Last week's Massachusetts Bar Association Lawyers E-Journal Law Practice Management Section Featured Practice Tip comes from LOMAP. Last week's Tip covered password management services, and featured a link to an excellent review of LastPass, written by practice management advisor Erik Mazzone.
Read the Tip here.
Check Out Our Website
A Law Practice Advisor for Massachusetts Lawyers
Monday, January 31, 2011
Friday, January 28, 2011
DimDim is DimDone: Alternatives for WebConferencing in the Aftermath of Salesforce’s Acquisition of DimDim
If you, like me, greeted the news of Saleforce’s purchase of DimDim with a string of expletives, you’re likely looking around for a new webconferencing option. It’s not like DimDim was the greatest product ever (sorry, DimDim, that honor goes to the Shake Weight, with the SlapChop, running a train on a close second), but there were some nice features, it was intuitive, it offered included web and telephone access and the price was free or nice, depending upon whether you wanted to upgrade your package. We used DimDim as a the platform for delivering the monthly webinars tied to our LOMAP Marketing Group. And, I’ve been using DimDim well before that. DimDim became available in 2007, and I have been on pretty much from the jump, seeing it improve to a more robust and impressive product as it matured. So, now I need to find a new platform for delivering our Marketing Group presentations, and you need to find another way to do whatever it is that you do with your webconferencing. (No, I’m not judging; it’s cool. We're in the Tree of Trust here.)
Following the accomplishment of a thorough review of the webconferencing landscape, undertaken and completed, basically, for the first time in five years, I’ve decided to collect my thoughts and observations, to be relayed below, starting with preliminaries.
. . .
So, DimDim’s been purchased by Salesforce; but, that doesn’t mean that DimDim won’t be supported by Salesforce, right? Sorry, Hoss. Ain’t happenin’. DimDim is DimDone.
What had been released as an initial statement regarding the purchase at DimDim’s blog has morphed into a full-scale PR salvo at Salesforce’s. You can find the full press release here, for your reading pleasure; but, I’ll tell you right now that it’s full of much of that horrid business-voguespeak that you hear at meetings, and that makes you want to throw up in your mouth . . . just . . . a . . . little . . . bit. Here’s what you need to know: the acquisition of DimDim “will extend salesforce.com’s Chatter collaboration platform with critical real-time communication technologies”. Hhhmmm. What's Chatter? This is Chatter. It looks a bit like PBworks, which looks a lot like Facebook--but, who isn’t copying Facebook these days? The best way to conceive of Chatter is to think of it as an internal and privacy-protected Facebook for your company. (Delightful. As if I wasn’t surrounded by the Facebook enough already. This is the sort of language that launched a thousand intellectual property cases.) You set up your work profile and offer status updates. (Only, this has to be less good than real Facebook, right?: ‘i’m surfing real Facebook and not working. my boss is such an idiot.’ ‘Is that so, Chaz?’ ‘sorry, Mr. Scott. would you like to give an abandoned champagne unicorn a home on your farm? just look at his sad eyes’). Chatter establishes a socially-networked corporate directory, from which work groups can be created, integrates with other applications, is accessible via mobile, allows for file share and preview and features analytics tools. Other than sounding a hella lot like 1984, I guess that’s good. Check out the features of Chatter here, FAQs and demos being available there and there. Chatter is free with Salesforce. Good. If you want to buy Chatter as a stand-alone program, it’s by quote. Yikes. That probably means it’s expensive. Cheap stuff is usually not quoted; I’m not going to Quizno’s getting quotes on subs.
So, not much about DimDim above, right? Right. As best as I can figure, and as best as I can wade through the corporation mumbo jumbo about positioning and the next generation of technology and cloud 2, etc., it seems like the DimDim acquisition was based on two considerations: (1) get the sharing/collaboration tools existing in DimDim to graft those tools onto/develop those tools within Chatter; and, (2) get the DimDim team over to Salesforce--a straight talent acquisition.
What does that mean? DimDim as a webconferencing software is likely dead. (DimDim is dead. Long Live Chatter!) Some of the major DimDim collaboration and sharing tools are likely to show up as bastardized versions of themselves in Chatter, but there will no longer (or not yet) be a stand-alone conferencing option, or, likely, one with a very attractive price.
So, Where to now?
(By the way, I think the DimDim purchase price of $31 million was sort of low. If I ever invent some software that’s used by enough people or cool enough that some company wants to buy it, you can bet I’m not selling for anything under $100 million. You’re on notice, Zuckerberg.)
. . .
When you’re considering the use/purchase of a webconferencing program, you’ve got some initial questions dressed up as forks in roads to address first. The two primary questions are:
What Will You Be Using the Software For?
-Are you looking for an internal collaboration option (like those offered through PBworks, NetDocuments or Chatter with, probably, DimDim attributes, for example) Or Are your looking for an external collaboration option (for communicating with clients and referring attorneys and colleagues of presentation attendees)?
What Features Are You Looking For?
-What are you willing to pay, if anything? (You’re so cheap, really.) How many participants are you talking about bringing into your little conferences? What kind of sharing and collaboration options do you need? Do you need to be able to access on-screen chat? What audio options do you want? Do you want to be able to record your conferences? Are you looking for any special or unique features?
Generally, if you’re looking at collaboration on a small scale, your best bet is probably a cheap webconferencing program with a good security protocol (especially if you will be collaborating with clients, or on attorney-client privileged information), unless you can afford to set up your own secured portal, perhaps through another application. But, depending on your workflow, you may not need webconferencing at all; or, you may be able to proceed using a one-on-one telephone call, with some standalone collaboration program (potentially Google Docs, or, at a higher level, Chatter, PBworks or NetDocuments). Webconferencing options usually come into play when you’re talking about larger numbers of collaborators. Then, when your number of collaborators expands beyond the point of management for a free system, or you need features unavailable on a free version (like an additional webcam, say), that’s when it’s time to think about stepping up to the plate to pay somebody. When you’re making regular presentations over webconference, and your audience is decently-sized, and promises to stay at that high level, or increase, then it’s likely that you’ll require a pay version, or enterprise edition, webconferencing program, in order to pull off a slick enough stageplay of what you do.
Given the broad array of needs (only a smattering of which are relayed above, with examples), and the number of potential uses for webconferencing software, it’s impossible to generate a list for every instance (at least, I’m sure as hell not going to be the one who does it); therefore, next, I intend to provide some chief options (not an exhaustive list, per my above description), in the realm of webconferencing post-DimDim (A.D.D.), for your perusal, and complete with the answers to most pressing product queries, direction to special features, pricing information and other like thoughtfulness on my part:
. . .
Yugma
Pricing + Participant Information: Free + 2 Participants/Graduated Cost Scale + Up to 500 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Instant Messaging (free)/ Whiteboard + File Sharing + Video, etc. (paid)
Security Application: Full SSL Encryption
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Mobile
Special Features + Consideration: Yugma boasts a number of cool features, including: support for multiple monitor presentations; Skype integration; and, the opportunity to create and post widgets for sharing meeting access information. Yugma runs on Java. The free version of Yugma (yeah, the name is weird; apparently, it’s Sanskrit for “confluence, meeting or state of togetherness") is very limited in time and scope; however, the robust, bottom-level pay version starts at $10/month, and appears as a solid value. The pay version likely provides more bang for the buck than DimDim’s pay version did; and, Yugma, in the timeliest fashions, is offering discounted rates for spurned (soon to be former) DimDim users.
GoToWebinar
Pricing + Participant Information: $49/mo. + 15 Participants/Graduated Cost Scale + Up to 1000 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Applications + Drawing Tools
Security Application: SSL Encryption + End-to-End 128 Bit Encryption
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Polls + Mobile
Special Features + Consideration: GoToWebinar is a really slick program, built off of the GoToMeeting brand/platform. The interface is easy to manage, and there are lots of presentation and interaction options. Post-meeting report generation is quite helpful, as are automated follow-ups to attendees, including Outlook integration for ease of calendaring. Customized branding is also available. The capability for presenters to mute call-in lines is essential for managing those uninitiated of the chat room. But, it appears that it’s true that you got to pay for what you get. GoToWebinar is great. You just gots to pay a lot for that muffler.
WebEx
Pricing + Participant Information: $49/mo. + 25 Participants/Larger Participant Packages by Quote
Sharing Features: Desktop + Documents w/ Annotation + Applications
Security Application: Encryption
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Mutliple Webcams + Mobile
Special Features + Consideration: Backed by gigantic corporation Cisco (I eat your small company for breakfast), WebEx offers another slick platform for webconferencing. Multiple webcam sharing is pretty excellent, and the document annotation feature is useful for editing sessions. WebEx is not as smooth or richly-featured as GoToWebinar, but costs less, when you consider the added number of participants per price. Still, we’re not looking at DimDim-style cost effectiveness in this instance.
Join.Me
Pricing + Participant Information: Free + 250 Participants/$29/mo. + 250 Participants (+ added features)
Sharing Features: Screen Sharing + File Transfer/Send (NOT share)
Security Application: Pro features “Knock to Join” Option/Free System, Meetings are Open
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In
Special Features + Consideration: Simplicity is the name of the game for Join.Me, which I first saw advertised on a city bus in Boston. This a straight screenshare program, with chat and call-in capability. The draw here is mostly for holders of quick, impromptu meetings (scheduling is available through the Pro version) . . . with lots and lots of people, potentially a web version flash mob. The allowed number of participants is impressive; however, the features are so limited, and basic, that I hesitate to recommend the program for professionals, especially for lawyers, who should feel very uncomfortable sharing confidential documentation through a service like this one. Join.Me is a LogMeIn product.
FuzeMeeting
Pricing + Participant Information: $29/mo. + 25 Participants/Graduated Cost Scale + Up To 100 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Applications + File Share + Content Share (in HD)
Security Application: SSL Encryption
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Mobile
Special Features + Consideration: When I got an HDTV a couple years back, I was like, “No big. I’ve seen TV before. How awesome can HD be?” Well, it’s pretty darn amazing. My wife likes to tell everyone I will only watch PBS documentaries in HD now, even though they’re basically a series of still photos. This is true. But, they look so damn good. Can you blame me? I was similarly impressed by Fuze’s unique offering of meetings in HD. It looks great, at least on the demo. The Fuze interface is pretty intuitive, and offers much on-the-fly functionality. The “FuzeIn” feature dials stragglers automatically, while you conduct your meeting. Contact integration is impressive, and is a big time-saver. Fuze also offers access to more mobile platforms than any other webconferencing system we’ve reviewed. Fuze offers a base pricing package similar to DimDim’s; and, although features are not co-extensive, Fuze has more unique features than DimDim offers.
Mikogo
Pricing + Participant Information: Free + 10 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Applications + File Share + Whiteboard
Security Application: Encryption + Third Party Restricted Access
Interaction Options: Call-In (billed to each participant)
Special Features + Consideration: Given the lack of price, Mikogo is a pretty nifty service. It’s rather full-featured for a free webconference system; although, there are some major drawbacks, like the potential that your participants are charged for phoning in, which may make audio access, really, unreasonable or ineffective. Impressive features unique to free programs include: scheduling tools; a session player; and, presenter switching options. A long-form user guide is provided for industrious investigators. You could do much worse for a free webconferencing software--that is, if you can stand small numbers for access, and don’t really like talking on the phone anyway. BeamYourScreen is the enterprise version Mikogo, apparently launched by aliens obsessed with making the world safe for web video.
Vyew
Pricing + Participant Information: Free + 10-20 Participants/Graduated Cost Scale + Up To 150 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Applications + Documents w/ Annotation + Whiteboard + Drawing Tools
Security Application: Partial SSL Encrytion
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Webcam
Special Features + Consideration: Vyew is unique among the products we’ve reviewed in that many of their broad features are available across the free and pay editions. Unless you’re really into branding your meetings, or holding more than one meeting at a time, or you need to provide a lot of participants access at once, then the free version is really all you need. I’d call that a bargain. And, if you’re not into those things, but could get into them, the pay versions are still fairly ridiculously cheap for the webconferencing realm. This seems to be an ideal product for teachers, and those who consider themselves teachers--a web classroom module, as it were. Among the Vyew features that I like are: the support of many file extension types; content management options; and, an invitation manager function. The major caveat against the use of Vyew is the very sketchy security. Unless you’re comfortable with open meetings, it’s difficult to make the jump to this product, despite the free and cheap feature collection.
Not quite a Top Ten List; but, I’m actually trying not to shatter my record for blog post length this day--it is a prodigious record, after all, and I’d like to see that it remain standing. That being said, here are some other webconference options available, which you can check out on your own time, but which we did not deem meritorious of an chearlish breakdown: WebHuddle, GreenLight Collaboration, Infinite Conferencing, InterCall, Microsoft Office Live Meeting, MyMeeting 123, MegaMeeting, iLinc, WebConCentral, Adobe Connect and Yuuguu.
I’d like to say I’m leaving you in suspense in keeping from you what option we will choose to replace DimDim; but, I cannot tell a lie: I don’t know what we’re going to use yet, because we still have a month-and-a-half before the plug officially gets pulled on DimDim, and I don’t like to rush anything. Although, I will write in invisible ink the program that I think we’re going to move to: Yugma . . . or, maybe FuzeMeeting.
Damn. Ran out of invisible ink. And, I still can’t decide.
As always, but specifically in this instance, I am very appreciative of and grateful for the efforts of our expert and talented administrative assistant, Rachel Willcox, who reviewed the vast majority of these referenced products, providing some tremendous feedback and distilled information sets.
. . .
Liner Notes
When you think webconferencing, one of the first things that comes to mind is Roy Orbison.
Oh, hell. Roy Orbison has nothing to do with webconferencing. I just want to talk to you a little bit about Roy Orbison, and to get you listening up on him.
As regular followers of the Practice Advisor will recall, I am currently engaged in a death struggle with my iTunes library, and I intend for only the one of us to come out on the other side. Further, I intend to emerge victorious. I have been engaged for several months now in the Jared Correia Listening Project, which is me running through the 7,557 songs in my iTunes library, in order, by artist and album, rating each song as I go. I’m on “R”; so, I’m almost done. Specifically, I am on Roy Orbison. Also, Roy Orbison is on.
