The Oklahoma Bar Journal January 2024

activities and processes included in the Evaluating Phase are to monitor scope, budget and rela tionships throughout the Executing Phase and after, meeting of team members to conduct after action review, revise matter strategy for future similar matters, adminis tratively close the matter, deliver final product, archive reusable work product/create “reusable” assets and obtain final payment. The deliverables and work prod uct in the Evaluating Phase are an updated plan and budget, change orders, final budget-to-actual, exemplars/templates and model documents saved to the law firm knowledge management system. PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT Tools used to improve design and manufacturing processes can and should be used in the LPM arena. Performance improvement tools, whether for improvement of design, manufacturing pro cesses, project management or LPM, all boil down to four actions: analyze, search, solve and control. Using the process of performance improvement, litigation managers can determine the best way to carry out a certain kind of legal work to achieve efficiency, excel lency, probability of a particular outcome and predictability. OBSTACLES TO LPM Lawyer personality traits that pose the greatest impediment to the effective use of LPM and process improvement are 1) abstract reason ing, 2) skepticism and 3) urgency. Abstract reasoning can cause over-analysis to the point where nothing gets resolved. Skepticism can result in over-adversarial com munication style, which is coun terproductive to the collaborative

the legal work as a project. 13 In addition to doing the legal work, the four most important parts of the Executing Phase are dealing with changes in scope, managing communication with the various stakeholders, managing the project team and monitoring the bud get. 14 The activities and processes generally included in the Executing Phase are to monitor work com pletion and adherence to matter strategy, acquisition of resources to perform work assignments, modify the matter timeline, communi cate with stakeholders early and often, manage scope changes with client and other key stakeholders and monitor against budget. The deliverables and work products generally included in the Executing Phase are an updated matter time line, updated deliverable lists and budget and change requests. The Evaluating Phase The benefits of the Evaluating/ Lessons Learned Phase include the enhancement of handling of future similar matters and/or matters for the same client, even in a different area of law, and the ability of the lawyer to differenti ate themselves from other law yers by offering to have a debrief session. The Evaluating/Lessons Learned Phase is critical for gath ering data about the costs of mat ters, changes that occurred and affected achievement of the project outcomes and issues affected by stakeholder expectations. During the Evaluating Phase, the performance of in-house partners/managers and the firm are evaluated. Additional consid erations for post-matter evaluation include the thoughts and opinions of businesspeople – how well were client expectations managed? The

process of LPM as well as to process improvement. Urgency can prevent lawyers from having the patience and taking the time to work through the phases of LPM. CONCLUSION LPM is one tool that in-house legal departments can implement to create efficiencies in the do-less with-more era. Even when work ing through the phases of LPM feel counter-intuitive, especially to in-house litigators tasked with managing increasing claims and litigation with limited resources, the discipline and rigor will result in more predictability and more efficient use of resources. received her J.D. from the OCU School of Law in 2002 and her LL.M. from the Baylor University School of Law in 2022. 1. Norton Rose Fulbright surveyed more than 430 general counsel and in-house litigation leaders in the United States and Canada in multiple industries, including financial services, energy, healthcare and technology, https://bit.ly/46I2E2W. 2. Id. 3. Id . 4. Id 5. Id . 6. The Power of Legal Project Management , p. 36, 37 – Susan Raridon Lambreth and David A. Rueff Jr. 7. The Power of Legal Project Management , p. 35 – Susan Raridon Lambreth and David A. Rueff Jr. 8. Id . P. 38 9. Id. 10. Id. 11. “Taming the Litigation Beat with Legal Project Management Technology,” Donald A. Loft, https://bit.ly/3R9mA8Z. 12. The Power of Legal Project Management , p. 99. 13. The Power of Legal Project Management , p. 140. 14. Id. ENDNOTES ABOUT THE AUTHOR Jennifer Castillo is senior attorney and manager of litigation and claims at OGE Energy Corp. in Oklahoma City. She

Statements or opinions expressed in the Oklahoma Bar Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff.

34 | JANUARY 2024

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL