THE 2011 SURVEY

The original research identified four key areas for investigation. Firstly, it sought to investigate how growing trends for desktop delivery of services had affected lawyers' relationships with the physical library and library staff. It also looked at the effects that electronic material had on library budgets by exploring the changing proportions spent on databases as opposed to hardcopy stock. How electronic information had affected the type of queries answered by information professionals was investigated, as well as the way in which they received enquiries. Finally, in order to help the profession bolster itself for the future, changes to job roles resulting from the introduction of electronic resources were explored.

The survey used a mixed methods approach combining qualitative and quantitative questions to assess the 203 responses received. The conclusions drawn from the survey were then supplemented by additional qualitative interviews with a number of practitioners from both the UK and USA to mirror where the majority of survey respondents were based. Rather than replicating the original survey and interviews, then comparing the results, the research will be revisited through current observations encountered in day-to-day practice.

The key findings to the 2011 survey found a significant reduction in the number of low level enquiries, leading to more complicated questions being directed at research staff. Alternative skills had become more prominent, such as a rise in the amount of training being delivered. The introduction of multiple databases had caused information professionals to develop greater confidence in public speaking, presenting, and how they conducted themselves through interaction with lawyers. Whilst new skills were developed, there was a reduction in “easy win” enquiries – electronic information produced the expectation among end users that everything is accessible. In-depth research tasks and complicated searches no longer automatically resulted in positive recognition – earning respect for tasks undertaken and the skills needed to fulfil the researcher's job role had become harder to earn than in the past.

CHANGING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN LAWYERS AND LIBRARY STAFF

The growth of resources accessible at users' desktops came with concerns for how the physical library would be affected by the widening scope of databases such as Westlaw and Lexis Library. Fears had been raised that over time relationships between lawyers and their librarians would break down. Users could now easily access a wide range of journals and books that were cross referenced against cases and legislation, without needing to rely on the librarians' knowledge of the physical collection. This lack of contact might have prompted less opportunity to build trust and familiarity between colleagues, an important part of the information industry.

This concern proved to be unfounded. Rather than reducing the need for librarians, lawyers were provided with access to large quantities of information, and now required a means to locate, find and deal with the vast amounts of material that was being returned from their searches. This however, was not a new problem: 58.5% of respondents had been providing users with database access from their desktop for over ten years, and so had been adapting for some time. In the three years since the survey, new challenges have arisen for librarians in managing their databases. The increasing number of databases using password logins rather than IP recognition is also providing librarians with new opportunities to provide assistance through the implementation of password management products such as Research Monitor and OneLog. Projects such as these can help to build relationships throughout a firm – with IT, and key stakeholders.

Remote training sessions were being provided by 67.7% of respondents to help users with confusion over which product to use, and to teach information literacy. This created a role as a trainer for the librarian, building a different kind of relationship with lawyers. The importance of search skills became increasingly recognised, as did the understanding of the collection with regards to what information was now online, and where to find it. Information literacy has been championed by many, and training sessions allowed library professionals to showcase their skills, and demonstrate the abilities that they have. Training is still an area that librarians can expand in – taking problems such as those Goodman (2014) raises regarding clients' demands that their lawyers are proficient with research databases, and work to ensure those needs are met.

The legal sector also provides the opportunity for law librarians to segue into knowledge management (KM). Some smaller firms have merged job roles between what might have traditionally been separate KM and library positions. Larger firms have kept distinct roles, but assimilated library positions into a trend for ‘knowledge’ branding. This has seen library services move from a business services position to become part of a ‘knowledge’ team, joining with Professional Support Lawyers, document management teams and, in some cases, IT. These changes have allowed enterprising library teams to become increasingly involved in the organisation and presentation of knowledge through intranets and KM systems. By breaking down barriers outside the ‘traditional library’, the image of the information professional in law firms has been changed for the better.

The continuing ubiquity of electronic information will continue to cement the librarian's role as a trainer, project manager, and KM authority by helping to create new relationships between the information professional and their end users. The increasing awareness of ‘knowledge’ as a brand or commodity that law firms can sell to clients, as well as to their internal staff as a professional development, will continue to benefit library services, and is something that should be encouraged. Lawyers' understandings of the role of information have changed, as are their understandings in relation to the costs and limitations of information. The traditional divide between fee earner and support staff is being slowly eroded; librarians can ensure this continues through exploring alternative roles and projects.

BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

Budgetary constraints will vary from firm to firm, and from year to year, but broad trends still exist across the legal sector allowing parallels to be drawn. The 2011 research paper found tightened library budgets following the recession to guard against falling income levels in law firms. To find savings many hardcopy subscriptions had been cancelled, especially where titles were duplicated online. Hardcopy publications such as ICLR law reports and court forms had been cut by law firms looking to save money, with online versions proving to be sufficient for the needs of the users.

2014 has seen some the largest increase in law firm profits after several years of downturn (Byrne, Reference Byrne2014). Despite these rises, library budgets are expected to stay tight for the time being, but if they do expand, where will the finances be spent? It is unlikely that print copies of materials will be restored now that they have been discarded. Rather, the majority of spend will go to specialised databases, primarily targeted towards market intelligence, ‘know-your-client’ (KYC), or competitive intelligence products. This spend will be scrutinised, however, with law firm finance directors less willing to see year-on-year cost increases – the financial downturn has seen the legal market become more competitive, requiring firms to continue to keep a tight control on spend.

Budgets will be challenged over the coming years by a rise in sector specific products and as databases silo information into different subscription strands. This effect is already being seen as traditional sector specific journals move online, or remove their content from larger databases. Large vendors have attempted to compensate for the removal of journals not by providing price reductions, but by replacing sources with content that can often be found free elsewhere. Prices then remain high as the number of content sources remains steady, regardless of the quality of content. If this trend continues, it will become necessary to subscribe to a greater number of individual platforms for specific areas of legal practice. These sector specific journals will continue to grow as publishers refuse to license their content for use elsewhere, urging firms to buy their content directly from them. Beneficially, information managers will be able to target the products they require, finding alternative sources to large databases with increasing costs. Information professionals must be aware of splintering databases though, and higher overall costs due to expensive ‘specialist’ products. Products may start to fall into three tiers: databases containing core legal texts published by large vendors, current awareness aggregators covering predominantly free online web news selling their services based on the advanced search functionality they provide, and specialist independent databases producing their own unique content unavailable elsewhere.

As librarians seek content from alternative publishers, hoping to save money, there should be less resistance in cancelling products than was faced when managing a hardcopy collection. Lawyers are less likely to be attached to an electronic resource than a hardcopy equivalent. Information retrieved electronically does not seem to create the same loyalties with lawyers as print once did. Users are now used to consuming material from a wide range of journals from various databases and are less likely to be concerned about breaking the run of a print collection. The challenge for information professionals now is not loyalty to a publication title, but teaching information literacy skills to use a new resource. It would be wrong to dismiss user loyalty attachment to electronic resources altogether though. It can be seen mostly with larger brands such as Westlaw UK or Lexis Library, and to a lesser extent with electronic magazines or other publishers. This can be problematic during renewal negotiation where buying from stakeholders is vital. It is essential that users associate the database with its monetary cost, even if this results in their being shocked at the cost of electronic information in an age where they perceive so much content accessed via the intranet as being free. Having users willing to move between vendors to try new products will help market competition.

Within the legal sector, a great degree of consolidation of vendors and information products has taken place. The 2011 research survey explored “big deals” and the value that they did – or did not – provide to users. As databases have merged, this has created less competition in the market, and the profits have ended up with a smaller number of large players. This in turn may continue to increase prices, stretching budgets, meaning that any slack in spending is immediately consumed by high yearly renewal increases. The number of online resources will continue to develop despite this, and whilst a few core publishers are continuing to consolidate much of the legal information market (e.g. Thomson Reuters and LexisNexis), other smaller publishers will continue to emerge to offer niche, bespoke alternatives to the areas that become dominated by the larger players in the market. The market will always correct itself, and new entrants will emerge to fill the void left as others are bought out, providing that new entrants receive support. The library and information profession needs to invest time and money in helping these alternative products to grow and become viable alternatives to the large players.