I’ve always found Roy Orbison to be a fascinating performer. He has such a unique voice; many have called it operatic; and, his vocal range yawns like the Grand Canyon. He was probably the lowest-slung pop star ever, and he could not have been called charismatic. Hell, I thought he was blind until I was 20 years old. As is the case with many a thing, though, it’s not the thing itself, but the associations that we make of it. So it is with Roy Orbison and me; Roy Orbison means more to me than the music that he sings, or who he is. My grandmother used to own a mammoth record player/8-track player combination, which was just about the most gargantuan and ungainly piece of furniture that you can imagine. (It was delivered by zeppelin.) I used to spin records all the time when I was over there. My grandmother just happened to be a huge Roy Orbison fan, and had a number of his albums, and so we used to listen to Roy together all the time. It was only later that Roy Orbison experienced a career renaissance, assisted by his joining up with the Traveling Wilburys, as Lefty Wilbury. But, whenever I hear another Roy Orbison song, his voice warbling through another chorus, I take the occasion to remember my grandmother, and that is certainly a good thing.
Roy Orbison’s career can be divided into two distinct stages: early successes featuring traditional songs and a late-career renaissance, which periods served as bookends for a meso-dryspell.
Roy Orbison’s early career was filled with hits that have become standards, most notably: “Oh, Pretty Woman” ('take two'), “Only the Lonely” and “It’s Over”. “Love Hurts”, “Crying” and “Pretty Paper” offer heavy doses of pain and angst and regret, if even in Christmas wrapping. “Uptown”, “Working for the Man” and “Mean Woman Blues" are heavier numbers with distinct appeal. “Dream Baby" and “Candy Man” have a sensual edge that most early Orbison tracks lack.
Despite a string of hits like those presented above, Roy Orbison disappeared somewhere along the line. Then came the Traveling Wilburys, a supergroup made up of George Harrison, Bob Dylan, Tom Petty, Jeff Lynne and Orbison, all going by aliases. The Traveling Wilburys’ “Volume 1” was a huge hit record, with lead tracks “Handle With Care” and “End of the Line”. Orbison was featured on those tracks, and displayed his singular vocal talents in fronting “Not Alone Anymore” and on an impressive cameo with Petty on lead vocals for “Last Night”. The unreleased track, “Heartbreak Radio” is Roy at his rollickin’ best.
All of a sudden, Roy Orbison was a superstar again, and in the highest demand. Producer extraordinaire Jeff Lynne and Petty worked with Orbison to write and produce the “Mystery Girl” album, which ended up being a staggeringly immense hit record.
Late period Roy Orbison featured a more polished sound, chiseled by the pop songcraft of Jeff Lynne, chiefly, though among others. However, it was still the same in that the music was the showcase for the uniquely fixed voice. “You Got It”, “After the Love Has Gone”, “California Blue” and “I Drove All Night” are representative tunes from the late Roytaceous epoch.
Sadly, Roy Orbison’s late period was to be a blue one. Following an exhaustive performance schedule, and when preparing to get home to finally get some rest, Roy Orbison died of a heart attack, directly at the height of his new-found popularity, and before his official comeback album, “Mystery Girl”, was finished and released. He was only 52 years old.
But, if you turn off the lights, close your eyes, and turn up your headphones, you can still hear Roy Orbison; and, his voice still carries.
Following the accomplishment of a thorough review of the webconferencing landscape, undertaken and completed, basically, for the first time in five years, I’ve decided to collect my thoughts and observations, to be relayed below, starting with preliminaries.
. . .
So, DimDim’s been purchased by Salesforce; but, that doesn’t mean that DimDim won’t be supported by Salesforce, right? Sorry, Hoss. Ain’t happenin’. DimDim is DimDone.
What had been released as an initial statement regarding the purchase at DimDim’s blog has morphed into a full-scale PR salvo at Salesforce’s. You can find the full press release here, for your reading pleasure; but, I’ll tell you right now that it’s full of much of that horrid business-voguespeak that you hear at meetings, and that makes you want to throw up in your mouth . . . just . . . a . . . little . . . bit. Here’s what you need to know: the acquisition of DimDim “will extend salesforce.com’s Chatter collaboration platform with critical real-time communication technologies”. Hhhmmm. What's Chatter? This is Chatter. It looks a bit like PBworks, which looks a lot like Facebook--but, who isn’t copying Facebook these days? The best way to conceive of Chatter is to think of it as an internal and privacy-protected Facebook for your company. (Delightful. As if I wasn’t surrounded by the Facebook enough already. This is the sort of language that launched a thousand intellectual property cases.) You set up your work profile and offer status updates. (Only, this has to be less good than real Facebook, right?: ‘i’m surfing real Facebook and not working. my boss is such an idiot.’ ‘Is that so, Chaz?’ ‘sorry, Mr. Scott. would you like to give an abandoned champagne unicorn a home on your farm? just look at his sad eyes’). Chatter establishes a socially-networked corporate directory, from which work groups can be created, integrates with other applications, is accessible via mobile, allows for file share and preview and features analytics tools. Other than sounding a hella lot like 1984, I guess that’s good. Check out the features of Chatter here, FAQs and demos being available there and there. Chatter is free with Salesforce. Good. If you want to buy Chatter as a stand-alone program, it’s by quote. Yikes. That probably means it’s expensive. Cheap stuff is usually not quoted; I’m not going to Quizno’s getting quotes on subs.
So, not much about DimDim above, right? Right. As best as I can figure, and as best as I can wade through the corporation mumbo jumbo about positioning and the next generation of technology and cloud 2, etc., it seems like the DimDim acquisition was based on two considerations: (1) get the sharing/collaboration tools existing in DimDim to graft those tools onto/develop those tools within Chatter; and, (2) get the DimDim team over to Salesforce--a straight talent acquisition.
What does that mean? DimDim as a webconferencing software is likely dead. (DimDim is dead. Long Live Chatter!) Some of the major DimDim collaboration and sharing tools are likely to show up as bastardized versions of themselves in Chatter, but there will no longer (or not yet) be a stand-alone conferencing option, or, likely, one with a very attractive price.
So, Where to now?
(By the way, I think the DimDim purchase price of $31 million was sort of low. If I ever invent some software that’s used by enough people or cool enough that some company wants to buy it, you can bet I’m not selling for anything under $100 million. You’re on notice, Zuckerberg.)
. . .
When you’re considering the use/purchase of a webconferencing program, you’ve got some initial questions dressed up as forks in roads to address first. The two primary questions are:
What Will You Be Using the Software For?
-Are you looking for an internal collaboration option (like those offered through PBworks, NetDocuments or Chatter with, probably, DimDim attributes, for example) Or Are your looking for an external collaboration option (for communicating with clients and referring attorneys and colleagues of presentation attendees)?
What Features Are You Looking For?
-What are you willing to pay, if anything? (You’re so cheap, really.) How many participants are you talking about bringing into your little conferences? What kind of sharing and collaboration options do you need? Do you need to be able to access on-screen chat? What audio options do you want? Do you want to be able to record your conferences? Are you looking for any special or unique features?
Generally, if you’re looking at collaboration on a small scale, your best bet is probably a cheap webconferencing program with a good security protocol (especially if you will be collaborating with clients, or on attorney-client privileged information), unless you can afford to set up your own secured portal, perhaps through another application. But, depending on your workflow, you may not need webconferencing at all; or, you may be able to proceed using a one-on-one telephone call, with some standalone collaboration program (potentially Google Docs, or, at a higher level, Chatter, PBworks or NetDocuments). Webconferencing options usually come into play when you’re talking about larger numbers of collaborators. Then, when your number of collaborators expands beyond the point of management for a free system, or you need features unavailable on a free version (like an additional webcam, say), that’s when it’s time to think about stepping up to the plate to pay somebody. When you’re making regular presentations over webconference, and your audience is decently-sized, and promises to stay at that high level, or increase, then it’s likely that you’ll require a pay version, or enterprise edition, webconferencing program, in order to pull off a slick enough stageplay of what you do.
Given the broad array of needs (only a smattering of which are relayed above, with examples), and the number of potential uses for webconferencing software, it’s impossible to generate a list for every instance (at least, I’m sure as hell not going to be the one who does it); therefore, next, I intend to provide some chief options (not an exhaustive list, per my above description), in the realm of webconferencing post-DimDim (A.D.D.), for your perusal, and complete with the answers to most pressing product queries, direction to special features, pricing information and other like thoughtfulness on my part:
. . .
Yugma
Pricing + Participant Information: Free + 2 Participants/Graduated Cost Scale + Up to 500 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Instant Messaging (free)/ Whiteboard + File Sharing + Video, etc. (paid)
Security Application: Full SSL Encryption
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Mobile
Special Features + Consideration: Yugma boasts a number of cool features, including: support for multiple monitor presentations; Skype integration; and, the opportunity to create and post widgets for sharing meeting access information. Yugma runs on Java. The free version of Yugma (yeah, the name is weird; apparently, it’s Sanskrit for “confluence, meeting or state of togetherness") is very limited in time and scope; however, the robust, bottom-level pay version starts at $10/month, and appears as a solid value. The pay version likely provides more bang for the buck than DimDim’s pay version did; and, Yugma, in the timeliest fashions, is offering discounted rates for spurned (soon to be former) DimDim users.
GoToWebinar
Pricing + Participant Information: $49/mo. + 15 Participants/Graduated Cost Scale + Up to 1000 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Applications + Drawing Tools
Security Application: SSL Encryption + End-to-End 128 Bit Encryption
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Polls + Mobile
Special Features + Consideration: GoToWebinar is a really slick program, built off of the GoToMeeting brand/platform. The interface is easy to manage, and there are lots of presentation and interaction options. Post-meeting report generation is quite helpful, as are automated follow-ups to attendees, including Outlook integration for ease of calendaring. Customized branding is also available. The capability for presenters to mute call-in lines is essential for managing those uninitiated of the chat room. But, it appears that it’s true that you got to pay for what you get. GoToWebinar is great. You just gots to pay a lot for that muffler.
WebEx
Pricing + Participant Information: $49/mo. + 25 Participants/Larger Participant Packages by Quote
Sharing Features: Desktop + Documents w/ Annotation + Applications
Security Application: Encryption
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Mutliple Webcams + Mobile
Special Features + Consideration: Backed by gigantic corporation Cisco (I eat your small company for breakfast), WebEx offers another slick platform for webconferencing. Multiple webcam sharing is pretty excellent, and the document annotation feature is useful for editing sessions. WebEx is not as smooth or richly-featured as GoToWebinar, but costs less, when you consider the added number of participants per price. Still, we’re not looking at DimDim-style cost effectiveness in this instance.
Join.Me
Pricing + Participant Information: Free + 250 Participants/$29/mo. + 250 Participants (+ added features)
Sharing Features: Screen Sharing + File Transfer/Send (NOT share)
Security Application: Pro features “Knock to Join” Option/Free System, Meetings are Open
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In
Special Features + Consideration: Simplicity is the name of the game for Join.Me, which I first saw advertised on a city bus in Boston. This a straight screenshare program, with chat and call-in capability. The draw here is mostly for holders of quick, impromptu meetings (scheduling is available through the Pro version) . . . with lots and lots of people, potentially a web version flash mob. The allowed number of participants is impressive; however, the features are so limited, and basic, that I hesitate to recommend the program for professionals, especially for lawyers, who should feel very uncomfortable sharing confidential documentation through a service like this one. Join.Me is a LogMeIn product.
FuzeMeeting
Pricing + Participant Information: $29/mo. + 25 Participants/Graduated Cost Scale + Up To 100 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Applications + File Share + Content Share (in HD)
Security Application: SSL Encryption
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Mobile
Special Features + Consideration: When I got an HDTV a couple years back, I was like, “No big. I’ve seen TV before. How awesome can HD be?” Well, it’s pretty darn amazing. My wife likes to tell everyone I will only watch PBS documentaries in HD now, even though they’re basically a series of still photos. This is true. But, they look so damn good. Can you blame me? I was similarly impressed by Fuze’s unique offering of meetings in HD. It looks great, at least on the demo. The Fuze interface is pretty intuitive, and offers much on-the-fly functionality. The “FuzeIn” feature dials stragglers automatically, while you conduct your meeting. Contact integration is impressive, and is a big time-saver. Fuze also offers access to more mobile platforms than any other webconferencing system we’ve reviewed. Fuze offers a base pricing package similar to DimDim’s; and, although features are not co-extensive, Fuze has more unique features than DimDim offers.
Mikogo
Pricing + Participant Information: Free + 10 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Applications + File Share + Whiteboard
Security Application: Encryption + Third Party Restricted Access
Interaction Options: Call-In (billed to each participant)
Special Features + Consideration: Given the lack of price, Mikogo is a pretty nifty service. It’s rather full-featured for a free webconference system; although, there are some major drawbacks, like the potential that your participants are charged for phoning in, which may make audio access, really, unreasonable or ineffective. Impressive features unique to free programs include: scheduling tools; a session player; and, presenter switching options. A long-form user guide is provided for industrious investigators. You could do much worse for a free webconferencing software--that is, if you can stand small numbers for access, and don’t really like talking on the phone anyway. BeamYourScreen is the enterprise version Mikogo, apparently launched by aliens obsessed with making the world safe for web video.
Vyew
Pricing + Participant Information: Free + 10-20 Participants/Graduated Cost Scale + Up To 150 Participants
Sharing Features: Desktop + Applications + Documents w/ Annotation + Whiteboard + Drawing Tools
Security Application: Partial SSL Encrytion
Interaction Options: Chat + Call-In + Webcam
Special Features + Consideration: Vyew is unique among the products we’ve reviewed in that many of their broad features are available across the free and pay editions. Unless you’re really into branding your meetings, or holding more than one meeting at a time, or you need to provide a lot of participants access at once, then the free version is really all you need. I’d call that a bargain. And, if you’re not into those things, but could get into them, the pay versions are still fairly ridiculously cheap for the webconferencing realm. This seems to be an ideal product for teachers, and those who consider themselves teachers--a web classroom module, as it were. Among the Vyew features that I like are: the support of many file extension types; content management options; and, an invitation manager function. The major caveat against the use of Vyew is the very sketchy security. Unless you’re comfortable with open meetings, it’s difficult to make the jump to this product, despite the free and cheap feature collection.
Not quite a Top Ten List; but, I’m actually trying not to shatter my record for blog post length this day--it is a prodigious record, after all, and I’d like to see that it remain standing. That being said, here are some other webconference options available, which you can check out on your own time, but which we did not deem meritorious of an chearlish breakdown: WebHuddle, GreenLight Collaboration, Infinite Conferencing, InterCall, Microsoft Office Live Meeting, MyMeeting 123, MegaMeeting, iLinc, WebConCentral, Adobe Connect and Yuuguu.
I’d like to say I’m leaving you in suspense in keeping from you what option we will choose to replace DimDim; but, I cannot tell a lie: I don’t know what we’re going to use yet, because we still have a month-and-a-half before the plug officially gets pulled on DimDim, and I don’t like to rush anything. Although, I will write in invisible ink the program that I think we’re going to move to: Yugma . . . or, maybe FuzeMeeting.
