# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Apply to be a part of our network to get:

The Latest News: get updates of what our members are working on, and to share your own work

Invitations: link up with us at our online and in-person events, in which we share knowledge and strategies

Materials: share our curriculum, protocols, planning materials, and strategies - and contribute your own to the network

LeDA offers two types of memberships:

Community Member: you want to learn more about legal design, make connections, and stay updated.

Full Member: you are already practicing legal design methods, either in business or academia. To be a Full Member: 1) you are willing to share at least one contribution to the LeDA resource library (method, case, tool, article...), and 2) you support the Legal Design Manifesto, and want to be listed as a signatory

All memberships are free.

Legal Design is an interdisciplinary approach to apply human-centered design to prevent or solve legal problems.

It prioritizes the point of view of 'users' of the law - not only lawyers and judges, but also citizens, consumers, businesses, etc. The people who use legal information, documents, services, and policies are not being served well by their current design.

As legal designers, we believe that the legal system can be more straightforward, more engaging, and more user-friendly. We aim to make the legal system be more human. This includes how information is presented, how processes are set up, and how policies have been established.

Legal Design pushes us to improve how we communicate, deliver services, and make rules and policies - all with the aim of enhancing the experience, comprehension, and empowerment of the users.

We believe that design methods, principles, and visual disciplines can make communication of legal information better, and facilitate interactions between people and legal systems.

Legal Design bridges domains of academic research and professional practice. It links the business world and the academic world, the management world and the legal world, and the corrective/reactive law world and the proactive/preventive law world. It takes a big-tent approach: to welcome many different kinds of people from practice, academia, government, and the community, and to work closely with many other research groups - acknowledging the value of their work and mindsets. All are welcome to develop a strong practical and theoretical foundation for how law works currently, and how it can work better in the future.

For us, "Legal" does not only refer to the legislative system, but it includes also doctrine, jurisprudence, decisions, social norms, contractual provisions, policies. We move beyond the static positive law approach, as many other researchers have established. We take a proactive and preventive law stance, meaning that our focus is about empirical reality - not just the law. We work alongside researchers in empirical legal studies, legal realism, law and society, law in action, participatory action research, and others who are working on understanding the reality of law, and who are studying new interventions to improve this reality.

For us, "Design" is an approach of creating new interventions to make a social system more usable, useful, and accessible. Design is not content to understand the current reality, but it aims to experiment with what could be - and to drive towards social impact by creating new programs and policies. Design creates knowledge by building new things - documents, services, technologies, rules, and systems, piloting them, and evaluating them. Design also takes a wider perspective on what "law" is, by bringing more stakeholders' perspectives into account, and by looking at an interdisciplinary set of tools and expertise to find promising solutions. With this design focus, we work alongside researchers in human-computer interaction, document and information design, the semantic web, research through design, ICT for development, and privacy and ethics in ICT.

Legal Design research methodologies range from the small and qualitative, to larger scale quantitative ones. These methodologies aim to better understand the current realities of the law and its users, with focus groups, surveys, service safaris, design workshops, and statistical analysis. They also aim to generate and vet promising ideas for new interventions, with design jams, hackathons, field tests, lab tests, and pre-pilots and pilot observational studies. Finally, Legal Design researchers evaluate the outcomes of these new interventions, with randomized controlled trials and evaluations of procedural justice, usability, and user experience. These research methodologies are not exclusive, and this website will document these various methods in detail and provide examples with specific studies, datasets, and instruments.

Legal Design can contribute to better empirical realities, especially if we involve the builders, makers, and users of the legal system into making them. To paraphrase Dean Edward A. Dauer, litigation law is mostly law. Preventive law is mostly facts. And the critical time for Legal Design is when those facts are first being born. Please let us be involved in the making of those facts.

This Manifesto defines what a Legal Design approach to law is. Want to propose changes to it? Check out our version 2 to contribute your comments.

The Manifesto aims to enhance the understanding of Legal Design and promote its use. Legal Design can help to create functional, inclusive and transparent legal documents, services, and systems. Legal Design requires a paradigm shift in lawyers' attitudes, goals, and approaches. It also requires the participation of a multidisciplinary community of doers (designers, coders, communicators, behavioral scientists, lawyers, etc.) to bring new perspectives and tools to improve the law.

Create information, services and systems with the community, based on their needs and abilities, rather than starting with the needs of lawyers and courts.

PREVENTION

Prevent problems rather than only intervene to resolve conflicts that have arisen.

Enable people to understand and do the right thing easily, rather than require considerable investments of time, money, effort or expertise.

Establish a common language to collaborate across disciplines, rather than following just one perspective.

Seek to provide win-win solutions for all the actors involved, rather than accept and perpetuate imbalanced relationships between the parties

The Legal Design Manifesto v1 has been written and signed by

Rossana Ducato, UCLouvain and Université Saint-Louis - Bruxelles; Helena Haapio, Lexpert and University of Vaasa; Margaret Hagan, Stanford Legal Design Lab; Monica Palmirani, Associate Professor at University of Bologna, CIRSFID; Stefania Passera, Information Designer and Contract Visualizer, PhD from Aalto University; and Arianna Rossi, PhD candidate in Law, Science and Technology, University of Luxembourg

These are the members of the Legal Design Alliance.

To be a member of LeDA, anyone can apply. A potential member must demonstrate their legal design work and share resources with the the network. You can also join the LeDA community, to receive information and updates about legal design work.

Arianna Rossi, PhD candidate in Law, Science, and Technology, University of Luxembourg

Jules Sievert, Creative Director of Nulawlab and Stable Ground Boston at Northeastern University

Jose Fernando Torres, former fellow at Stanford Legal Design Lab and co-founder at Lexter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Apply to be a part of our network to get: The Latest News: get updates of what our members are working on, and to share your own work Invitations: link up with us at our online and in-person events, in which we share knowledge and strategies Materials: share our curriculum, protocols, planning materials, and strategies - and contribute your own to the network LeDA offers two types of memberships: Community Member: you want to learn more about legal design, make connections, and stay updated.

# data[].attributes.body
Revue d'outils pour de la conception UX (orientée web donc) : https://uxtools.co/
Revue d'outils et environnements de travail collaboratifs, analyse poussée : https://outilscollaboratifs.com/
ou listée a minima (avec approche didactique) : https://trello.com/b/rKn1DdAf/cours-en-ligne-outils-collaboratifs
Revue de formats de brainstorming ou de réunions ludiques: http://gamestorming.com/blog/

# data[].attributes.body
Quelques données sur la perception visuelle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
We Create Content That People Want to Share | NeoMam Studios

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
13 Scientific Reasons Why Your Brain Craves Infographics [Interactive]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are a content marketing agency on a mission to produce creative content that online audiences will want to share and journalists will want to write about

# data[].attributes.body
Par le labo du MIT
Lifelong Kindergarten

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How lessons from kindergarten can help everyone develop the creative thinking skills needed to thrive in today’s society.In kindergartens these days, children spend more time with math worksheets and phonics flashcards than building blocks and finger paint. Kindergarten is becoming more like the res…

# data[].attributes.body
Tuto "Passer du texte à l'image"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Qu'est-ce qu'on veut ? > Des infographies juridiques ! Quand est-ce qu'on s'y met ? > Maintenant !

Ceci est un extrait de notre atelier formation " Créer des infographies juridiques ". Contactez-nous pour en savoir plus.

Télécharger le fichier Word

Le point de départ de notre tutoriel est un texte qui présente les signes distinctifs d'une entreprise : la marque, la dénomination sociale, le nom commercial, l'enseigne et le nom de domaine.

Il s'agit d'une présentation textuelle classique telle que vous trouverez dans les manuels de propriété intellectuelle.

Télécharger le fichier Word

Dans une première tentative de mieux organiser et présenter les informations, on regroupe les 5 signes distinctifs et on les présente visuellement sous forme d'une liste à puces. On y associe les définitions.

