In the late 1990s a number of law firms and other organisations began to market online products which &quotpackage&quot legal knowledge. Unlike spreadsheets, word processing software and email, these products are not designed to provide efficiency improvements. Rather, online legal knowledge products, which package and apply the law, were and are viewed by many as having the potential to make major changes to legal practice. Many used the term &quitrevolution&quot to describe the anticipated impact. Like any new technology development, many intersecting factors contributed to their development. In many ways they built on existing uses of technology in legal practice. The various information technology paradigms which underpin them - text retrieval, expert systems/artificial intelligence, document automation, computer aided instruction (CAI) and hypertext - were already a part of the &quotcomputerisation of law&quot. What is new about online legal knowledge products is that as well as using technology paradigms such as expert systems or document automation to package and apply the law, they are developed using browser-based technologies. In this way they leverage the comparative ease of development and distribution capabilities of the Internet (and/or intranets). There has been particular interest in the impact of online legal knowledge products on the legal services provided to large commercial organisations. With the increasing burden of corporate compliance, expanding role of the in-house lawyer and pressure to curb costs, online legal knowledge products should flourish in commercial organisations and many have been adamant that they will. However, there is no convincing evidence that anything like a &quotrevolution&quot has taken place. Success stories are few and far between. Surprisingly few have asked whether this &quotrevolution&quot has failed, or seriously analysed whether it lies ahead. If it does lie ahead, what factors, if any, need to taken into account in order for it to take place? If there is to be no revolution, what value should be placed on online legal knowledge products? In this dissertation I use the findings of my own empirical work, supported by a literature survey, to demonstrate that the impact of online legal knowledge products has been modest. I argue that in order to build successful online legal knowledge products it is necessary to appreciate that a complex system of interacting factors underpins their development and use,and address those factors. I propose a schematic representation of the relationships involved in producing an online legal knowledge product and use the findings of some empirical work, together with a review the literature in related fields, to identify the factors relevant to the various components of this framework. While there are many interacting factors at play, four sets of considerations emerge from my research as particularly important: integrating different technology paradigms, knowledge acquisition, usability, and implementation. As a practical matter, the implication of these findings is that some online legal knowledge products are more likely to be successful than others, and that there are other technology applications that may represent a better investment of the limited in-house technology budget than many online legal knowledge products. I also argue that while most of the challenges involved in integrating different technology paradigms, improving usability, and effective implementation can be addressed with varying levels of effort, the problem of the knowledge acquisition bottleneck is intractable. New approaches to knowledge acquisition are required to overcome the knowledge acquisition bottleneck. I identify some potential approaches that emerge from my research: automation, collaboration and coalition, phasing and simple solutions.

In the late 1990s a number of law firms and other organisations began to market online products which &quotpackage&quot legal knowledge. Unlike spreadsheets, word processing software and email, these products are not designed to provide efficiency improvements. Rather, online legal knowledge products, which package and apply the law, were and are viewed by many as having the potential to make major changes to legal practice. Many used the term &quitrevolution&quot to describe the anticipated impact. Like any new technology development, many intersecting factors contributed to their development. In many ways they built on existing uses of technology in legal practice. The various information technology paradigms which underpin them - text retrieval, expert systems/artificial intelligence, document automation, computer aided instruction (CAI) and hypertext - were already a part of the &quotcomputerisation of law&quot. What is new about online legal knowledge products is that as well as using technology paradigms such as expert systems or document automation to package and apply the law, they are developed using browser-based technologies. In this way they leverage the comparative ease of development and distribution capabilities of the Internet (and/or intranets). There has been particular interest in the impact of online legal knowledge products on the legal services provided to large commercial organisations. With the increasing burden of corporate compliance, expanding role of the in-house lawyer and pressure to curb costs, online legal knowledge products should flourish in commercial organisations and many have been adamant that they will. However, there is no convincing evidence that anything like a &quotrevolution&quot has taken place. Success stories are few and far between. Surprisingly few have asked whether this &quotrevolution&quot has failed, or seriously analysed whether it lies ahead. If it does lie ahead, what factors, if any, need to taken into account in order for it to take place? If there is to be no revolution, what value should be placed on online legal knowledge products? In this dissertation I use the findings of my own empirical work, supported by a literature survey, to demonstrate that the impact of online legal knowledge products has been modest. I argue that in order to build successful online legal knowledge products it is necessary to appreciate that a complex system of interacting factors underpins their development and use,and address those factors. I propose a schematic representation of the relationships involved in producing an online legal knowledge product and use the findings of some empirical work, together with a review the literature in related fields, to identify the factors relevant to the various components of this framework. While there are many interacting factors at play, four sets of considerations emerge from my research as particularly important: integrating different technology paradigms, knowledge acquisition, usability, and implementation. As a practical matter, the implication of these findings is that some online legal knowledge products are more likely to be successful than others, and that there are other technology applications that may represent a better investment of the limited in-house technology budget than many online legal knowledge products. I also argue that while most of the challenges involved in integrating different technology paradigms, improving usability, and effective implementation can be addressed with varying levels of effort, the problem of the knowledge acquisition bottleneck is intractable. New approaches to knowledge acquisition are required to overcome the knowledge acquisition bottleneck. I identify some potential approaches that emerge from my research: automation, collaboration and coalition, phasing and simple solutions.