Damn. Ran out of invisible ink. And, I still can’t decide.
As always, but specifically in this instance, I am very appreciative of and grateful for the efforts of our expert and talented administrative assistant, Rachel Willcox, who reviewed the vast majority of these referenced products, providing some tremendous feedback and distilled information sets.
. . .
Liner Notes
When you think webconferencing, one of the first things that comes to mind is Roy Orbison.
Oh, hell. Roy Orbison has nothing to do with webconferencing. I just want to talk to you a little bit about Roy Orbison, and to get you listening up on him.
As regular followers of the Practice Advisor will recall, I am currently engaged in a death struggle with my iTunes library, and I intend for only the one of us to come out on the other side. Further, I intend to emerge victorious. I have been engaged for several months now in the Jared Correia Listening Project, which is me running through the 7,557 songs in my iTunes library, in order, by artist and album, rating each song as I go. I’m on “R”; so, I’m almost done. Specifically, I am on Roy Orbison. Also, Roy Orbison is on.
I’ve always found Roy Orbison to be a fascinating performer. He has such a unique voice; many have called it operatic; and, his vocal range yawns like the Grand Canyon. He was probably the lowest-slung pop star ever, and he could not have been called charismatic. Hell, I thought he was blind until I was 20 years old. As is the case with many a thing, though, it’s not the thing itself, but the associations that we make of it. So it is with Roy Orbison and me; Roy Orbison means more to me than the music that he sings, or who he is. My grandmother used to own a mammoth record player/8-track player combination, which was just about the most gargantuan and ungainly piece of furniture that you can imagine. (It was delivered by zeppelin.) I used to spin records all the time when I was over there. My grandmother just happened to be a huge Roy Orbison fan, and had a number of his albums, and so we used to listen to Roy together all the time. It was only later that Roy Orbison experienced a career renaissance, assisted by his joining up with the Traveling Wilburys, as Lefty Wilbury. But, whenever I hear another Roy Orbison song, his voice warbling through another chorus, I take the occasion to remember my grandmother, and that is certainly a good thing.
Roy Orbison’s career can be divided into two distinct stages: early successes featuring traditional songs and a late-career renaissance, which periods served as bookends for a meso-dryspell.
Roy Orbison’s early career was filled with hits that have become standards, most notably: “Oh, Pretty Woman” ('take two'), “Only the Lonely” and “It’s Over”. “Love Hurts”, “Crying” and “Pretty Paper” offer heavy doses of pain and angst and regret, if even in Christmas wrapping. “Uptown”, “Working for the Man” and “Mean Woman Blues" are heavier numbers with distinct appeal. “Dream Baby" and “Candy Man” have a sensual edge that most early Orbison tracks lack.
Despite a string of hits like those presented above, Roy Orbison disappeared somewhere along the line. Then came the Traveling Wilburys, a supergroup made up of George Harrison, Bob Dylan, Tom Petty, Jeff Lynne and Orbison, all going by aliases. The Traveling Wilburys’ “Volume 1” was a huge hit record, with lead tracks “Handle With Care” and “End of the Line”. Orbison was featured on those tracks, and displayed his singular vocal talents in fronting “Not Alone Anymore” and on an impressive cameo with Petty on lead vocals for “Last Night”. The unreleased track, “Heartbreak Radio” is Roy at his rollickin’ best.
All of a sudden, Roy Orbison was a superstar again, and in the highest demand. Producer extraordinaire Jeff Lynne and Petty worked with Orbison to write and produce the “Mystery Girl” album, which ended up being a staggeringly immense hit record.
Late period Roy Orbison featured a more polished sound, chiseled by the pop songcraft of Jeff Lynne, chiefly, though among others. However, it was still the same in that the music was the showcase for the uniquely fixed voice. “You Got It”, “After the Love Has Gone”, “California Blue” and “I Drove All Night” are representative tunes from the late Roytaceous epoch.
Sadly, Roy Orbison’s late period was to be a blue one. Following an exhaustive performance schedule, and when preparing to get home to finally get some rest, Roy Orbison died of a heart attack, directly at the height of his new-found popularity, and before his official comeback album, “Mystery Girl”, was finished and released. He was only 52 years old.
But, if you turn off the lights, close your eyes, and turn up your headphones, you can still hear Roy Orbison; and, his voice still carries.
Friday, January 21, 2011
True Life: I Have a Share on the Jersey Shore--GTL = ‘Go-to Legal’
In my continuing quest to do little, and even less, work by promoting others’ ideas for my own self-aggrandizement, Twitter has really been a boon. Twitter is the lazy man’s content generation machine. Let me repeat, it’s the Big (Red) content Machine for the Doritos set. It’s the broadcast medium equivalent of popping a burrito into the microwave, waiting a minute, and then finishing it right quick, after burning your mouth a little with the first bite. (I do believe that that should be Twitter’s description of its service at its own website. Well, one of those, at least.) You just know that there’s some dude who died in the 1880s who is pretty pissed off right now, because he hated reading all those squirrely-texted newspapers, and only just wanted his useless information streamed in instant fashion based on category listings that he could have derived. He’s British, by the way, in case you’re interested. We’d be friends, the he and I. But, What methodology would he use to separate the Jim Wheat from the Ronan Chaff from the John Barleycorn? Lists. Sweet, notorious lists. I used to use what were called “Groups” in Tweetdeck (wow, I had an old version); but, I wanted to switch to HootSuite, mostly to create and use Lists in a program that I would be likely to use going forward. (More on the switch from Tweetdeck to HootSuite coming up at the LOMAP Blog . . . You didn’t think I’d miss a chance for a follow-up post on the same subject, did you? Do you even know me?) Christmastime provided me the opportunity to make the move.
And, What do we do at the holidays? We celebrate. (By the way: Why did this song suddenly become ubiquitous during the Christmas seasons 2010?) I celebrated by creating a couple of Twitter lists using HootSuite. And, a glorious celebration it was.
In my quest to read as little Twitter-related jettisoned flotsam as possible, I decided to create a list of folks related to law practice management whose content I like/trust. That way, I can stream the list at HootSuite (for ease of retweeting), and also promote these folks via a published list page linked off of my main Twitter account. Win-win, right? Yup. I’ve labeled this list of most excellent law practice management-style twitter users as “GTL: Go-to Legal”. I could have named it any old thing; but, if you enjoyed the passing reference to MTV’s Jersey Shore, well, then . . it was all worth it. Of course, I’m starting to feel like a huge tool now, because no one seems to get the joke. In any event, while this is not, perhaps, as exciting as T-Shirt Time, this list merits monitoring, due to the stark quality of the inclusions’ frequent and incisive posts. You can follow the Go-to Legal List here. (I thought, at first, that I might find a cease-and-desist order from the attorneys representing The Situation for this; but, that hasn’t happened yet. Apparently, that dude is doing alright, and probably has bigger fish to fry. I should have worked on my abs more in high school. Damn.)
But, I wasn’t done yet. I also produced a list of Practice Management Advsisors (PMAs), like myself, who also tweet. (Then, I was done.) The PMA List can be found here, at PMA Central. (Far less infringement.) If you want further contact information, or contact information for those PMAs who do not tweet, check the ABA’s listing page for the PMAs of North America.
Maybe there’ll be more lists in my future; and, maybe, I’ll just keep working on burrowing my way out of this office using a rockhammer.
. . .