Cette réorganisation minimale permet :

de ressortir visuellement la liste des signes distinctifs ;

de s'apercevoir qu'il en existe 5 ;

de casser l'aspect linéaire des paragraphes de texte.

Télécharger le fichier Word

A la lecture du texte, on se rend compte qu'il existe deux catégories de signes distinctifs :

ceux qui sont gérés par le Code de la propriété intellectuelle (CPI) ;

ceux qui ne bénéficient pas de ce régime et sont régis par le droit commun de la responsabilité civile ;

On réorganise le texte en fonction de la catégorie " Signes distinctifs ".

Cette meilleure organisation n'est pas forcément agréable à lire : on a deux niveaux de listes à puces et notre première catégorie [propriété intellectuelle] ne liste qu'un seul item [la marque]. En réalité, il existe d'autres signes distinctifs régis par le code de la propriété intellectuelle (les marques collectives, les marques de certification, les AOC et les IGP). Par souci de simplicité, on a décidé de ne pas les inclure.

On peut améliorer la présentation du texte ci-dessus, mais ce n'est pas notre but. Cette réorganisation nous sert à créer un tableau.

Télécharger le fichier Word

On abandonne la présentation unidimensionnelle de l'information au profit d'une présentation en deux dimensions. Le tableau nous permet de naviguer à l'horizontale et à la verticale et visualiser des liens entre des catégories d'informations qui n'étaient pas facilement perceptibles à la lecture du texte.

Le tableau nous permet de reprendre l'ensemble des informations contenues dans le texte dans un format synthétique qui accélère la lecture, améliore la compréhension et favorise la mémorisation.

En fonction du contexte d'utilisation intenté de ce tableau, on peut naviguer l'information en commençant par la liste numérotée des signes distinctifs ou par leur catégorie supérieure, le régime juridique :

Télécharger le fichier Word

On poursuit notre travail sur l'architecture de l'information avec un tableau vertical : on a transformé les colonnes en lignes et les lignes en colonnes. Pourquoi ? Parce que le but de l'exercice est de réorganiser l'information jusqu'à identifier la meilleure façon de la présenter en fonction de l'objectif poursuivi.

Et pour cause, on a pris un ensemble de décisions intentionnelles dans l'objectif d'introduire le sujet à une personne qui a de faibles connaissances en la matière.

Cette personne a probablement déjà entendu les termes " marques ", " dénomination sociale " ou " nom de domaine " dans d'autres contextes, juridiques ou non. Notre tableau sera la première fois qu'elle va apprendre qu'on peut les grouper sous l'appellation " Signes distinctifs " et qu'il existe des liens entre eux.

On va donc lui présenter le sujet dans un ordre logique et pratique : on commence par le type de signe -> sa définition -> l'organisme où on l'enregistre / dépose et, enfin, le régime juridique ;

On peut s'arrêter ici et travailler davantage la présentation du tableau (la typographie, les couleurs, les alignements...). Mais on peut aller plus loin !

Télécharger le fichier Word

Pour rendre le tableau plus visuel, on ajoute des pictogrammes qui améliorent la compréhension et créent des marqueurs visuels favorisant, dans un premier temps, une meilleure mémorisation et, dans un deuxième temps, une restitution plus complète de l'information.

Les concepts de dénomination sociale et de nom commercial sont les moins évidents à transformer en icônes. C'est normal, il s'agit de concepts abstraits :

la dénomination sociale est le pendant du nom et du prénom d'une personne physique qui apparaissent sur sa carte d'identité. Pour une société, l'équivalent est l'extrait Kbis ;

le fonds de commerce est composé d'éléments corporels (mobilier, outils...) et d'éléments incorporels (clientèle, titres de propriété industrielle, documents...). En l'occurrence, l'image d'une boutique étant déjà utilisée pour l'enseigne, on peut visualiser les éléments incorporels comme un classeur contenant le fichier des clients et divers documents.

Télécharger le fichier Word

Si vous avez déjà téléchargé le document Word contenant les étapes 1 à 6, vous avez pu voir comment on a fait pour " détourner " les tableaux pour créer des structures plus élaborées et visuelles.

