the structures within a matter-specific WorkSpace, shortcuts to WorkSpaces may be distributed to end users in a number of different ways:

• A 'My Matters' container can organize shortcuts to WorkSpaces organized by 'Categories' that can also contain any number of levels of subcategories. Using this concept, a definitive, exhaustive listing of matters can be created and organized in multiple ways under a single user's My Matters container. For example, a virtual 'Litigation' user can contain shortcuts to all litigation matters organized by Client Name, Matter Name, Year Opened, Respon-sible Attorney, or any combination of matter-specific data. This gives users multiple ways to browse for matters, based on their own personal preferences. This also gives users a unique new capability they never had before: the ability to 'horizontally' browse similar matters, based on their proximity to each other in the organization hierarchy. This allows users to find similar work product for a new matter within the content of a similar matter that may have closed years ago.
• Users may be automatically 'Subscribed' to other users' My Matters containers, so that they may have access to the 'master' structures described above, without maintaining a redundant copy of these structures. This improves overall system performance, gives users a consistent experience within the system and allows large volumes of matters to be rapidly managed from a security standpoint. If a firm desires, users can only be allowed to see matters and their organizational structures if they are members of the appropriate practice group.

Modern Document Management Systems (DMS) provide ways of creating structures for organizing content that go beyond old-fashioned 'folders.' 'WorkSpaces' can contain folders (static containers for content) and stored searches (dynamic, predefined ways of finding current content that meets specific search criteria) organized under 'Tabs.' Security and metadata (document-specific profile information) can be assigned to different levels of the structure, and lower levels can be set to 'inherit' higher-level security and metadata values.

In a law firm environment, it is natural, considering the way matters are handled and taking into account important business processes (including new matter opening procedures and records management requirements), that each matter be allocated a WorkSpace ' leading to the 'Matter-Centric' architectural paradigm. Financial services, accounting and other professional services firms may use similar but different paradigms (typically client-specific or task-specific), and generic types of WorkSpaces may be used in any type of business, such as user-specific Personal WorkSpaces, business-to-business Vendor WorkSpaces, help desk or support services Application WorkSpaces, and myriad types of administrative WorkSpaces.

The power of security management within a WorkSpace and the convenience of metadata and security inheritance make it easier for users to store new content or move existing content into appropriate containers with a minimum of additional data entry.

The fact that WorkSpaces are also Web pages make Web portals and client extranets seamless to users inside and outside the firm, without maintaining redundant copies of content, eliminating synchronization and security translation problems.

Out with the Old'

Many firms are realizing that the intricately designed ' and hotly debated ' document identification schemes developed when the DMS was originally implemented were not really adopted or widely used by end users. Poor document identification can lead to 'provisioning' problems when moving to a matter-centric structure: If document type-specific folders are designed into each WorkSpace, and the actual documents have inaccurate values for this identifier, the document will not be placed into the correct folders during the matter-centric migration. Rather than obsessing about how to correct these problems, a possible approach is to look at it as an opportunity to abandon some or all of the historical schemes, given the lower relevance of this information in a matter-centric environment.

' And in with the New

Increasing Adoption of Matter-Centricity

In the recent 2006 ILTA IT Spending and Budgeting Survey, Matter-Centricity was in the top seven 'Most Exciting Technologies or Trends,' and was the only one that involved a practice concept, rather than specific hardware or software.

As of the time of this writing, about one-fifth of firms that have DMS systems that are matter-centric-capable have gone from non-structured, profile-based content management to matter-centric content management. The bulk of the remaining firms are either in the planning, design or rollout phase. Only a small percentage of firms have stated specific plans to not go matter-centric. Firm size, client profile and other practice-specific issues may indicate that this is an appropriate stance.

Specific catch-all folders (called, e.g., 'To Be Filed' or 'Other Documents') can be created initially within each matter WorkSpace, and pre-loaded ('provisioned') with all documents for the specific client and matter, regardless of other metadata values, whether correct or not. Then additional folders with additional specific metadata values can be created and provisioned, moving correctly identified documents from the catch-all folder to the more specific folder or folders within the same WorkSpace, and out of the catch-all folder. Using this approach, documents using correct metadata or documents with identifiers that will be preserved, can be carried forward to the appropriate new matter-centric structures, and the detrimental effects of incorrect or discontinued metadata vales can be minimized.

New Matter-Centric Design Concepts

Powerful Capabilities of Structures Above the Matter Level

In addition to the structures within a matter-specific WorkSpace, shortcuts to WorkSpaces may be distributed to end users in a number of different ways:

• A 'My Matters' container can organize shortcuts to WorkSpaces organized by 'Categories' that can also contain any number of levels of subcategories. Using this concept, a definitive, exhaustive listing of matters can be created and organized in multiple ways under a single user's My Matters container. For example, a virtual 'Litigation' user can contain shortcuts to all litigation matters organized by Client Name, Matter Name, Year Opened, Respon-sible Attorney, or any combination of matter-specific data. This gives users multiple ways to browse for matters, based on their own personal preferences. This also gives users a unique new capability they never had before: the ability to 'horizontally' browse similar matters, based on their proximity to each other in the organization hierarchy. This allows users to find similar work product for a new matter within the content of a similar matter that may have closed years ago.
• Users may be automatically 'Subscribed' to other users' My Matters containers, so that they may have access to the 'master' structures described above, without maintaining a redundant copy of these structures. This improves overall system performance, gives users a consistent experience within the system and allows large volumes of matters to be rapidly managed from a security standpoint. If a firm desires, users can only be allowed to see matters and their organizational structures if they are members of the appropriate practice group.