Liner Notes
There’s more to New Jersey than the Jersey Shore, of course. (Not that I wouldn’t be shocked to see Snooki on the license plates one day. Perhaps that should read making license plates one day. . .) It’s the Garden State. It’s got the Nets, for a little while longer. There’s a Parkway and the Turnpike, the Thruway being stopped at the border. And, it’s the only state that’s shaped like the number 8. (See, I just drew New Jersey.) Now, I know the Boss is from New Jersey; but, I’m not a big Springsteen fan. (Although, I did pretend to be for a semester in college in order to secure a passing grade in a science class.) Neither do I enjoy the stylings of Bon Jovi, although Bon Jovi/Jon Bon Jovi’s western forays (“Wanted Dead or Alive” and “Blaze of Glory”) are not that insufferable; of course, I’m a sucker for cowboy lullabies. My tastes run, perhaps, to the little bit more obscure, in this arena; and, if I had to pick an underrated members group of the Jersey Shore sounders, it would have to be:
Southside Johnny and the Asbury Jukes
I’ll admit that, when my uncle (lives in northern New Jersey) gave me a Southside Johnny tape (yes, that’s right, a cassette tape) a number of years back, I had no idea who the hell they were. But, being the curios beaver that I am, and never willing to pre-judge any band (I only post-judge), I checked out the tape.
It was good stuff, and still is good stuff, even though, for whatever reason, Southside Johnny’s popularity never extended much beyond New Jersey and the surrounding areas. Southside Johnny has something like a Smokey sound (I imagine they’d fit in well jammin’ in one of those (fast-vanishing) cigar-infested barrooms), which is exemplified by lead singer Southside Johnny’s unharsh (and even, at times, gentle) rasping. Southside Johnny (the band, not just the singer) has a pretty unique fusion sound (kind of like a toddler’s Steely Dan cover band), sort of rock, kind of jazzy, with some pop, and an increasing measure of old soul and R & B creeping in. They use more instruments than you might suspect, including brass and strings. Southside Johnny’s lack of popularity, I think, is not consistent with the obvious talent on display in the band; and, although talent is one thing, and bringing it all together to achieve a successful result is another thing, I think that Southside Johnny brings it all together.
The only thing you can really do at this point is to take a listen, to find out for yourself . . . Try these tunes on for size:
“I Don’t Want To Go Home”
“Love on the Wrong Side of Town”
“Talk to Me”
“Trapped Again”
“This Time It’s for Real”
And, that was . . . “Greetings from Asbury Park”. Or, perhaps not.
And, What do we do at the holidays? We celebrate. (By the way: Why did this song suddenly become ubiquitous during the Christmas seasons 2010?) I celebrated by creating a couple of Twitter lists using HootSuite. And, a glorious celebration it was.
In my quest to read as little Twitter-related jettisoned flotsam as possible, I decided to create a list of folks related to law practice management whose content I like/trust. That way, I can stream the list at HootSuite (for ease of retweeting), and also promote these folks via a published list page linked off of my main Twitter account. Win-win, right? Yup. I’ve labeled this list of most excellent law practice management-style twitter users as “GTL: Go-to Legal”. I could have named it any old thing; but, if you enjoyed the passing reference to MTV’s Jersey Shore, well, then . . it was all worth it. Of course, I’m starting to feel like a huge tool now, because no one seems to get the joke. In any event, while this is not, perhaps, as exciting as T-Shirt Time, this list merits monitoring, due to the stark quality of the inclusions’ frequent and incisive posts. You can follow the Go-to Legal List here. (I thought, at first, that I might find a cease-and-desist order from the attorneys representing The Situation for this; but, that hasn’t happened yet. Apparently, that dude is doing alright, and probably has bigger fish to fry. I should have worked on my abs more in high school. Damn.)
But, I wasn’t done yet. I also produced a list of Practice Management Advsisors (PMAs), like myself, who also tweet. (Then, I was done.) The PMA List can be found here, at PMA Central. (Far less infringement.) If you want further contact information, or contact information for those PMAs who do not tweet, check the ABA’s listing page for the PMAs of North America.
Maybe there’ll be more lists in my future; and, maybe, I’ll just keep working on burrowing my way out of this office using a rockhammer.
. . .
Liner Notes
There’s more to New Jersey than the Jersey Shore, of course. (Not that I wouldn’t be shocked to see Snooki on the license plates one day. Perhaps that should read making license plates one day. . .) It’s the Garden State. It’s got the Nets, for a little while longer. There’s a Parkway and the Turnpike, the Thruway being stopped at the border. And, it’s the only state that’s shaped like the number 8. (See, I just drew New Jersey.) Now, I know the Boss is from New Jersey; but, I’m not a big Springsteen fan. (Although, I did pretend to be for a semester in college in order to secure a passing grade in a science class.) Neither do I enjoy the stylings of Bon Jovi, although Bon Jovi/Jon Bon Jovi’s western forays (“Wanted Dead or Alive” and “Blaze of Glory”) are not that insufferable; of course, I’m a sucker for cowboy lullabies. My tastes run, perhaps, to the little bit more obscure, in this arena; and, if I had to pick an underrated members group of the Jersey Shore sounders, it would have to be:
Southside Johnny and the Asbury Jukes
I’ll admit that, when my uncle (lives in northern New Jersey) gave me a Southside Johnny tape (yes, that’s right, a cassette tape) a number of years back, I had no idea who the hell they were. But, being the curios beaver that I am, and never willing to pre-judge any band (I only post-judge), I checked out the tape.
It was good stuff, and still is good stuff, even though, for whatever reason, Southside Johnny’s popularity never extended much beyond New Jersey and the surrounding areas. Southside Johnny has something like a Smokey sound (I imagine they’d fit in well jammin’ in one of those (fast-vanishing) cigar-infested barrooms), which is exemplified by lead singer Southside Johnny’s unharsh (and even, at times, gentle) rasping. Southside Johnny (the band, not just the singer) has a pretty unique fusion sound (kind of like a toddler’s Steely Dan cover band), sort of rock, kind of jazzy, with some pop, and an increasing measure of old soul and R & B creeping in. They use more instruments than you might suspect, including brass and strings. Southside Johnny’s lack of popularity, I think, is not consistent with the obvious talent on display in the band; and, although talent is one thing, and bringing it all together to achieve a successful result is another thing, I think that Southside Johnny brings it all together.
The only thing you can really do at this point is to take a listen, to find out for yourself . . . Try these tunes on for size:
“I Don’t Want To Go Home”
“Love on the Wrong Side of Town”
“Talk to Me”
“Trapped Again”
“This Time It’s for Real”
And, that was . . . “Greetings from Asbury Park”. Or, perhaps not.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Listing Agent: Twitter Lists Divert the Stream
This week's Massachusetts Bar Association Lawyers E-Journal Law Practice Management Section Featured Practice Tip comes from LOMAP. This week's Tip covers the usefulnesses for and application of Twitter lists.
Read the Tip here.