Cette dernière version a été réalisée avec Illustrator dans le but d'améliorer certains aspects graphiques notamment la typographie (sur ce point, voir notre article " Choisir la police de caractère de ses documents juridiques " ).

Enfin, voici une version intermédiaire de l'infographie basée sur le principe du mindmap. Elle a été écartée pour plusieurs raisons, principalement parce que le mindmap n'était pas la méthode de visualisation optimale dans notre cas.

Cet article vous a plu ou vous avez des questions ? N'hésitez pas à le partager et commenter sur les réseaux sociaux ( Twitter ou LinkedIn).

Si vous êtes intéressés à apprendre à créer vos propres infographies juridiques, vous serez peut-être intéressés par mon atelier formation ? Contactez-nous pour en savoir plus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tutoriel infographie juridique : passer du texte à l'image

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Qu'est-ce qu'on veut ? > Des infographies juridiques ! Quand est-ce qu'on s'y met ? > Maintenant ! Ceci est un extrait de notre atelier formation " Créer des infographies juridiques ". Contactez-nous pour en savoir plus.

# data[].attributes.body
Catalogue de pictogrammes juridiques

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A l'occasion du Village de la LegalTech, SketchLex et SVP vous offrent un pack d'icônes relatives à la communication du Droit.

Télécharger les icônes

L'archive .zip contient les icônes au format .PNG sur fond transparent et au format .SVG éditable avec un outil de dessin vectoriel.

La collection d'icônes " Communication & Droit " est distribuée sous licence Creative Commons attribution (BY). Cela permet une exploitation des icônes, y compris à des fins commerciales, à condition citer le nom de l'auteur (Miroslav KURDOV / SketchLex).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pack d'icônes relatives à la communication du Droit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A l'occasion du Village de la LegalTech, SketchLex et SVP vous offrent un pack d'icônes relatives à la communication du Droit. L'archive .zip contient les icônes au format .PNG sur fond transparent et au format .SVG éditable avec un outil de dessin vectoriel.

# data[].attributes.body
Mapping of stakeholders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Any product change, project plan, change management initiative requires assessment of and approach to working with stakeholders, a term we use to describe anyone who can impact a decision. Stakeholders often slow or block change; in other cases, they bust obstacles and accelerate progress. To increase your likelihood of success, check out this activity from visual thinker Yuri Mailshenko and identify your stakeholders to understand how they feel about your work.

Object of Play
The object of this game is to create an organizational map of your stakeholders. In some cases this may look like your org chart. In other cases situation and context will dictate a unique shape - likely familiar but undocumented. In addition to mapping stakeholders' organizational relationships, you'll also analyze their contextual disposition regarding your initiative.

Invite players from across your project's organizational spectrum to ensure thorough stakeholder mapping. Colleagues with experience from similar projects or relationships with suspected stakeholders may provide valuable information. Invite them, too!

Duration of Play
30-60 minutes

Material Required
Organizational Design Analysis works best on a whiteboard. Substitute a flip chart (or two) if necessary. To run a good session, you will need:

Dry-erase markers, we recommend using at least three colors (black, green, red)

Dry-erase marker eraser (or paper towels)

Sticky notes

Camera to capture the results

How to Play
Step 1: Map organizational structure

1. Invite your players to a five minute stakeholder brainstorm, ask: Who are our project stakeholders? Ask them to consider teams and individuals both inside and outside your org or company. Have players write one stakeholder per sticky note.

2. Once the brainstorm ends, have each player present their stakeholders by placing their sticky notes on a wall and provide to the group a brief description of their thinking.

3. With all the sticky notes on the wall, ask the group to organize them into a rough org chart. This needs only to be an imprecise draft.

4. With the sticky note draft org chart as your guide, create a cleaner version of the org using a whiteboard and dry-erase markers. Ask for a scribe to map the organisation top to bottom. When the scope is quite big (for example, you are mapping a large enterprise), map the parts of the org structure that are less relevant to the analysis with less detail, and vice versa.

