http://www.sajim.co.za/peer88.7nr1.asp?print=1


   
  Peer Reviewed Article Vol.7(1) March 2005

 

Survey of information and knowledge 
management in South African law firms  

T. du Plessis 
Centre for Information and Knowledge Management  
University of Johannesburg  
Johannesburg, South Africa 
tf@rau.ac.za 

A.S.A. du Toit 
Centre for Information and Knowledge Management  
University of Johannesburg  
Johannesburg, South Africa 
asadt@rau.ac.za  

Contents  

1. Introduction  
2. Information and knowledge in the practice of law  
3. Managing legal information and knowledge  
4. Why information and knowledge management are critical to the success of a law firm  
5. Lawyers and legal research  
6. Empirical survey 

6.1 Methodology 
6.2 Findings  

7. Conclusion  
8. References  

Key words: Knowledge management (KM), law firms, legal practice, legal research, 
information technology  

1 Introduction  

The practice of law is in its core the provision of specialized knowledge and services in a 
variety of ways. This knowledge is acquired from internalizing valuable information 
gathered during legal studies, legal research and legal experience. The processing of 
information to knowledge is a personal, subjective process emerging from previous 
experiences and current events (Roos, Roos, Dragonetti and Edvinsson 1997:25). With the 



advent of sophisticated technologies, such as today's information and communication 
technologies (ICTs), the amount and accessibility of data and information have proliferated 
exponentially. Several studies have shown that in the most recent years advances in the ICTs 
are transforming the methods that lawyers use to access, retrieve and process information in 
order to deliver legal services to clients (Susskind 2003; Van der Merwe 2000:265–269). 

Conducting legal research traditionally implies the use of printed legal information in the 
form of statutes and cases that, in the legal environment, serve as the primary authorities; and 
the use of secondary or complementary sources (Garratt 2001:8–11). Nowadays the Internet 
can also be seen as an additional 'library' or 'information channel' from where some statutes, 
regulations and cases reported by countries worldwide as well as secondary sources may be 
retrieved either freely or on a subscription basis (Barratt and Snyman 2002; Brown 2002). 
Pacifici and Skalbeck (1999) and Kennedy (2001) are of the opinion that in legal research the 
focus will increasingly be on the collaborative elements of research through the use of ICTs, 
together with a sound information and knowledge management (IKM) strategy as foundation 
(Curran and Higgins 2000).  

The aim of this research was to examine the degree of impact the changing legal information 
environment has on the legal research process and to find out what benefit legal research will 
gain from IKM. The research also looked into the process of legal research and investigated 
the skills that lawyers, who are successful legal researchers in the print information 
environment, would need to also be successful researchers in a digital information 
environment.  

2 Information and knowledge in the practice of law  

Legal knowledge, that is, knowledge on law and its application, is used to procure, produce 
and manage legal work. Except for the primary sources, legal information constitutes 
secondary sources, such as legal reference works, digests, indexes, law reviews, legal 
periodicals, academic works of legal researchers, commentaries, books and articles from 
specialized law publications (Feiertag 2000:15–24).  

In addition to the primary and secondary sources of law, lawyers also need organized access 
to the information generated in the course of their relationships with clients. Client 
information includes that which is generated in the firm's day-to-day business, for example 
the client's personal details, and billing data needed to control the time and resources that 
lawyers dedicate to a particular matter (Rodríguez, García and Pizarro 2002:52). Client 
information also refers to the 'work done for clients' and this information (cases) is related to 
the practice of the profession. Case information is mainly found in the documents that 
lawyers generate and should be locatable at all times, since it could be used again in other 
cases, or required in future claims relating to the same case.  