Read the Tip here.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Hedging Bettors: New-Fangled Attorneys as Stop-Gap Entrepreneurs Split Hobson’s Choice
With the market saturation of attorneys in Massachusetts, coupled with the general down economy (still) and relatively high unemployment figures, there’s bound to be a job shortage for lawyers who want to practice law and to work for someone else. The math doesn’t manage otherwise. And, our experience bears this out: we see a number of attorneys here at LOMAP who are unemployed, or employed outside the legal practice (underemployed, I guess, some might say; only, that’s not narrow enough, in this case), the latter agreeing to the arrangement mostly solely in order to make ends meet. Those so affected do not admit of easy classification: young or new attorneys, old or experienced attorneys, lawyers with vast arrays of different experiences . . . all of these unsortable folks are struggling to find employment fits. Some will eventually find work as practicing lawyers, and some will finally determine to move from the practice of law into a law-related field, or into another profession altogether, by using their legal degree as a wedge for entrance. But, before any of that happens, there’s this limbo period covering the time beginning at the release from the last found legal job, or from law school, through to the start of the next-found suitable job, legal or otherwise. In a better economy, where effective employment was quicker to come by, job seekers had the luxury of complete concentration. When it only takes a month or two to find a new job, the perspective imparted by that knowledge is a far more calming one than, say, if it takes one to two to three years to find another suitable job. Pre-recession/depression, it was much easier to comfortably focus on “the job search” as a primary (or even sole) objective; these days, well . . . perhaps not.
For those attorneys who are unemployed, volunteering, as a chief endeavor, just does not cut it (although it provides some useful experience), at least as a measure for procuring subsistence provision. For those employed outside of the legal practice profession, there is often a need for supplementation of income, as well; or, if not, there’s a nagging suspicion, brought on by childhood dreams or law school brainwashing, that you’re not doing what you’re supposed to be doing: you should be out billing real hours somewhere, for someone. For job searchers in 2011, especially for those who are not working at some soft transitional position, the sheer length of the job search period just bears down, more forcefully each day, and fears of failure draft ahead of reasoned hopes for success, until perspective is so skewed as to become a significant handicap against effectively seeking and finding the next opportunity.
As a method for the resolution of the supra-applied strawmen argumentation, many attorneys are blurring the line between actual employ and the potential for employment. Given the above recitation of factors, many attorneys are finding appeal in a hybrid sort of arrangement, whereby they search for jobs while also managing their own solo practices. In the modern world, multi-tasking is the watchword; and, this is, perhaps, an outgrowth of a jumbled community, in which none of us, any longer, have the luxury of time and space, in which to think unfettered. (At least we’re all becoming used to it, right?) I’ll freely admit that I was nowhere near attentive or thoughtful enough to dream up this arrangement on my own; as is so often the case in my advising role, I recognize trends only after some significant period of time has elapsed, and as they are delivered to me upon silver platters by our striving, and genuinely innovative, clientele. And, although I had never made the initial recommendation to split and run simultaneous endeavors in this way, I think that, given the prevailing climate, it’s not so bad an idea; and, it’s, maybe, the best shot some folks have.
Attorneys are in a unique position, as are those others with traditional professions: there is always the background consideration for the establishment of a business--in this case, in conjunction with the continuance, or opening, of a job search. And, the establishment of a solo practice by the job seeking attorney answers for a number of the difficulties arrayed only for the knocking down: How does one get experience in an environment where paying jobs in one’s line are few and far between, and in which volunteering opportunities are neither plentiful, nor at all paying? Well, one creates one’s own experience, through the expedient of entrepreneurship. In addition to providing some unique resume fodder, the creation of a solo practice may birth a subsistence-level, at least, income, as well (. . . maybe more). And, that’s getting better, even as a forced choice, than forking over the full-on proceeds to somebody else. Further, the opening of a solo practice, and all that that entails, serves to provide the now-part-time job seeker with something significant to do; and, just having something important to do, having something rather large to accomplish, will take one’s mind off of the interminable job search--and that can be one of the first personal wellness benefits that your new business bestows. (You didn’t know you offered benefits, did you?) A byproduct of this split focus may become that the attorney so situated ends up finding that the time for each of his unique endeavors is even more precious; in this way, the ultimate result may end up being gains, rather than what might be suspected losses, in concentration, for each focus area, as each is engaged.
So, yeah, it’s always been the ancient advice that you should choose to do one thing, and to do it well, and that multi-tasking, especially on so large and important a scale as this, represents the detonation of concentration versus its sharpening; however, that strain of thinking ignores the effect of the electronic age, and represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the ways in which modern generations think and work. Major multi-tasking is the new norm; but, this does not mean that hyperfocus is gone--it’s merely fragmented, perhaps forever. If the present economic climate continues to prevail, the stop-gap entrepreneur, the professional who becomes a new job seeker/small business person in between periods of employment (during periods of “unemployment”, defined as being “not self-employed”, in this case), may become the norm, and that may just fit in perfectly with those modern modes of thinking and working. Whether that is, in the abstract, a good or a bad thing, depends, I suppose, on your perspective. (As for me, my vote for an agrarian society was dismissed, following Thomas Jefferson’s, quite a ways back.) Given the alternatives, though, and assuming that you can scrape, at least, a subsistence wage out of a solo practice, while still finding time to put in a reasonably effective amount of time searching for jobs (and when you’re your own boss, you can probably get time off for interviews), it seems like a pretty good interim solution.
(Of course, if you’re looking for a new legal job, and should you consider and choose to become a stop-gap entrepreneur, keep in mind that, when you get your new job, you can’t just check out on your solo practice, leaving files behind on the desk, as you would as a temp. You owe remaining duties to your continuing clients. Be certain, then, to prepare your practice, in advance, for its conclusion, establishing, at the outset, protocols for when you’ll have to shut it down. (Of course, a part-time solo practice will likely only service limited numbers of clients, making the winding up period likely shorter and less complex; when we’re talking about significant numbers of clients, that may be a solo practice that has grown up to be a full-time job on its own, obviating the necessity for a continuing job search, or for closing the practice.) Given the significant length of time some job searches run to these days, you’ll potentially have the time to prepare effectively, and to execute, both your business plan and your exit plan, throughout the history of your solo practice, and at its termination. Just don’t wind up not having been prepared to wind down.)
. . .
Liner Notes
This post, I’ve written about bringing seemingly mutually exclusive concepts together, to create a settled whole. This is sort of like what musicians do in creating suites, combining various pieces of music into single songs. (I know, what an intro, right? It’s beyond me, too, that I’m not writing for television, or something.) Armed with a fairly-ingenious analogy, I took to the interwebs, to see what “best suite” picks I could steal from other people . . . only, I was out of luck, because, it appears, no one has made out such a list. Wow. I could be breaking new ground here. (Most of the stuff on suites is about classical music; and, even Wikipedia falls into that defining trap. This is the first time Wikipedia has ever let me down, and I’m rather distraught, I’m not ashamed to tell you. My whole world has just figuratively imploded. This is worse than when my own Pandora station Rick Rolled me the other day. Why are you even still reading this!) Left to my own devices, I figured that I could come up with some great suites, and I was right! Thankfully, my love of seventies music and songs surrounding ten minutes greatly improved my chances of finding the below success:
(Some of these are called "suites" in the title, making them easier to find; however, in case you’re interested, my definition of the modern suite is: a combination of one or more distinct pieces of music melded into one cohesive song.)
“Suite: Judy Blue Eyes” by Crosby, Stills & Nash
“Suite for 20G” by James Taylor
(Almost purely a money grab by JT.)
“Scenes from an Italian Restaurant” by Billy Joel
“Bluebird” by Buffalo Springfield
“Foreigner Suite” by Cat Stevens
“I’m Your Captain (Closer to Home)” by Grand Funk Railroad
(Funny story about me. When I was a senior in college, I had some people over to my townhouse one evening for “checkers”, and I must have put this song on repeat, like, five times through. After about an hour of this, at least one kid wanted to kill me. Sadly for him, he just didn’t realize how dope this song is. And, that was why I was that kid that you didn’t want to invite to your parties, because I’d inevitably end up taking over your CD player and/or stealing a cheese wheel from your refrigerator. Who needs a six-pound cheese wheel? Clearly, I do.)
