On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Project Management for Lawyers 2019

Released on: Feb. 6, 2019
Running Time: 06:55:21
Lawyers today face increasing pressure to be efficient, handle matters effectively, and produce quality work product and service.  They must also utilize appropriate risk management practices and meet the ever-growing number of compliance requirements in many areas of law.  These expectations, along with the 24/7 service demand for most businesses, result in tremendous stresses on legal professionals to manage in a more disciplined manner than in the past.  Legal project management tools and approaches provide the techniques to navigate these pressures and relieve some of the stresses of managing matters. 

Ultimately, many lawyers are discovering that one of the best ways to improve client relationships, enhance the efficiency of their work and increase teamwork and collaboration is with the use of legal project management approaches.  In fact, legal project management is a key approach to meet the expectations of today’s clients for effective legal “service delivery”.   Service delivery or delivery capability is the deployment of legal expertise, technology, and process to solve client challenges.  Increasingly, clients expect more than just the right level of legal expertise.  It is this service delivery differentiation that has become a part of the strategy of many firms that are leaders in LPM.  Heads of legal organizations or the LPM initiatives within them recognize that differentiation is more than a function of your practice mix, your geographic footprint and the quality of your lawyers. 

Legal project management encompasses valuable approaches that enable lawyers to meet or exceed client expectations, while both respecting cost reduction mandates and improving profitability. This program will offer insights and approaches for legal project management that can be implemented immediately. Private practice lawyers – from solo practitioners to those working at the largest firms – as well as in-house teams and legal professionals who assist them will benefit from this one-day program.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:55:21]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Opening Remarks* [00:02:52]
    Susan Raridon Lambreth, Rebecca H. Benavides
  • Success Stories in Legal Project Management: New Approaches for Managing Matters and Changing Cultures [01:08:49]
    Susan Raridon Lambreth, Rebecca H. Benavides, Megan V. Panchella, Shea Twomey-Meuse, Mark Van Blargan
  • LPM in Action – Using LPM Techniques at the Matter Level [01:14:30]
    Susan Raridon Lambreth, Janelle Eveland Belling, Bree L. Johnson, David Alkins, John E. Duggan
  • Applying LPM in Smaller Legal Departments and Law Firms – It Applies to All Types of Law Practice, Large or Small [00:59:41]
    Carla Landry, Timothy O'Leary, James Shoemaker, Mark Van Blargan, Adrian R. Gardner
  • A Day in the Life of a Legal Project Manager [01:00:25]
    Susan Raridon Lambreth, Anthony Widdop, Megan V. Panchella, John E. Duggan
  • Client-Law Firm Collaboration – Partnering Inside and Outside Counsel [01:15:02]
    Susan Raridon Lambreth, Rebecca H. Benavides, Janelle Eveland Belling, Megan V. Panchella, Jaimee B. Farrer, Shea Twomey-Meuse, Aaron Kotok
  • Developing an Effective Budget - Closing: The Next Phase in the Evolution in Legal Project Management [01:13:58]
    Susan Raridon Lambreth, Natasha Edlow, Bree L. Johnson, James Shoemaker, David Alkins, Erica Godwin

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Increasing Efficiency and Driving Results with Legal Project Management—A Program for In-House and Outside Counsel, Interview with Helga Butcher, Chris Grant, and Stephanie Hamon
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Legal Project Management: Anticipating Areas of Greater Efficiency within the Law Firm to Provide Significant Value to Clients (November 2018)
    Mark Van Blargan, Nicole Fiamingo
  • Bill Josten, Legal Executive Institute, Legal Project Management—What Is It and Why Should You Care? (October 9, 2018)
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Susan Raridon Lambreth and Carla Landry, LawVision Group LLC, LPM Institute, White Paper, Implementing Legal Project Management: Is There a “Right” Place to Start?
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • LawVision Group LLC, LPM Institute, Legal Project Management: You Can’t Fake It Anymore—Part 2: Service Delivery as Part of Strategy and Differentiation
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Four LPM Approaches to Enhance Efficiency and Client/Lawyer Satisfaction
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP, Legal Project Management Value Statement
    John E. Duggan
  • The Sandberg Phoenix Experience: Implementing LPM in a Smaller Firm
    Timothy O'Leary
  • Legal Project Management and Its Role at the Heart of the Law Firm of the Future, Modern Legal Practice (April 2018)
    Anthony Widdop
  • LawVision Survey on Legal Project Management Roles (2017)
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Sample Job Descriptions for Legal Project Management Roles
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Spinning Plates—A Day in the Life of a Legal Project Manager (LPM)
    John E. Duggan
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP, Job Description—Legal Project Manager
    John E. Duggan
  • Husch Blackwell, Case Study, Close Collaboration Drives Successful Outcomes
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Husch Blackwell, Case Study, LPM for Litigation Portfolios
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Stephanie Forshee, What Peabody Energy’s GC Expects From Outside Counsel, The American Lawyer (April 20, 2018)
    Aaron Kotok
  • A. Verona Dorch, How This Fortune 500 GC Is Strengthening Her Law Firm Panel Relationships, The American Lawyer (July 17, 2018)
    Aaron Kotok
  • Tim Murphy, How the GC of Mastercard Improves His Law Firm Relationships, The American Lawyer (September 11, 2018)
    Aaron Kotok
  • Gregory H. Lantier, Natalie Hanlon Leh and Mindy Sooter, WilmerHale Series: Crafting Better Litigation AFAs
    Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Sample Budget Template
    Susan Raridon Lambreth