From this case information, which could be categorized under the generic name of 'the 
experience of lawyers', evolves what is known as 'forms and precedents'. Experienced 
lawyers create forms, which include comprehensive annotations and practical comments that 
serve as models for the type of documents that are required repeatedly in the firm's daily 
practice. Thus, information on previous client work may provide useful precedents for faster 
and more efficient handling of related future work. This type of information is typically tacit 
knowledge, for example, tips at drafting pleadings or documents; or leads from experts; or 
hints at arguing motions and applications that have been acquired over time. In the practice 
of law, this type of knowledge is sometimes guarded over by individuals and not readily 
shared with others.  

  top



Furthermore, many lawyers also require information about the firm, the current business 
environment and the industries in which the business has to operate competitively. They 
may, for example, use the information that appears daily in the press or in official registries 
or gazettes. All of these resources can generally be categorized as being administrative, 
declarative, procedural or analytical types of legal knowledge (Gottschalk 2002).  

3 Managing legal information and knowledge  

Knowledge management (KM) in a law firm is about providing the firm's lawyers and staff 
with cost-effective tools to support the daily processes through which an understanding of 
'the law', 'the world' and 'the client' is created and shared. Some, but not all, of these tools are 
technology based (Kull 2000). In law firms, information and knowledge is often stored in 
various formats and many different applications are used for this purpose, for example word 
processing programmes combined with document assembly systems and document 
management systems. Law firms also apply financial management systems for the purpose of 
time billing and accounting, and information on clients and matters are kept in case 
management systems. These systems are often integrated with other practice and business 
information management systems and make up part of the KM environment (Rusanow 
2001).  

In recent years, some law firms have implemented intranets or even more sophisticated 
technologies, such as enterprise information portals and context-based searching tools. But, 
rather than being technology-based, KM centres on individual participation and it is therefore 
important to develop a KM culture. This culture encourages and invests in the sharing of 
both explicit and tacit knowledge. Managing tacit knowledge is more difficult and costly, 
though Rusanow (2001:5) regards it as the most valuable element of KM to a law firm. 
Because KM is expensive, it is recommended that law firms consider the value of the 
knowledge to the firm versus the cost of making it available.  

4 Why information and knowledge management are critical to the success of a law firm 

The work product that lawyers create, for example every legal document, pleading, 
deposition, trial and appellate brief, memorandum, letter, e-mail and spreadsheet, could be or 
is an important knowledge asset and ought to be properly managed. If managed well, 
knowledge is leveraged to alleviate further work production and knowledge creation. To 
lawyers, this is not a new concept. However, with technological advances and changes in the 
legal industry, KM could play a significant role in the future success of law firms. In 
determining why KM is regarded by some as crucial to the success of a law firm, the 
following questions could be considered for direction (Farrell 2001; Deya 2001):  

How easy is it to locate relevant documents or information in a timely fashion?  
Do lawyers in the law firm suffer from too much or too little information?  
How up-to-date are all law firm employees with relevant information?  
When a lawyer leaves the firm, is that expertise then lost?  
How much time goes into 'reinventing the wheel'?  
How fast can the people who have the required knowledge be identified and 
consulted?  
How effectively is cycle time reduced from receipt of client instructions to delivery or 
reporting on the completed task?  
Is technology appropriately used to deliver high quality services?  

  top

  top



Is innovation required to improve client service and satisfaction? 
Are all employees eager to learn and continuously improve services?  

Some of the factors that could lead to change in the practice of law include economic 
conditions and globalization issues; the courts and clients; the impact of the Internet; 
disintermediation; and the flexibility and immediacy brought along by the information and 
communication technologies (Susskind 2003). These and other factors such as the effect 
technology has on productivity and innovation, dematerialization, the expectations of 
digitally skilled lawyers with diverse work patterns, legal risk exposure, the law firm's 
reputation, the multi-office and multi-practice work environment, collaboration and 
communities of practice, and the increasing problem of information overload and knowledge 
attrition are some of the many reasons why lawyers should consider KM in their daily 
practice.  

