So the latest news on private equity investment in law firms is that, as far as the City firms are concerned at least, the investors have gone cold.While a year or so ago, when there was not much else to be investing in, some of them started looking at the profits a lot of firms were making and thought they might like a slice of the action, they have since had better ideas. Investing in a business that is so very reliant on the individual partners, who are free to walk whenever they choose, is not such an attractive prospect after all. But now private equity has spotted another opportunity. Investors have switched their focus from law firms themselves to the companies that provide them with technology and legal process outsourcing. What private equity recognises is the massive cost savings to be made by taking the vast swaths of low-level corporate work – document drafting, due diligence, all the boring stuff that everyone hates – out of the hands of qualified lawyers, or expensive law firms. If LPO providers, with the help of some pretty hefty external investment to get the right IT systems in place, can provide all this at a far lower cost than law firms currently do, then what is there for general counsel not to love? Private equity can see the opportunity, and so can the LPOs. But whether law firms have really seen this coming is another matter. So what, you might think. We may lose some of that dreary low-margin work, but we are focusing on the high-end stuff. Quite right, too. But hang on a minute. The partners will be concentrating on the more sophisticated aspects of legal work that really add value to the client. But what will a firm’s junior lawyers be doing? If general counsel start passing all their low-grade contract work straight to LPO providers, which will carry it out cheaply using technology and paralegals, what will newly qualified solicitors cut their teeth on? And what will trainees be doing? Once you have a situation where employing a trainee to do the commoditised corporate work becomes so much more expensive than the price at which an LPO could do it, will firms even want to employ trainees? Particularly given that there is no guarantee that the trainee will remain at the firm and become a partner. This might sound like doom-mongering, but it is something that many consultants in the know think could become a real issue. Firms should at least be thinking about what the rise of LPO providers could really mean for them. And, at the moment, it is simply not on their radar. Related articles Private equity to target legal process outsourcing
Somali President meets with US President Somali President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo arrived in the Chinese capital, Beijing, on Thursday ahead of the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) Summit to be held next week.President Farmajo is among tens of African leaders expected to attend the 2018 Summit, which will seek to bolster ties between the Asian country and the continent.The September Summit will be held under the theme; “China and Africa: Toward an Even Stronger Community with a Shared Future through Win-Win Co-operation.”During his stay in Beijing, President Farmajo is expected to hold talks with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the FOCAC Summit.The talks are expected to focus on Chinese investments in Somalia, regional security and bilateral trade. Related Somali President Mohamud visits Dadaab refugee camp Chad President visits Rwanda ahead of AU summit
The popular Chi Biosilk line of hair products was on Monday officially launched in Guyana, with Caribbean Premier Distributors being the sole distributors.The launching took place at a simple ceremony at the Georgetown Club on Camp Street, Georgetown. The hair products come in different forms suited for all hair types and are guaranteed to leave your hair feeling strong and healthy. Also, the products are available at affordable prices from as low as 00.According to the Chi Biosilk website, the hair care products are infused with silk to moisturise and add a glossy shine to your locks and offer flat irons, hair dryers and seven luxurious hair care collections to help style and finish your look.Fashion icon Sonia Noel, during the launching ceremony, endorsed the product, noting that it indeed does wonders for your hair.Persons who are desirous of making purchases or becoming sub distributors of the products are encouraged to contact Robetta Sami on 231-4130 or 616-0390 or visit their location at the Kaylan Mall, Lamaha Street.
Technology solutions have for some time helped Human Resources departments improve service delivery, find and attract talent, provide employees opportunities to learn and develop their careers, and support an organization’s business strategy. But what has changed in the last few years are the methods, strategies, and challenges for to insure the successful implementation and adoption of modern workplace and HR technologies.With more and more HR technology solutions moving to cloud-based delivery models, the way HR technology is marketed, sold, implemented, and deployed to users has dramatically changed in just the last few years..Combine the changes in the technology development and delivery process with the explosion in the number of solutions that offer HR professionals support for their initiatives and programs and you end up with a market that is full of potential and promise, but also one that can be difficult for the HR professional to navigate. Making the ‘right’ decisions about HR technology has never been more challenging, (and more important). Please join @weknownext at 3 p.m. ET on November 13 for #Nextchat with special guest Steve Boese (@SteveBoese) and Trish McFarlane (@TrishMcFarlane). We’ll discuss some of the most important factors for successful selection, implementation, and user adoption of the next generation of HR technology solutions. Q1. What are the signs that it is time to make an HR technology purchase/investment?Q2. What are some of the key elements and concepts in cloud HR technology purchases that HR professionals need to understand? Q3. What are some of the common statements and buzzwords given by HR solution providers, and what do they REALLY mean?Q4. How can HR professionals identify the most important factors for their organization in their technology decision process?Q5. After a technology is selected and purchased, what are the essential next steps to launch the implementation project?Q6. Are HR technology projects similar to other HR projects and what specific skills does HR need for technology projects?Q7. Once the project ‘goes live’ how can HR continue the positive momentum and ensure adoption rates meet project goals?Q8. What are the tools & metrics to evaluate/assess HR technology success? How can HR learn from past project experiences? What’s a Twitter chat?
