How To Send and Receive Faxes with Windows XP

Fellow VA, Terence Kierans (mailto:tkierans@virtualservices.com.au) of Cyberspace Virtual Serv recently shared this resource for setting up ANY Windows XP machine to send and receive faxes:

http://www.andyrathbone.com/tips/faxing.html

So long as you have a dial up modem (check for a phone jack on your PC) - you can fax right from your computer.

For those who do not wish to configure Windows inherent fax solution, I recommend Onebox (http://www.legaltypist.com/onebox.htm). With Onebox any business can send and receive (along with organize) incoming/outgoing faxes. But that's not all! Onebox also helps control and organize telephone calls, voicemails, faxes and e-mails -- all from one easy to use web based account/login.

Check them out: http://www.legaltypist.com/onebox.htm

Treo - The Only Way To Go!

I'm a productivity person who hates waste. I tout use of each software to it's fullest and to only purchase equipment that will actively be used. I am very selective about the services and solutions I put in place for my business and try to get every ounce out of each - with the ultimate goal of doing as much as possible with as little as possible. Not sure if this is the result of being a struggling entrepreneur with no venture capitalists knocking down my door or it's simply been hardwired into my frugal Scottish genes - but getting the most out of anything is definitely my forte!

In any event, I have been carrying around a Treo 600 for several years touting it as the productivity tool to every professional who wants to be mobile. Why? It all started because back then, a Treo was the only "smart" phone which provided access to e-mail. Actually, there was also the hard cased Treo 270 but you can think Beam Me Up Scotty! with that design! ;)

At the time (about three years ago), 95% of my business processes used some form of e-mail, therefore, armed with my Treo I could more timely respond to all my client and business needs from wherever I happened to physically be rather than necessitating a trip to my desk and PC.
Gains in personal productivity, increased flexibility and ability to react when necessary are some reasons I hear when I ask BlackBerry® owners why they use one. All these improvements are most certainly because of access to e-mail - and if you can do that with one piece of equipment, why carry two?

Along with e-mail, Treo users get:

Better Access -

• Telephone access through several different carriers
• The Internet
• Word, Excel and other Microsoft file attachments
• Picture files
• Palm and now Windows Operating System

More Applications -

• Specialized software including most software created for Palm operating systems
• Palm Desktop software for contacts, calendaring and syncing information with your Treo (similar to Outlook)
• Games - what’s life without a little fun once in a while? Popular titles and great graphics make a Treo a great device to "play"

More Utilities -

• Back up your Outlook Contacts and Calendar directly to your Treo
• Listen to mp3s through the amazing speaker or use headphones
• Watch DVDs

So, along with access to e-mail, each Treo is also a cell phone with the provider of your choice, allows remote access to the internet, syncs with Outlook and other popular applications for contacts, notes, calendar and tasks, etc. Oh, it also has a camera and a few free games on it right out of the box. With the built in SD card slot, the Treo also provides storage and access to large files, including DVDs and digital music collections. Yep - with inexpensive software, each Treo is also an mp3 player (with a wicked speaker and great battery life) and you can even watch DVDs.

However, that's not all ... when paired with the portable foldable keyboard by Palm, I can be typing away with more than just my thumbs making my Treo more of a teeny, tiny laptop than a 'smart' phone. Although I would not wish to use my Treo in place of my laptop, in this age of uncertainties it is certainly nice to know that I can and that's what being mobile is all about!

From the May 18, 2006 Technolawyer Answers to Questions Issue:

1. ANDREA CANNAVINA, WORD V. WORDPERFECT ON THE FRONT LINES

TechnoLawyer member Jon Calhoun asks:
"I think for most of us that swear by WordPerfect it is the Reveal Codes feature that always puts it head and shoulders above Word. I've not worked with Microsoft Word's Reveal Formatting that Kim described as "similar to" Reveal Codes." I'd appreciate further comments from those who use Word 2002, who also are familiar with WP, as to the ease of use and other characteristics of the Reveal Formatting." the ease of use and other characteristics of the Reveal Formatting."

Alan D. Garber responded:
"The issue really is how do you fix problems in a document, because in a perfect document, nobody would need to reveal codes or formatting...."

Barron K. Henley wrote:
"As someone who has taught Word AND WordPerfect to law firms for over 10 years, I can verify everything that Mr. Garber states in his post. The mastery of styles in Word eliminates and avoids about 90% of the formatting issues one may otherwise encounter...."

Nathaniel Barber responded:
"I couldn't agree more with Barron Henley. There's nothing I can do in WordPerfect that I can't do faster, more elegantly, and with less code in Word. WordPerfect, in my view, is an "enabler" (in the pejorative, behavioral science sense) of clutter and inefficiency...."