5 Lawyers and legal research  

Legal research is one of the critical skills that lawyers employ on behalf of their clients 
(Leckie, Pettigrew and Sylvain 1996:173). Although certain areas of law do not require the 
same amount of research as other areas, competency in legal research is essential to any 
lawyer, regardless of area or type of practice (Best 2003). Legal research should not be 
considered only as information seeking; rather it is a combination of a variety of information 
and knowledge-related activities (Dempsey, Vreeland, Sumner and Yang 2000:254). 
Nowadays some sophisticated legal researchers might experience skill inadequacies because 
they are confronted with a large variety of commercial databases as well as an enormous 
array of Internet and other electronic information resources that are constantly expanding. 
Publishers of electronic information resources are frequently adding new search 
functionalities and other enhancing features to their products. These features often differ 
from product to product, requiring researchers to acquire or adapt skills for successful 
information retrieval (Underwood 2001). Though the primary skill that characterizes the 
legal profession will remain intellectual capability, lawyers as legal researchers must also be 
able to effectively manipulate the modern tools of information technology and KM (Jackson 
2001:34).  

Since the law is a profession and professions have an assumed expertise in a body of 
knowledge, lawyers are considered as knowledge workers who are defined by their 
relationship with information. As knowledge workers lawyers adhere to a minimum standard 
of professional competence and the premise is that lawyers have a professional responsibility 
to research and know the law to serve in a client's or the public's best interest. A lawyer's 
duty to research and know the law has a strong ethical component. Equally important is the 
application of malpractice standards to not only traditional legal research, but electronic 
research as well (Adams 2002:58–59). For example, currently the Internet provides access to 
information resources that previously would not have been readily available and this requires 
modern lawyers to possess a high level of electronic research skills to find, amass, manage, 
evaluate and use all readily available relevant information to serve a client's case or matter. 
The question is whether lawyers, as knowledge workers, that is professionals, recognized as 
having knowledge and skill superior to that of the ordinary person, can be expected to be 
more skilled and proficient than the average layman in their use of, for example, the Internet 
for legal research. In terms of professional responsibility, the answer is 'yes'. In the 
information era lawyers cannot claim to be knowledge workers without effectively using the 
ICTs, the Internet and other electronic resources for legal research if the situation so requires. 

Traditionally the legal profession is associated with and given control over a particular body 

  top



of knowledge and when lawyers use technologies it is not simply for the sake of 
convenience, rather it is used to maintain control over information and to improve service 
provision (Muir and Douglas 2001:177–178). This control in the legal information service 
market sets the legal profession apart in the sense that it is a profession identified with a 
theoretical body of specialized knowledge, which assumes academic training as a 
requirement in order to master this information (Katsh 1994). Also, it is a profession that 
regulates itself and which forms associations that allow members to share information and to 
establish rules for the profession. Typical to this profession is the relationship between 
professionals and clients, with the belief that the professional is equipped with the necessary 
skills to serve a client's interests and the public good.  

In the current paradigm lawyers, as professionals, are used to unpredictable situations and 
skilled in, for example, confronting complexity and anticipating potential problems or 
negatives, and viewing matters from as many angles as possible in dispute resolution or in 
arranging agreements. They thus already have skills that are essential in a highly active and 
volatile information environment, or, in what Katsh (1996) calls the digital world. This is a 
world of digital communications, transactions and transferring of electronic information, a 
world of digital relationships and interaction in virtual societies with virtual rules. In this 
type of world, it might be required of lawyers to partly shift their mindset to an environment 
where, in general, time is accelerated and distance is compressed, where change is rapid and 
continuous, and relationships are quickly formed but of uncertain duration, where 
information verification is uncertain, and where anonymity rules and hacking prevails. It is in 
such a world where lawyers will gradually be expected to practise as digital lawyers, that is 
professionals who effectively apply IT to every aspect of their practice (Katsh 1995:79).  

Many legal researchers nowadays do not ignore the change that was brought forward by the 
advent of the Internet, computerized legal databases, CD-ROMs and other electronic media 
channels. Rather, they emphasize that legal research encompasses using and mastering both 
print and electronic resources. In terms of electronic resources, this implies skills and 
knowledge of information resources that are either subscription-based, for example Jutastat, 
Butterworths/LexisNexis and WestLaw, or freely available, for example SAFLII, Polity or 
Concourt for South African court decisions and legislation, bills and regulations, and Cornell 
LII, AUSTLII, BAILII, CANLII, WORLDLII, and Courtsnet for international cases and 
legislation. Then there are also a variety of directories and search engines, for example 
Horters, the online directory of SA legal professionals, FindLaw with access to the West 
Legal Directory of legal professionals, and Google or Yahoo for general information 
searching.  