Summary: I analyse a 1994 Personal Information Management program and compare its goals to what we want in in a similar tool in 2004. I discover the requirements are basically the same.The blogosphere is mostly a synchronous give-and-take of content. People largely comment on and link to things that other people are commenting on and linking to. It’s a circular flow of information, with a particular point in time always at the epicentre. It’s why 99% of weblogs are primarily ordered chronologically – with the most recent post at the top of the page.When I’m looking for information to quench my insatiable thirst for knowledge, I often use the Web in an asynchronous manner. That is, I like to read historical web documents and compare them to current blogosphere memes. The Wayback Machine is my friend in this regard. Why, just last week I discovered a gem of historical Web documentation: the Electronic Proceedings of the Second World Wide Web Conference ’94: Mosaic and the Web. This is a record of all the presentations made to the 2nd annual WWW conference back in 1994. I intend to browse through most of the presentations in due course, but for now I want to tell you about the first one that tickled my Interest gland.It’s funny how a tool developed 10 years ago can still accurately describe the requirements of the 2004-era Web. That’s exactly the case with PAINT, a “tool for individualizing the Web”. Here’s the executive summary:The increasing complexity of navigating the Internet is becoming one of the fundamental obstacles to its effective use. This is due to the nature of the Internet, principally, a disorganized collection of both sites and site documents whose exponential growth rate rapidly is outstripping any user’s ability to master it. There are two ways to deal with this complexity: reorganize the structure of the Internet or give each user the ability to organize an individual perspective of the Internet. Although the former would produce more global benefit, the latter is both easier to accomplish and potentially more beneficial to any individual or group of users.Our approach, therefore, is to create a navigation tool which copes with Internet complexity at the individual, rather than the organizational, level. This tool, PAINT (Personalized, Adaptive Internet Navigation Tool), allows the user to impose a hierarchical organization on Internet sites and documents of interest by creating categories under which to group sites. Such categorization can be used not only by an individual user, but also can be shared among groups of users with similar interests. PAINT will also provide local automatic classification based on user parameters and user behavior. That is, PAINT will record visited locations and categorize them according to past use. The user is then free to examine the automated organization, modify it, and make it a personalized view of the Internet. In our report, we will describe the PAINT tool, its use, and some preliminary investigations of local, automatic categorization.This webpage, even though nearly 10 years old, still in a nutshell describes what we’re looking for in a PIM (Personal Information Management) appliance circa 2004. You can get all fancy and talk about wanting agents to gather data automatically, or using Bayesian filters, or latent semantic indexing. But really it still boils down to this: we want a tool that (in the words of Paint) individualizes the Web. Take the following sentence from the first paragraph in that 1994 webpage. It outlines the central problem – complexity – and the two general solutions. In red type, I’ve added how these two solutions are (generally speaking) being approached now:There are two ways to deal with this complexity: reorganize the structure of the Internet(2004 = the Semantic Web) or give each user the ability to organize an individual perspective of the Internet(2004 = bootstrapping; eg what tech bloggers are now trying to do with their weblog taxonomies).The program PAINT was designed to take the second approach. Paint wanted to put the user at the centre of their own personal Web:This tool, PAINT (Personalized, Adaptive Internet Navigation Tool), allows the user to impose a hierarchical organization on Internet sites and documents of interest by creating categories under which to group sites.The key things to note: PAINT enables people to create a hierarchical organization for their information, by grouping items into categories. Hmm, sound familiar?PAINT circa 1994 was first of all an extension of the Mosaic web browser’s hotlist facility. Hotlists were the equivalent of Favourites in the modern IE browser, or Bookmarks in Netscape. But at the time, hotlists could not be organized into folders. You just had the one list of documents and websites. So it could be argued that PAINT was simply a description of what IE Favorites or