“Trilogy: Lovin’ Me/To Make a Woman Feel Wanted/Peace of Mind” by Loggins & Messina
“Funeral for a Friend/Love Lies Bleeding” by Elton John
For those attorneys who are unemployed, volunteering, as a chief endeavor, just does not cut it (although it provides some useful experience), at least as a measure for procuring subsistence provision. For those employed outside of the legal practice profession, there is often a need for supplementation of income, as well; or, if not, there’s a nagging suspicion, brought on by childhood dreams or law school brainwashing, that you’re not doing what you’re supposed to be doing: you should be out billing real hours somewhere, for someone. For job searchers in 2011, especially for those who are not working at some soft transitional position, the sheer length of the job search period just bears down, more forcefully each day, and fears of failure draft ahead of reasoned hopes for success, until perspective is so skewed as to become a significant handicap against effectively seeking and finding the next opportunity.
As a method for the resolution of the supra-applied strawmen argumentation, many attorneys are blurring the line between actual employ and the potential for employment. Given the above recitation of factors, many attorneys are finding appeal in a hybrid sort of arrangement, whereby they search for jobs while also managing their own solo practices. In the modern world, multi-tasking is the watchword; and, this is, perhaps, an outgrowth of a jumbled community, in which none of us, any longer, have the luxury of time and space, in which to think unfettered. (At least we’re all becoming used to it, right?) I’ll freely admit that I was nowhere near attentive or thoughtful enough to dream up this arrangement on my own; as is so often the case in my advising role, I recognize trends only after some significant period of time has elapsed, and as they are delivered to me upon silver platters by our striving, and genuinely innovative, clientele. And, although I had never made the initial recommendation to split and run simultaneous endeavors in this way, I think that, given the prevailing climate, it’s not so bad an idea; and, it’s, maybe, the best shot some folks have.
Attorneys are in a unique position, as are those others with traditional professions: there is always the background consideration for the establishment of a business--in this case, in conjunction with the continuance, or opening, of a job search. And, the establishment of a solo practice by the job seeking attorney answers for a number of the difficulties arrayed only for the knocking down: How does one get experience in an environment where paying jobs in one’s line are few and far between, and in which volunteering opportunities are neither plentiful, nor at all paying? Well, one creates one’s own experience, through the expedient of entrepreneurship. In addition to providing some unique resume fodder, the creation of a solo practice may birth a subsistence-level, at least, income, as well (. . . maybe more). And, that’s getting better, even as a forced choice, than forking over the full-on proceeds to somebody else. Further, the opening of a solo practice, and all that that entails, serves to provide the now-part-time job seeker with something significant to do; and, just having something important to do, having something rather large to accomplish, will take one’s mind off of the interminable job search--and that can be one of the first personal wellness benefits that your new business bestows. (You didn’t know you offered benefits, did you?) A byproduct of this split focus may become that the attorney so situated ends up finding that the time for each of his unique endeavors is even more precious; in this way, the ultimate result may end up being gains, rather than what might be suspected losses, in concentration, for each focus area, as each is engaged.
So, yeah, it’s always been the ancient advice that you should choose to do one thing, and to do it well, and that multi-tasking, especially on so large and important a scale as this, represents the detonation of concentration versus its sharpening; however, that strain of thinking ignores the effect of the electronic age, and represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the ways in which modern generations think and work. Major multi-tasking is the new norm; but, this does not mean that hyperfocus is gone--it’s merely fragmented, perhaps forever. If the present economic climate continues to prevail, the stop-gap entrepreneur, the professional who becomes a new job seeker/small business person in between periods of employment (during periods of “unemployment”, defined as being “not self-employed”, in this case), may become the norm, and that may just fit in perfectly with those modern modes of thinking and working. Whether that is, in the abstract, a good or a bad thing, depends, I suppose, on your perspective. (As for me, my vote for an agrarian society was dismissed, following Thomas Jefferson’s, quite a ways back.) Given the alternatives, though, and assuming that you can scrape, at least, a subsistence wage out of a solo practice, while still finding time to put in a reasonably effective amount of time searching for jobs (and when you’re your own boss, you can probably get time off for interviews), it seems like a pretty good interim solution.
(Of course, if you’re looking for a new legal job, and should you consider and choose to become a stop-gap entrepreneur, keep in mind that, when you get your new job, you can’t just check out on your solo practice, leaving files behind on the desk, as you would as a temp. You owe remaining duties to your continuing clients. Be certain, then, to prepare your practice, in advance, for its conclusion, establishing, at the outset, protocols for when you’ll have to shut it down. (Of course, a part-time solo practice will likely only service limited numbers of clients, making the winding up period likely shorter and less complex; when we’re talking about significant numbers of clients, that may be a solo practice that has grown up to be a full-time job on its own, obviating the necessity for a continuing job search, or for closing the practice.) Given the significant length of time some job searches run to these days, you’ll potentially have the time to prepare effectively, and to execute, both your business plan and your exit plan, throughout the history of your solo practice, and at its termination. Just don’t wind up not having been prepared to wind down.)
. . .
Liner Notes
This post, I’ve written about bringing seemingly mutually exclusive concepts together, to create a settled whole. This is sort of like what musicians do in creating suites, combining various pieces of music into single songs. (I know, what an intro, right? It’s beyond me, too, that I’m not writing for television, or something.) Armed with a fairly-ingenious analogy, I took to the interwebs, to see what “best suite” picks I could steal from other people . . . only, I was out of luck, because, it appears, no one has made out such a list. Wow. I could be breaking new ground here. (Most of the stuff on suites is about classical music; and, even Wikipedia falls into that defining trap. This is the first time Wikipedia has ever let me down, and I’m rather distraught, I’m not ashamed to tell you. My whole world has just figuratively imploded. This is worse than when my own Pandora station Rick Rolled me the other day. Why are you even still reading this!) Left to my own devices, I figured that I could come up with some great suites, and I was right! Thankfully, my love of seventies music and songs surrounding ten minutes greatly improved my chances of finding the below success:
(Some of these are called "suites" in the title, making them easier to find; however, in case you’re interested, my definition of the modern suite is: a combination of one or more distinct pieces of music melded into one cohesive song.)
“Suite: Judy Blue Eyes” by Crosby, Stills & Nash
“Suite for 20G” by James Taylor
(Almost purely a money grab by JT.)
“Scenes from an Italian Restaurant” by Billy Joel
“Bluebird” by Buffalo Springfield
“Foreigner Suite” by Cat Stevens
“I’m Your Captain (Closer to Home)” by Grand Funk Railroad
(Funny story about me. When I was a senior in college, I had some people over to my townhouse one evening for “checkers”, and I must have put this song on repeat, like, five times through. After about an hour of this, at least one kid wanted to kill me. Sadly for him, he just didn’t realize how dope this song is. And, that was why I was that kid that you didn’t want to invite to your parties, because I’d inevitably end up taking over your CD player and/or stealing a cheese wheel from your refrigerator. Who needs a six-pound cheese wheel? Clearly, I do.)
“Trilogy: Lovin’ Me/To Make a Woman Feel Wanted/Peace of Mind” by Loggins & Messina
“Funeral for a Friend/Love Lies Bleeding” by Elton John
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)