Applied to the situation where, for example, a lawyer is presented with a legal problem in an 
area of the law with which the lawyer is unfamiliar, print sources will typically aid the 
lawyer in analysing the facts; evaluating what legal concepts may be relevant; finding 
concepts in secondary sources; identifying primary authority; synthesizing the principle 
contained in the primary sources; and applying the principle to the legal research problem. 
However, in a digital information environment, researchers might follow different 
approaches and search for information in ad hoc, tailored ways, for example, extracting key 
terms while analysing the facts and using these terms as search terms in performing 
computerized searches to locate cases with similar facts and other applicable primary 
sources, or to find secondary resources that will direct the researcher to primary resources 
(Bast and Pyle 2001:297; Halvorson 2000:132).  

A general observation in comparing research in the different information environments is 
that with print sources legal researchers start quite broad and typically move from the facts of 
the research problem to general concepts and then to the specifics. In digital research, 
research usually commences with narrow or focused searching for something very particular 



or looking for cases specific to the fact pattern, followed by reading the internal references 
and the noting-up of relevant cases.  

6 Empirical survey  

The purpose of the empirical survey was to investigate the current situation with regard to 
IKM in South African law firms.  

6.1 Methodology  

The survey methodology consisted of questionnaires that were distributed to the sample 
group. Participants were selected according to the general criterion that they are South 
African lawyers, that is, law firm attorneys, advocates of the various South African bars, or 
members of the South African judiciary. The study sample included 160 attorneys, 20 
advocates and 20 judges, that is, a total of 200 lawyers. As the size of law firms might have 
an impact on the results, a random stratified sample was selected. This sample was generated 
from the Hortors electronic directory of law firms in South Africa (Horters 2003). The 
attorney section of the sample was made up of 100 attorneys from firms with 50 or more 
directors, 50 attorneys from firms with between 11 and 50 directors, and 10 attorneys from 
small firms or solo practitioners. Every effort was taken to ensure that the sample covered a 
wide area of the Republic of South Africa in order that the figures would not be biased with 
regard to city practices and rural practices, though this sample was accordingly stratified. 
Furthermore, the selection criteria discerned attorneys from law firms with reputable Web 
sites to constitute 50% of the sample and, therefore, of the 200 lawyers, 100 names were 
selected from law firms with Web sites.  

This was an exploratory study that involved lawyers as a particular group of information and 
knowledge workers and sought to gain a better understanding of legal research in practice 
and the current KM systems utilized by lawyers. The questionnaire contained 85 questions 
divided into a section applied to questions aimed at demographics information; a section on 
legal research; and an IKM section. Questions were generally constructed with either fixed 
alternative items, for example the participant has to respond by indicating 'Yes' or 'No'; or a 
Likert scale in terms of items to characterize their features and performance. Participants 
received the questionnaires via post with an accompanying letter and prepaid envelope. A 
period of ten weeks was allowed for response to the questionnaires before analysis was 
undertaken.  

The data from the questionnaires were processed by the Statistical Consultation Service at 
the University of Johannesburg, which used SPSS, version 11.0, for the input, management 
and statistical analysis of the data that were collected. This was then put into spreadsheets 
with statistical graphics for a visual presentation of the results.  

6.2 Findings  

The questionnaire response was received from 144 lawyers, which equates to a 72% success 
rate. Of those responding to the survey, 11% of the participants were from small law firms or 
were solo practitioners; 22% were from small to medium-sized law firms; 27% were from 
medium to large-sized law firms; 30% were from large law firms; and 10% represented the 
other segment of the sample, namely, judges or advocates.  