E-books are still yet to make the impact on the legal market that they were expected to. Three years ago, 57.7% of respondents were not providing access to e-books for their users. This number is not expected to have changed much, primarily due to costs/benefit reasons. At present librarians have three options when purchasing core texts; hardcopy, obtaining the text via a database, or in a distinct e-book. The costs for an e-book at present are often the same as, or more than, the hardcopy, thereby negating the cost benefits of moving online. The benefits are further negated with licenses limited to a small number of users. This removes the advantages of a hardcopy in a library that can be accessed by many. Accessing a book via a database can solve access issues, but limits the functionality and can make reading chapters difficult. Most demand for e-books at present originates from publishers marketing e-books' compatibility with tablets, something coveted by many lawyers at present. For individuals that have purchased e-books, disparate apps across multiple operating systems have provided a poor user experience. Users expect an ePub like format, with additional functionality, something that at present does not exist in a strong enough form to become a compelling purchase. The format, cost and usability of e-books in the legal market will still need to be considered, much as it did three years ago, but the market does not look set to change in the short term.

Something that wasn't understood by many end users three years ago is now slowly becoming clearer to them: that the rise of electronic materials certainly does not equate to an automatic reduction of cost, or greater availability of information across a firm. Cancelling hardcopy that is duplicated on databases that are already subscribed to will prompt initial savings, though the following year any savings achieved will most likely result in a smaller budget allocation. This allocation will be put under pressure by high percentage increases for database renewals, and earlier removal of hardcopy duplicated electronically will have removed any “easy” savings to accommodate price rises. Budgets will be further put under pressure over the coming years as a trend for sector specific products grows, with vendors producing proprietary content that is not aggregated elsewhere. These are challenges that librarians will have to face, and mean that ensuring users have an understanding of the monetary value of information will be key in providing a library that satisfies lawyers' needs and budgets.

RECEIVING AND INTERPRETING ENQUIRIES

As law firms expand their international reach, either by opening up foreign offices or merging with other firms, information professionals are increasingly being asked to provide library and research services to multiple jurisdictions. How are firms adapting to supporting a wider number of offices with a similar number of staff, and how are they supplementing information needs from clients who are entering into new and unfamiliar jurisdictions in search of new business?

Previously, the survey sought to look primarily at how librarians received their enquiries and how they structured their collections – this provided an understanding of how support was provided across a firm's offices. 90% of enquiries were received via email, although an equivalent percentage still pointed out that they had contact with the fee earners in person beyond the enquiry desk. 95% had a centrally managed hardcopy collection, although 85% of respondents said that this was supplemented with satellite collections. Clearly, the librarian was not always physically present, but they were managing collections remotely, often across offices.

Whilst different library structures were given consideration before, team structures were not. This is primarily due to the lack of awareness of embedded models, something that seems to have grown since the recession. Staff who are based within a legal department have certain advantages over those in a central library. They can be more responsive and should have more opportunities to build awareness of the library services. Embedded approaches do, however, have limitations in that they put strain on staff numbers. If a practice has a large, diverse number of teams, ensuring that a member of the information services is located within each group's practice can be a challenge, as can the initial implementation. The lawyer's perceptions of the library also rely primarily upon the librarians based in the team – the librarian must be confident, experienced and knowledgeable. The model can therefore be a challenge to new professionals, acting as a steep learning curve, and occasionally cutting off development as they are unable to learn from colleagues as they would in a central team.

One benefit of an embedded approach compared with a centralised service is that the librarian can still remain visible within the community that they support, even though the lawyers are accessing most of their resources from their desktops rather than from a physical library collection. It certainly seems that the embedded approach has expanded in the years since the financial crisis. It is not clear if this is a direct response to ensuring that information teams remain visible in an environment where it is important to sell one's services and value, but it is suspected that an attempt to ensure visibility against the rise of desktop databases plays into this to a certain degree.

Of course, the embedded approach is not right for all firms and services, and the kind of relationship building that is often associated with the embedded approach can still be achieved from a centralised team, although this usually requires more effort. Schumaker (Reference Schumaker2014) has already illustrated the pitfalls associated with becoming ‘embedded’, so these will not be covered further. One model that is predicted to increase over the coming years in larger firms is a “chase the sun” model, with 24 hr hour research support being provided by teams spread across larger firms' offices, each team handing tasks over to the next as their time zones overlap. This will have drawbacks, for example local expertise on a jurisdiction is more likely to be challenged should a fee earner in England working out of normal office hours lodge an enquiry that is subsequently handled by someone in a North American office. The need to balance immediacy of response against the depth of knowledge is something that needs to be considered if firms do move to this model.