Presentation Material

  • Success Stories in Legal Project Management
    Rebecca H. Benavides, Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • LPM in Action - Using LPM Techniques at the Matter Level
    David Alkins, Janelle Eveland Belling, John E. Duggan, Bree L. Johnson, Susan Raridon Lambreth
  • Applying LPM in Smaller Legal Departments and Law Firms - It Applies to All Types of Law Practice, Large or Small
    Adrian R. Gardner, Carla Landry, Timothy O'Leary, James Shoemaker, Mark Van Blargan
  • A Day in the Life of a Legal Project Manager
    John E. Duggan, Susan Raridon Lambreth, Megan V. Panchella, Anthony Widdop
  • A Day in the Life of a Legal Project Manager (Polling Questions)
  • Client-Law Firm Collaboration (Polling Questions)
  • Client-Law Firm Collaboration - Partnering Inside and Outside Counsel
    Janelle Eveland Belling, Rebecca H. Benavides, Jaimee B. Farrer, Aaron Kotok, Susan Raridon Lambreth, Megan V. Panchella, Shea Twomey-Meuse
  • Developing an Effective Budget
    David Alkins, Natasha Edlow, Erica Godwin, Bree L. Johnson, Susan Raridon Lambreth, James Shoemaker
  • Developing an Effective Budget (Polling Questions)
Co-Chair(s)
Rebecca H. Benavides ~ Director of Legal Business, Microsoft Corporation
Susan Raridon Lambreth ~ Principal, LawVision Group
Speaker(s)
David Alkins ~ Director of Matter Planning, Nixon Peabody LLP
Janelle Eveland Belling ~ Director of Legal Project Management, Perkins Coie LLP
John E. Duggan ~ Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Natasha Edlow ~ Director of Pricing Analytics & Project Management, Covington & Burling LLP
Jaimee B. Farrer ~ Managing Attorney, Global External Legal Relations, GSK
Adrian R. Gardner ~ General Counsel , Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission
Erica Godwin ~ LPM Global Regulatory Practice Group Lead, Hogan Lovells US LLP
Bree L. Johnson ~ Chief Strategy, Pricing & Legal Project Management Officer, Robins Kaplan LLP
Aaron Kotok ~ Managing Director, AdvanceLaw
Carla Landry ~ Senior Consultant, LawVision Group LLC
Timothy O'Leary ~ Shareholder, Sandberg Phoenix & von Gontard P.C.
Megan V. Panchella ~ Legal Project Manager, Reed Smith LLP
James Shoemaker ~ Director of Pricing and Matter Management, Miles & Stockbridge PC
Shea Twomey-Meuse ~ Director, Matter Management Services, WilmerHale
Mark Van Blargan ~ Member, Management Committee, Member in Charge of Innovation, McNees Wallace & Nurick
Anthony Widdop ~ Global Director, Legal Project Management, Shearman & Sterling LLP
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period. Effective January 1, 2019, the limit of distance education per reporting period will increase from 9 to 18 credits.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  All PLI products can fulfill Washington’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Related Items

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Project Management for Lawyers 2019 Rebecca H. Benavides, Microsoft Corporation
Susan Raridon Lambreth, LawVision Group
 
Project Management for Lawyers 2018 Stéphanie Hamon, Barclays
Susan Raridon Lambreth, LawVision Group
 
Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2019 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2019 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.