Most lawyers, 77%, indicated that their law firms had intranets, though 7% of the 
participants were unsure. Only 5% of the participants indicated that their law firms did have 

  top



an extranet and 42% of the participants were unsure. With regard to the current use of 
specific KM applications in law firms, the results were as follows: On average, more than 
60% of law firms used KM systems. For example, 73% used records management systems; 
72% case management systems, 42% expertise databases, 42% customer relationship 
management, 68% forms and precedents databases, 60% research archive databases, 52% 
systems for managing procedures such as best practice guides, and 67% in-house developed 
databases. The high percentages of lawyers responding as 'unsure' might indicate a lack of 
knowledge or awareness with regard to these systems, or it could be an indication that these 
systems were not used in the law firms (Table 1).  

Table 1 KM systems used in law firms 

The lawyers who did have access to the Internet either considered it fairly easy to use the 
Internet as an instrument for information retrieval (41%); or easy to some extent (31%). Only 
1% of lawyers did not consider it easy to use the Internet and 27% found it generally easy to 
use the Internet for information retrieval. Interestingly, on average, lawyers who found it 
easy to use the Internet for information retrieval also considered the Internet as an effective 
legal research tool, that is, 28% found the Internet very useful as a research tool, 34% fairly 
useful, 34% useful to some extent and 4% not useful at all. The reasons for having a Web 
presence included: because clients or the community required the law firm to have a Web 
site (77%); because younger lawyers considered it necessary (68%); because senior lawyers 
considered it important (64%); and because the IT department considered it necessary (59%).

The reasons for having and using an intranet included: to gain access to resources, for 
example brief, bank or library resources (88%); to gain access to precedent information 
(76%); to be provided with links to legal or factual information (74%); and to automate 
administrative processes, for example billing (64%). However, only 39% of lawyers 
indicated that their intranets provided them with expert information, while 34% said that the 
intranet did not provide expert information and 28% were unsure. This could indicate a lack 
of expertise databases available or law firm expertise, or unawareness or lack of knowledge 
with regard to what these databases were. Participants who indicated having an extranet used 
it to communicate draft work product with clients (60%), but were generally unsure as to 
whether it was used for calendaring purposes (40%). 

The survey furthermore showed that 80% of participants viewed the use of ICTs as 
principally beneficial in terms of improved access to information resources. Other indications
were that ICTs were moderately to greatly beneficial with regard to increased efficiency of 
communication with colleagues (41% to 52%); and with regard to increased efficiency of 
communication with clients (36% to 58%). However, 8% considered ICTs as having low 
value in terms of improved communication with colleagues or with clients. Because one of 
the main features of ICT is improved communication, the relatively high percentage of 
lawyers who did not consider ICT beneficial in this regard is a matter of concern. It might be 

IKM systems used  Yes  No  Unsure 
Systems for managing records or documents  73% 10% 17%  
Systems for managing cases (client files)  72% 13% 15%  
Systems for managing expert knowledge  42% 29% 29%  
Systems for managing customer relationships  42% 22% 36%  
Systems for managing forms and precedents (checklists)  68% 21% 11%  
Systems for managing research archives  60% 21% 19%  
Systems for managing procedures  52% 24% 24%  
Systems for managing in-house developed databases  67% 20% 13%  



that the system did not function correctly or that there was a need, for example, for training 
in the use of ICTs in order to reach their full potential. 

Special notice should be taken of lawyers' positive attitude towards the potential applications 
of IKM systems. Participants indicated an appreciation of being made aware of existing 
current knowledge (97%); and being enabled to distribute, share, capture and apply 
knowledge (94%); to work independent of time and location (93%); to collect information 
created by colleagues (92%); to learn new IT skills (90%); to reduce the dependence on an 
individual's knowledge (89%); to be part of the development of new knowledge (89%); to 
distribute information to colleagues (85%); and to partake in discussions within a 
'community of practice' (66%). The only hesitance (20%), or unwillingness (14%) detected 
concerned the last facet of IKM's use. It could be because lawyers are unfamiliar with the 
concept, use, or benefits of a 'community of practice' or 'community of interest'. 