My observations on the topic of Word vs WordPerfect:

It is WordPerfect's Reveal Code feature which makes the formatting of complex legal documents manageable from a secretary's rather than a programmer's perspective. Certainly, using Styles in Word can come close in terms of formatting, however, an issue not yet touched upon is that not all documents that pass your desk will be created by you or by someone within your firm that has a complete grasp on Word's Styles. In many instances, work will be necessary on files received from clients, adversaries, and co-counsel or which may have been revised several times by several people. "Clean up" of such documents is no small task in either application, however, given that the code is right in front of you in WordPerfect, at least it can be done by someone other than an IT programmer!

Also, it's not just the Reveal Codes feature of WordPerfect which makes it a better word processing application for those just starting their own practice or who, finally getting out there on their own, come to realize that typing and properly formatting legal documents is no small endeavor! WordPerfect is much more intuitive to use, IMHO. The FKey template that you can print out and place over your FKeys is extremely helpful to new users as the commands are right there in front of your eyes/hands.

Along with Reveal Codes and the FKey Template, WordPerfect also has an inherent print to .pdf feature so that you do not need to use or purchase expensive .pdf software. If a contact uses Word then documents need merely be printed to pdf by using "File" and "Publish To .pdf" before sending. I recommend to my clients that they .pdf everything before providing to another that way none of the information you do not mean to send (i.e., metadata), if captured by your software will be provided.

Additionally, I'm not quite certain where it got to the point that just because we can provide electronic versions of documents to clients and adversaries, we should. In the old days (and I'm not that old!) — all documents were sent hard copy — on paper or through fax, and changes were made in hand and returned to the firm that produced the document — making one "master" document that only one firm worked on. In fact, it really depended on the relationship between an adversary and our office whether or not we would supply the interrogatory questions or force them to type from scratch — our jurisdiction requires questions and answers. ;)

It only stands to reason that if several different operating systems, versions of software and people actually open and work on a document, the more likely it is to go corrupt (or even something get changed in the mix and not brought to light — do attorneys read the entire 100 page agreement after getting it back from an adversary?). Word's Track Changes feature is completely unreliable and unstable (my clients that redline documents, for the most part, use DeltaView). That's why I always recommend to my clients that they keep the original file and only provide physical documents (or pdfs) to their adversaries, clients, etc.

Regards,

Andrea Cannavina, CEO
LegalTypist, Inc.
(866) 848-2195 x101
www.legaltypist.com
Virtually@YourService!T
E: Andrea@Legaltypist.com

In honor of my Dad, I held the launch of this new site, http://www.lawfirmsolutions.com today, February 4, 2006 - his birthday. I lost my Dad over a decade ago now, but feel his presence with me every day. May the karma of the launch date carry Law Firm Solutions solidly into the future!

Not just trusting to karma, however, this past week I also attended LegalTech at the Hilton in NYC. Paul Sans of PSN Solutions (www.psn.com) was kind enough to provide me with a few passes and I enjoyed learning more about such venerable companies as Corel and Thompson West and rubbing elbows with a ton of legal technology software/equipment vendors - three floors of scan your e-mail; store/back up your documents/document management solutions. I just enjoyed saying "Yeah, but does it type?" after each little presentation, hehehehe. (Of course, my first site, LegalTypist, provides off site transcription services and my new site, Law Firm Solutions, offers all types of digital and web based services for multiple attorney environments!) Not surprisingly, every single response was "No". To which I replied "I do!" and handed over my new website's audio business cards, beautifully labeled and narrated by Penny Haynes of BrainStorm! and Encouraging Audio Books fame.

Please feel free to take a gander at the site and provide me with any comments or feedback! If you'd like to hear my business CD, follow the link; click on the Podcast and Play (triangle) icons. It's about ten minutes and will give you an idea about who I am and what Law Firm Solution's digital dictation upgrade can do for your firm:

http://quikonnex.com/channel/page/eMediaTouch-AndreaCannavina

Always

Virtually@YourService!

From the November 11, 2005 Issues of Technolawyer's Fat Friday Issue:

5. ANDREA CANNAVINA, FORGET TRAINING; OUTSOURCE
INSTEAD

A TechnoLawyer member who practices law, invests in
technology startups, and wishes to remain anonymous writes:
"I'm dumbfounded to see how profoundly backward many law firms are. How they are more worried about partner draws than making meaningful investments in technology, are totally averse to learning new technology, and/or in just learning how to use the technology that they
have, and rather than making investments in either stuff that works and that would allow for the smart people on their staff to get more done, they are afraid of the impact...."

Neil J. Squillante wrote
in his CM's note:
"This could very well be the most important Post of 2004 because it discusses the number one problem with technology — failing to invest beyond the price of the product. Legal software companies know this, and in their pursuit of growth, I think a few of them have latched onto a superior business model — Web-based services rather than local software, plus free online training seminars...."

Martin Dean wrote:
"I must absolutely disagree. The absolute bottom line here is buy software that doesn't need training.... Good software or hardware (how many of you were "trained" to use a fax machine?) should be self supporting and self teaching."

Bob Hughes responded:
"I was really flabergasted when I saw this post, and the fax machine analogy is ludicrous. Using a wheelbarrow or a bike may take no or little training. But, I would not want any air force folks flying jet fighters without some schooling.... The software I need (HotDocs & Time Matters/Billing Matters) will help my practice big time. And, I might be able to learn it on my own in about 10 years. I'm thankful there are people who will learn the details of those programs and who will teach it to me in much less time for a reasonable fee. That way I can spend more time representing my clients and learning how to be a better lawyer. We will both make a living doing what we do best. Isn't that how it usually works?"

I must politely disagree with Bob. I think that rather than paying the professionals to train a fee earner on the ins and outs of a particular application, sole practitioners and firms would be much better off investing that training in their support or paraprofessional staff or, even better, outsourcing the function altogether. My rationale is that attorneys should be focusing their energy, talents and time on two activities: present client service and new client generation (and the various subcategories of these activities: research; writing; court; association meetings; networking). In fact, I'll even be so bold as to say that attorneys should limit their administrative functions to time keeping for billing purposes, or they are not making the
most productive (revenue-wise) use of their time.

Of course, the whole idea of investing in technology is to increase productivity and/or reduce costs. The Virtual Assistance industry is meeting more and more of the challenges faced by businesses, including law firms and the legal industry, by providing off site transcription, billing, accounting and escrow functions, research and even legal writing. By contracting with a VA (or service provider), attorneys can gain the assistance of a top notch legal secretary gone cyber; without incurring all the employer liabilities: taxes; reporting and otherwise. If you already have a top notch secretary — great — why not promote her and get rid of her administrative functions and make her a more active role in fee producing — have her join networking and other paraprofessional organizations .. but I digress... ;)

It's my perception that it is difficult for law firm administrators, managing partners and working attorneys to know what "technology" they need and then to properly configure it to work as efficiently as possible — e-mail (security, confidentiality and storage); software applications; client communications; not to mention correctly shop for the best value on things such as telephone usage or even office equipment — the landscape of choices is shifting so rapidly and technology is advancing in so many different directions its hard to digest it all on top of running a successful business.

That's why resources such as TechnoLawyer, the Bar Association and other legal networking sites are so important — it is one place where attorneys will hear about technology being put into actual practice! Another fantastic resource is the International Virtual Assistant's
Association as it offers a free Request for Proposal process where attorneys, etc. post their needs and/or questions and receive contact from those with solutions and answers.

Regards,

Andrea Cannavina,
EthicsChecked MVA
LegalTypist, Inc.

The Top Three Reasons Law Firms Aren't Using Digital Dictation Technology

In my profession, it is common to ask a lot of questions. Truly, it’s necessary. A Virtual Assistant is someone who has to know as much as possible about a particular client’s systems or way of doing things in order to best configure and make use of available technology to help them do it better, faster, for less cost – whatever the client is looking to gain.

I started my VA career almost five years ago and limit my practice to virtual assistance to the legal industry. I do so as I have over 15 year’s brick and mortar experience in the legal “business”. Over the past five years, I have asked many attorneys, law firm administrators, paralegals, HR managers, private investigators, IT administrators, managing partners, office managers, secretaries and others about the processes used at their firms. Some use document management software, some don’t. Some have websites, some don’t. Almost without fail, when asked what the attorneys use for dictation, the most common response: a tape recorder.

That’s good! Dictating is a very efficient process, even with a tape. According to Dictaphone, in 1952 recorded dictation was established as "a time saver over handwriting and stenography among attorneys, physicians and other professionals". The first mini-cassette recorder was marketed in 1973. Do you believe it? That same little recorder still in use at most firms in the US
today is the technological equivalent of listening to music on an 8 track!

In any event, if your firm uses tape based dictation, then upgrading to digital should be a serious consideration. If your firm does not use dictation, perhaps you should start with digital so keep reading….

Why Upgrade To Digital Dictation?