5. To help with navigation, label all stakeholders.

6. Denote future parts of the organizations (ones that are missing at the moment but are important to be considered for potential impact).

7. Draw a border around the areas that are affected by the change/initiative or are in the focus of the analysis.

8. Your whiteboard map could now look something like these:

Drawing considerations:

Avoid using prepared artifacts like your company's official org chart. Create on-the-go with full engagement of the group.

Draw people. Draw a person as a circle and the upside down letter 'U'. A group of people could be just three persons put close to each other; avoid drawing departments and teams as boxes.

Many organizations are matrices of different kinds. Introducing an extra dimension might create visual clutter. Try to avoid that by either using a different style of a line (dotted or dashed lines) or a different color for a weaker organizational component.

Step 2: Add insight

1. Begin a group discussion with the goal of mapping stakeholder disposition and level of support regarding your initiative.

2. Discuss each stakeholder one-by-one, try to uncover:

1. Disposition towards the initiative: are they for, neutral or against? To what degree? Why?

2. Level of impact: how much influence will this stakeholder have? High, medium or low?

3. Relationship strength between stakeholders: who do they influence? who influences them? To what degree?

4. Participation energy level: high, medium or low?

5. If you are having difficulty dispositioning a particular stakeholder, move to the next one. Additional conversation may help you get unstuck and you can circle back to the troublemaker.

3. As you near consensus, draw your findings using tokens or icons. Discover what works best for you, some examples:

1. A green smiley face for a supportive stakeholder

2. A battery with one out of three bars charged for a low-energy stakeholder

3. A cloud overhead signals a confused stakeholder

Strategy
Org charts are quite unambiguous and offer little room for opinion. This exercise's value comes from mapping less obvious things like stakeholder influence, disposition and decision making power in relation to the initiative. Defined structures are rarely challenged but a necessary foundation. What is interesting is something that lies beyond the official org chart - people's attitude to the topic of discussion, their real power and influence. Players will share their opinions openly - and surprisingly!-in a safe, structured and collaborative setting.

Complementary Games
You understand who your stakeholders are and the org design dynamics facing your project, now what?

Who do - identify what you need from each of your stakeholders

Empathy Map - get inside their heads to understand their pains and gains

Understanding Chain - create the story your stakeholders need to hear to contribute to your success!

Source
Activity developed by Yuri Malishenko - visual thinker, agile coach, product owner

Activity titled by Stefan Wolpers - agile coach and ScrumMaster.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Any product change, project plan, change management initiative requires assessment of and approach to working with stakeholders, a term we use to describe anyone who can impact a decision. Stakeholders often slow or block change; in other cases, they bust obstacles and accelerate progress.

# data[].attributes.body
Emma Hertzberg http://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/146350
Stefania Passera
https://stefaniapassera.com/portfolio/publications/

# data[].attributes.headline
IDEO/Acumen : MOOC Human-Centered Design

# data[].attributes.subject
IDEO/Acumen : MOOC Human-Centered Design

# data[].attributes.body
Conduite des ateliers : Workshop 2

# data[].attributes.headline
IDEO/Acumen : MOOC Human-Centered Design

# data[].attributes.subject
IDEO/Acumen : MOOC Human-Centered Design

# data[].attributes.body
Conduite des ateliers d'équipe : Workshop 1

# data[].attributes.headline
Site de la méthodologie de la d.school de Stanford sur le design thinking appliqué au droit 

# data[].attributes.subject
Site de la méthodologie de la d.school de Stanford sur le design thinking appliqué au droit 

# data[].attributes.body
https://dschool.stanford.edu/resources/a-virtual-crash-course-in-design-thinking
Fiches méthodologiques des bootcamps : https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57c6b79629687fde090a0fdd/t/58890239db29d6cc6c3338f7/1485374014340/METHODCARDS-v3-slim.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
Ressources du cours "Legal Problem Solving" de Caitlin Moon

# data[].attributes.subject
Ressources du cours "Legal Problem Solving" de Caitlin Moon

# data[].attributes.body
Ressources bibliographiques, méthodologies, sites principaux : http://www.legalproblemsolving.org/#the-resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Creating, Sharing and Celebrating the World's Visual Language.