Three questions pertaining to what was thought to be some of the main concerns lawyers 
might hold in terms of KM systems revealed a considerable concern regarding information 
security and confidentiality, computer viruses resulting in information corruption and content 
authenticity (Table 2).  

Table 2 Lawyers' concerns in using digital information resources  

Although apprehension of lawyers in using IT applications and KM systems was observed, 
they were however not ignorant of the convenience of these technologies. This could be seen 
in the results to the questions that were aimed at investigating the preferred usefulness that 
lawyers felt that they could expect from IT and KM systems. Most participants indicated that 
should they want to work from a location other than their office, they would like to be able to 
communicate with clients via e-mail (96%), gain access to their calendars (89%), retrieve 
and work on office documents (95%) and gain access to online databases for information 
retrieval (94%).  

Next, lawyers' opinions on the competencies of legal researchers were tested and an 
arrangement of these skills and competencies in order of significance are given in Table 3.  

Table 3 Legal researchers' skills arranged according to significance  

Concerns regarding the use of 
digital information resources in 
legal research:  

No 
concern 

Some 
concern 

Moderate 
concern  

Large 
concern  

Security and confidentiality 
concerns  5%  36%  36%  23%  

Computer viruses resulting in 
information corruption  2%  28%  39%  31%  

Content authenticity  4%  23%  43%  30%  

Being a competent legal researcher involves:  Never Sometimes Always 
Knowing how to find appropriate information  0%  5%  95%  
Knowing where to find appropriate information  0%  5%  95%  
Keeping up with new information  0%  5% 95%  
Providing timely, accurate information to relevant 
people  

0%  8%  92%  

Written communication skills  0%  10%  90%  



After testing lawyers' opinions on the skills of a competent legal researcher, enquiry was 
made into the methods of obtaining legal materials. From the results it seems that 35% of the 
participants consulted their personal contacts and/or private libraries on a daily basis and 
40% of participants on a weekly basis. Online databases were used daily by 38% of 
participants and weekly by 35% of participants. The frequency of searching the Internet for 
legal materials was 21% daily; 32% weekly and 33% monthly. Only 2% of the participants 
consulted a librarian for assistance daily, 50% sought assistance once a week and 35% 
monthly. The results can also be illustrated in terms of the frequency these methods were 
used for obtaining legal materials (Figure 1).  

Figure 1 Frequency of specific methods used for obtaining legal materials  

  

The results to the remaining KM-related questions that were asked are shown in Table 4.  

Not surprisingly, the majority of participants, 76%, did find that a growing amount of their 
work product was contained in e-mails and e-mail attachments. This response strengthens the 
necessity of KM systems to enhance the daily activities of lawyers who sometimes, to a large 
extent, rely on electronic communications and the creation and transfer of electronic files.  

The following question was aimed at determining the need for methods of enhancing the 
retrieval of previous work product from within the electronic environment. Based on the 
results it can be reasoned that, on average, almost half of the participants experienced the 
need for methods that would enhance the retrieval of existing work product from their 
electronic work environment. This assumption was further supported by the response to the 
next question regarding the need for a common electronic location where colleagues can 

Problem-solving skills  0%  11%  89%  
Decision-making skills  0%  20%  80%  
Organizing and managing information resources  1%  27%  72%  
Creative thinking skills  0%  33%  67%  
Developing a personal system for finding information  2%  33%  65%  
Computer competency (e.g. digital information 
searching skills)  

0%  44%  56%  

Oral communication skills  1%  53%  46%  
Building working relationships  3%  60%  37%  
Presentation or public speaking skills  9%  61%  30%  



obtain existing work product.  

Table 4 Lawyers' perspectives on KM-related activities  

Specific questions were directed to investigate the need for ensuring that, should a lawyer 
become unable to perform his or her duties, or should the lawyer's office become destroyed, 
sufficient information and knowledge existed in other locations to enable work continuation. 
These questions were not aimed at identifying a new trend; rather it aimed at emphasizing 
the need for such systems or processes to also provide for the needs of lawyers who 
increasingly work in an electronic information environment. Participants' responses in this 
regard indicated that, should they personally become unable to perform their duties, 58% of 
participants, to a large extent, and 24% to a moderate extent considered it important that 
sufficient information existed for another person to know their responsibilities and perform 
their duties. Only 6% did not regard it as important, and 12% indicated that it was necessary 
to a small extent. The majority of participants, 72%, strongly indicated the necessity that 
should their offices be destroyed, sufficient information and knowledge should exist in other 
locations for them to continue to perform their duties. The remaining participants indicated 
'to a moderate extent' (13%), 'to a small extent' (8%) and 'not necessary' (5%). These results 
therefore confirmed the necessity to constantly develop systems and processes to ensure the 
safety of lawyers' work and resources, including the information and knowledge work and 
resources that reside in an electronic environment. 

7 Conclusion  

Among the most notable findings of the survey was that participants in general indicated 
their use of IT applications and KM systems for managing information and knowledge in 
their organizations. However, the relatively high percentages of lawyers responding as 'being 
unsure' might indicate a lack of knowledge or awareness with regard to these systems, or it 
could be an indication that these systems are currently not used in South African law firms. 
Results further showed that Internet and intranet use was high, and that the uses for these 
technologies were valued, but the concept of an extranet proved to be mostly unfamiliar. Of 
some concern is the relatively high percentage of participants who did not consider the ICTs 
beneficial as communication tools, though the attitude of most participants was positive 
towards the potential applications of IKM systems.  

8 References 

Extent to which lawyers experience the 
following: 

Not 
at all 

Small 
extent 

Moderate 
extent  

Large 
extent 

That a growing amount of their work 
product is contained in e-mails and e-mail 
attachments (electronic files)  

8%  10%  6%  76%  

That it is difficult to retain previous work 
product from electronic files and e-mail 
communications  

14% 44%  21%  21%  

That there is a need for a common electronic 
location where colleagues can obtain 
existing work product  

13% 11%  23%  53%  

  top

  top



Adams, K.L. 2002. Online research strategies for the bookish lawyer: lawyers with more 
legal than technical know-how can still use the many computer tools available to enhance 
their research and make their arguments more persuasive. Trial 38(8):58-62.  

Barratt, A and Snyman, P. 2002. Researching South African law. [Online]. Available 
WWW: http://www.llrx.com/features/southafrica.htm (Accessed 1 October 2002).  

Bast, C.M. and Pyle, R.C. 2001. Legal research in the computer age: a paradigm shift? Law 
Library Journal 93(2):285-302.  

Best, C.P. 2003. Legal research is an essential lawyering skill. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.legalresearch.org (Accessed 24 February 2004).  

Brown, PJ. 2002. Internet legal research, a viable option. [Online}. Available: WWW: 
http://www.katsuey.com/chgdlegalresearch.htm (Accessed 18 Sep 2002).  

Curran, K. and Higgins, L. 2000. A legal retrieval information system. [Online]. Available 
WWW: http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/00-3/curran.html (Accessed 19 September 2002).  

Dempsey, B.J., Vreeland, R.C., Sumner, R.G. Jr and Yang, K. 2000. Design and empirical 
evaluation of search software for legal professionals on the WWW. Information Processing 
and Management 36(2):253-273.  

Deya, D. 2001. Information technology issues in legal practitioner: an East African 
perspective. (Paper presented at the International Bar Association's African Regional 
Conference on the theme 'Law in a Continent in Transition'. Nairobi, Kenya, 25-28 March, 
2001).  

Farrell, N. 2001. Setting up a law firm KM system in Asia. Knowledge Management 1
(1):4,8.  

Feiertag, T. 2000. Die toeganklikheid van Internetbronne in inligtingverskaffing aan 
regsgeleerdes. (M.Bibl. dissertation) Potchefstroom: Potchefstroom University for Christian 
Higher Education. [Unpublished].  

Garratt, O.G. 2001. Accountability and demonstration of the value of information services in 
South African law firms. [MA (Information Science) dissertation] Johannesburg: Rand 
Afrikaans University. [Unpublished].  

Gottschalk, P. 2002. A stages of growth model for knowledge management technology in 
law firms. Journal of Information, Law and Technology (2). [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/02-2/gottschalk.html (Accessed 16 October 2002).  

Halvorson, T.R. 2000. Law of the super searchers: the online secrets of top legal researchers. 
Medford, NJ: CyberAge.  

Hortors. 2003. Search for attorneys software. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.hortors.co.za (Accessed 18 May 2003).  

Jackson, R. 2001. Laying down the knowledge asset law. Knowledge Management (Oct.):32-
34.  

Katsh, E. 1994. Digital lawyers: orienting the legal profession to cyberspace. University of 
Pittsburgh Law Review 55(4):1141-1175. [Online]. Available WWW: http://www-

 



unix.oit.umass.edu/~eleclaw/lawyer.html (Accessed 30 October 2002). 

Katsh, E. 1995. Law in a digital world. London: Oxford University Press.  

Katsh, M.E. 1996. Lawyers in the networld. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 
2(2):part 2 of a special issue. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue2/katsh.html (Accessed 22 September 2002).  

Kennedy, D. 2001. The connected law firm: preparing your firm to thrive in the Internet era. 
[Online]. Available WWW: http://www.denniskennedy.com/connectedbook.htm (Accessed 
20 November 2001).  

Kull, M.D. 2000. Get a competitive edge with knowledge management. [Online]. Available 
WWW: http://www.lfmi.com/news/km.cfm (Accessed 20 November 2001).  

Leckie,G.J., Pettigrew, K.E. and Sylvain, C. 1996. Modeling the information seeking of 
professionals: a general model derived from research on engineers, health care professionals 
and lawyers. Library Quarterly 66(2):161-193.  

Muir, L. and Douglas, A. 2001. Advent of e-business concepts in legal services and its 
impact on the quality of service. Managing Service Quality 11(3):175-181.  

Pacifici, S.I. and Skalbeck, R.V. 1999. Intranets and knowledge management solutions: law 
librarians lead the way. Legal Times 19 July: 26. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.llrx.com/features/lead.htm (Accessed 30 October 2002).  

Rodríguez, C.M., García, J.P and Pizarro, J.A.S. 2002. Knowledge management in a law 
firm. Upgrade 3(1):51-54.  

Roos, J., Roos, G., Dragonetti, N. and Edvinsson, L. 1997. Intellectual capital: navigating 
the new business landscape. Hampshire: Macmillan Business Press.  

Rusanow, G. 2001. Culturing lawyers in knowledge management. Knowledge Management 1
(1):1, 5, 7, 9-11.  

Susskind, R. 2003. Transforming the law: essays on technology, justice and the legal 
marketplace. Oxford: University Press.  

Underwood, P.G. 2001. Avoiding the breakers: making the best use of the Web to ensure you 
have easy access to legal material. (International Institute for Research, Law librarian 
Conference, 20-21 November 2001, Johannesburg.) [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.lawlibrary.co.za (Accessed 4 March 2002).  

Van der Merwe, D. 2000. Computers and the law. 2 nd ed. Kenwyn: Juta. 

Disclaimer 

Articles published in SAJIM are the opinions of the authors and do not 
necessarily reflect the opinion of the Editor, Board, Publisher, Webmaster 
or the Rand Afrikaans University. The user hereby waives any claim 
he/she/they may have or acquire against the publisher, its suppliers, 
licensees and sub licensees and indemnifies all said persons from any 
claims, lawsuits, proceedings, costs, special, incidental, consequential or 
indirect damages, including damages for loss of profits, loss of business or 



downtime arising out of or relating to the user’s use of the Website. 

  top

ISSN 1560-683X

Published by InterWord Communications for the Centre for Research in Web-based Applications,
Rand Afrikaans University