Although not as old as dictation itself, digital dictation has been around for quite some time. The medical profession has been using digital dictation technology (call in and portable recorders) for over a decade. Why? Upgrading to a digital dictation process provided hospitals, clinics, doctor’s offices and insurance companies with:

• the ability for doctors to work remotely with nothing more than a phone or portable recorder and internet connection


• centralization of document workflow for multiple user, multiple site operations


• the ability to monitor work in progress and overall productivity


• the ability to track and report various metrics and criteria


• the ability to utilize remote transcriptionists and save on personnel costs

The way I see it, any size firm has as much to gain as a comparably sized medical practice by upgrading to a digital dictation process - so the question remains, with so much to gain, Why haven't they!? (Read that list above again – with your firm in mind.)

Why Aren’t Firms Using Digital Dictation?

The main reason, I believe, is no one has put 2+2 together yet. Since digital dictation technology isn’t “new”, not much attention has been paid to it outside the medical industry. Just recently, however, British and other European law firms have been in the news discussing how upgrading to digital dictation has provided benefits and improvements. Some recent headlines include:
DWF switch to BigHand System for Firm Wide Digital Dictation ... and
Intelligent Workflow Advantages Prompt Roll Out of WinScribe ...

What About Here in the US?


Listed below (in reverse order) are the top three responses I have received over the years to the question:

"Why hasn’t your firm upgraded to digital dictation?"

Number 3: "Digital dictation, isn't that speech recognition?"

No, speech recognition is not digital dictation. Speech recognition is software. It takes the human voice and converts it to text. Speech recognition software requires training to each specific user - hours of training for most applications, making the implementation of this technology not practical in most firm settings.

Digital dictation is the recording of your voice with software or equipment that provides dictation functions - stop, rewind, insert and so forth. With digital, however, the recording does not go onto a tape, it gets saved as an audio file (i.e., .wav, .dss). Unlike speech recognition, digital dictation requires a transcriptionist and software to type the recorded thoughts.

By the way, one reason why I firmly believe speech recognition software can never replace a good legal secretary/transcriptionist - no matter how much you train it, it can never catch when you say "defendant' and you should be saying "plaintiff"! ;)

So, while you may have heard or read about the pitfalls of speech recognition technology, digital dictation is a different animal altogether.

Number 2: "If it ain't broke..."

Yes, it is true that tape dictation works and has worked for decades, but so does a typewriter, an abacus, even a compass for that matter! Upgrading to digital dictation is not a fix, it is an improvement to a known process. It is the natural evolution of dictation - from human being (secy),
to recorded (tape), to digital (sound file).

When upgrading to digital, what should be highlighted is that those making the recording no longer need to be in the same physical location as the person doing the transcribing - or in today's lingo: can work remotely! Since the dictation file created with digital is electronic in nature, it can be
manipulated much the same as any other computer file -- stored, routed through networks, attached to e-mails and so on. This makes the dictation file itself much more convenient and user friendly in today's electronic environment (networks, multiple offices, document management software, retention requirements). Therefore, depending on how the capture process is set up, so long as firm’s dictators have access to a telephone or the internet, they can produce billable time from wherever they are. :)

Along with remote work opportunities for firm dictators, upgrading to digital dictation provides reporting and tracking on each file as it travels through the process or all of the metrics that a tape based dictation system simply cannot provide. Hold up a tape and ask an attorney what’s on it and see what s/he says! If it were a digital file, however, you always know the date and time a file was created, by whom, how, how long it is, what client it is for, what matter it pertains, and more.

So, from an administrator’s as well as dictator’s perspective, upgrading to digital dictation provides quite an improvement in how they do their jobs.

and….my all time favorite response to…..

"Why hasn’t your firm upgraded to digital dictation?"

Number 1: "We don't like change."

I have heard this exact phrase more times than I care to admit!

Other than, of course, this response helping me to realize that firms can take forever to reach a decision, it presents quite a conundrum. Why? When upgrading to digital, not much actually changes in the process for the dictator. In fact, just recently Olympus added a portable digital recorder to its professional line that has a slide switch, for the first time producing a digital recorder which truly mimics an analog recorder. Therefore, when properly configured, other than the fact that an attorney does not have to get up from his chair to hand a tape to his secretary (or leave on her chair), when upgrading to digital, dictators do not “do” anything different! That is why
implementation of digital dictation is a relatively trouble free and "easy" technologically-speaking, even for large firms.

Wrapping It All Up

At some point, every firm has to weigh the pros and cons of any technology upgrade. With more and more equipment and software necessary to stay competitive, IT budgets are already strained; and with so many firms quick to jump on the recent legal technology wave only to be disappointed, it is no wonder no one is looking for another upgrade.

Unlike so much of the technology available to firms today, however, digital dictation technology is not “new”. It is very stable and has been robustly tested, successfully implemented and utilized in various sized environments for over a decade, providing improvements to workers, administrators and managers. There simply is no reason why law firms should not beneift from this technology.
This is why, IMHO, every firm should make an upgrade to digital dictation a must for their 2006 technology plan.