The original research asked if the availability of materials at a lawyer's desktop has freed up librarians' time from simply responding to basic requests, to enabling them to answer more challenging enquiries, and adding value to information for use in pitches or client awareness. The survey in 2011 showed that less basic document supply requests were submitted, having been replaced with requests for hard to locate materials, such as cases from foreign jurisdictions, or additional commentary on materials that have already been located. This has meant that librarians have had to further their skills and develop in-depth research abilities. These may have been present previously, but might have been showcased ineffectually or not necessarily noted. Where the library and information service must sell itself is by promoting librarians' abilities to locate material quickly, efficiently, and with additional analysis where required. This will only work if promotion is carried out within an environment where librarians strike a balance between continuing to urge users to carry out some initial research themselves before turning to the librarian for help. Simply obtaining straightforward information for users without teaching them will not help to promote librarians' skill sets.

If legal enquiries were to be categorised, the type of enquiry received would be found to not have changed greatly. Rather, the difficulty in locating information and the medium in which it is found has required the librarian has to adapt their search strategies. The principle change found is the growth of business development work. Research compiled by information centres is increasingly being used in client pitches, meetings, and current awareness. Libraries need to work with marketing teams to ensure the information is used correctly, but also ensure that providence is given to the information provided to ensure that the time taken to locate the information is communicated effectively.

One needs to look beyond the type of enquiry received, and also keep a broader eye on the type of work that the information professional is undertaking: training, resource analysis, budgetary considerations, and providing a “value added” approach. When these skills are evaluated, it perhaps seems as though little has changed – merely the technologies and tools that information professionals use. In 5-10 years' time, the same kinds of questions will still be raised about the profession. It is essential to keep asking these questions to prompt self-reflection, but also to keep in mind that the question itself is in many ways not the most important aspect, rather the approach that is taken in response to the answer. Simply being aware of the current challenges raised by each question is just as important.

HOW HAVE JOB ROLES BEEN ALTERED BY ELECTRONIC INFORMATION

The legal information sector has been altered by electronic information, simultaneously creating and terminating many job roles. As roles become obsolete, the professional moves on to a new position, with new requirements and means to implement their skills. An attempt to compare jobs' roles before and after the rise of electronic information is therefore a moot point. It is the profession at large that has changed, and this is what matters, not day to day routines. It is important to remember that many members of the library and information profession have come to terms with working with the electronic information over the last 20 years through the rise of the computer and the Internet – the largest catalyst for change. The rise of high speed internet connections made the transmission of information much simpler, and email and databases increased the immediacy and expectation of turnaround times. These changes are monumental over a 20 year period, but at a level that is noticeable from year to year, it is not quite so transparent.

When considered from a granular point of view, the core profession and job roles have not been significantly impacted by electronic information or, at least, no more so than how society has been similarly impacted by computers and technology. The means with which one goes about fulfilling one's job role has been adapted, but the core skills that make an information professional unique still remain. Understanding of information hierarchies, taxonomies and structure still exist, as do search skills. The methods for applying these abilities are the only difference. Cataloguing skills are still important when dealing with hardcopy stock, but are now also applied to structuring intranets and tagging documents for retrieval from document management systems. To analyse how electronic information and technology have affected the information professional are no different to examining how they have affected society at large and seem to detract from the core understanding of what the profession does.

This is of course from a very theoretical standpoint. Librarians have had to fight, and are continuing to have to fight, to be recognised as experts in managing information and to carry out their roles in a new information world. Too often they feel restrained by the “bookish” stereotype. This view is waning though, and too often it is the individual who is restrained by their own perceptions of how others may see them.

Electronic information has presented new challenges in terms of smaller time frames for responses, expectations of availability, and use of new technologies to improve their end users' experiences, but no more or less than society as a whole has adapted. To focus too much on the impact technologies have made runs the risk of fixating on the present moment, rather than developing the skills needed to continue to progress and service the needs of the end user, thereby future proofing the profession.