Netscape Bookmarks became a couple of years later – a hierarchical set of folders with which to store website URLs.But I think PAINT’s goals were deeper than that. Look at your usage of Favorites or Bookmarks today – do you use them as a way to categorize information you find on the Web? Do you organize your information into a hierarchy using the folders available to you? If you’re like me, once upon a time you made an effort to do all this, but it long ago fell by the wayside. With the advent of RSS and Google I hardly ever use my IE Favorites anymore! And yet we still have this over-riding need to organize our information on the Web…But obviously I can only take a comparison of PIM requirements then (1994) and now (2004) so far. What’s different now? For a start we’ve had an exponential increase in the amount of data and information on the Web, thanks in part to having weblog tools that allow anyone (technical or no) to publish on the Web. But perhaps more fundamentally, information on the Web is now published as “microcontent”. Information exists in “chunks”, and each chunk of information is defined with a permalink. True, we haven’t yet reached the stage where individual paragraphs or even sentences are given permalinks – but maybe that world of data isn’t too far off.So, could PAINT – or more likely a PAINT boosted with 2004-era technologies – be used to help us build weblog taxonomies based on categorizing our content hierachically? Well yes, but we’re already building such tools. Dave Winer has developed a product called Channel Z which categorizes weblog posts into categories created by the author. k-collector allows bloggers to create and post to categories in a shared directory. And some clever bloggers (eg Paul Ford, Erik Benson, Bill Seitz) have created their own automated back-linking categorizing extravaganzas. So we’re moving towards the goals that PAINT (and others I’m sure) defined back in 1994, and that visionaries such as Ted Nelson and Vannevar Bush defined decades before that. We haven’t got there yet though. Most of us still muddle our way manually organizing our Web content. PIM Nirvana hasn’t yet been developed. But with initiatives such as Chandler taking over the mantle from PAINT as the next big thing of PIMs, the circle of Web innovation continues and the dream lives on. Everybody wants to control and be at the centre of their information environment – will we ever succeed? Tags: #Knowledge Management#web Related Posts 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… richard macmanus
A second successive French Open doubles title eluded Leander Paes as the Indian ace and his Czech partner Lukas Dlouhy lost the final to Daniel Nestor and Nenad Zimonjic in straight set in Paris on Saturday.In line for a second successive title, the defending champions ran out of steam and lost 5-7 2-6 to their second seeded opponents Daniel Nestor of Canada and Nenad Zimonjic of Serbia in a 65-minute contest at Roland Garros.The third seeded Indo-Czech duo failed to convert the two breakpoints that came their way in comparison to their rivals who converted three of the four breakpoints that they earned.”It has been a great two weeks and I’m happy to be in the finals for the second successive time. I would like to thank Lukas for making it happen and sticking with me,” said Paes, who won the title in 1999 and 2001 (both with Mahesh Bhupathi) and then with Dlouhy in 2009.Dlouhy, on his part, credited the opponents for playing terrific tennis and said hopefully next year they would regain the title.”They were just too good today. Hopefully me and Leander will play some more tournament in the future and regain the title next year,” Dlouhy said.Paes already has six men’s doubles and five mixed doubles Grand Slam crowns in his pocket, same as his estranged partner Bhupathi.Paes and Dlouhy, who put up an impressive performance coming into the final, earned a breakpoint as early as in the second game after five deuces but couldn’t convert it.advertisementLocked 5-5, Nestor-Zimonjic finally broke the Indo-Czech pair in the 11th game and held their serve in the next to wrap up the first set 7-5 in 40 minutes.With momentum going their way, the Canadian-Serbian duo quickly earned two more breakpoints in the first game of the second set and even though Paes and Dlouhy saved one, they were eventually broken as Nestor-Zimonjic lead 1-0.Lagging 1-2, Paes-Dlouhy earned another breakpoint in the third game but failed to covert it yet again.To make things worse, Dlouhy double faulted and gave away three breakpoints which the Canadian-Serbian pair converted without much ado as they surged ahead 4-1.The Indo-Czech narrowed the gap to 2-5 but it was too late too little as Nestor-Zimonjic held their serves to eventually wrap up the second set 6-2 in 25 minutes and pocket the match and the title comfortably.