# data[].attributes.body
à traduire !

# data[].attributes.body
site, IDEO, notamment la partie "methods" qui donne des idées pratiques d'animation d'ateliers : http://www.designkit.org/methods

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Design Kit is IDEO.org’s platform to learn human-centered design, a creative approach to solving the world’s most difficult problems.

# data[].attributes.body
Sites :

Canva, Powtoon, easel.ly, Pixton, iMovie (je peux aussi partager un condensé de la formation vidéo que j'ai faite), Mindmap

Images/logos libres de droit :

Nounproject, unsplash (très accessoire)

# data[].attributes.headline
Parcours utilisateur et communication simplifiés

# data[].attributes.subject
Parcours utilisateur et communication simplifiés

# data[].attributes.body
Référentiel créé lors du cas d'usage Droits d'urgence

# data[].attributes.body
De Stefania Passera : "How to bring legal design and legal tech to contracts?"
https://lnkd.in/eRDwx82
De Elodie Teissèdre : "10 conseils pour réussir son projet Légal design" : https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/legal-design-10-conseils-pour-réaliser-son-projet-elodie-teissedre/
De Marie Potel-Saville : https://www.lemondedudroit.fr/decryptages/56815-legal-design-innovation-juridique-vecteur-transformation-entreprises-premiere-partie.html
et https://www.lemondedudroit.fr/decryptages/56816-legal-design-innovation-juridique-majeure-vecteurt-transformation-entreprises-seconde-partie.html

# data[].attributes.body
Un de ses meilleurs billets en terme de méthodologie !

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I am part of an ambitious new project in Florida to fundamentally rethink how to get legal help to people - and to do so through an inclusive, interdisciplinary, participatory design approach.

In Escambia County, Florida, in Pensacola, the Florida Bar Foundation and a community center, Pathways for Change, are collaborating to launch a ground-up plan for getting legal support to people who need it. I am taking part as a design facilitator, to guide the direction of the work and to coordinate what we do together.

We're working over the next 8 months to identify promising new ways to serve people in the Pensacola community with legal help, in ways that they want it. Our process is to involve people from the community in all parts of the design and development of these new services. And it is to build these services quickly, test them meaningfully, and then edit, scrap, or scale the initiatives based on what happens during their pilots.

Escambia County, in the Westernmost part of Florida's Panhandle, just right next to Alabama, has the chance to be a great example of how to do community-driven, coordinated legal/social services.

We're approaching it in the model of the participatory service design work going on in Malmo, Sweden and Milan, Italy. These service innovation labs have brought all kinds of community stakeholders directly into the creation of new, more accessible government services, with a spirit of inclusivity and creativity.

Could Pensacola be the Sweden, or the Milan of the US, when it comes to forward-thinking, people-centered, holistic government systems? That's what the Escambia Project is aiming towards.

What is the Escambia Project?

First, the name "the Escambia Project" is a placeholder name, until we know exactly what it is we are creating. For now, it is a collective of people, mostly based around Pensacola, who are intent on creating a better network of services and government systems for people who need them.

In the group there are legal aid attorneys, community activists, social service providers, funders, graduates of social service programs, volunteers from community groups, corporate social responsibility representatives, law professors, teachers, and more. Melissa Moss of the Florida Bar Foundation and Connie Bookman of Pathways for Change have brought together this wonderfully diverse group, and organized them into working groups to make things happen.

In particular, this group of people is focused on one big question to begin with: how do we get legal help to those who need it, and who may not even know they need it?

Rather than starting from the usual lawyer-first or court-first point of view, we are starting with the people. It's not about setting up more traditional law offices or clinics, and hoping that people realize they have a legal need and then find their way to a lawyer.

How instead, can we create services that are people-first: giving them the services they want, in the settings and times they want, and in ways that clearly provide them with the value they want and that solve the problems they have?

What would legal help look like if redesigned from the ground-up? If it were woven throughout the community for people to find and use on their own terms. What if it was created for people to find and use in the easiest, most supportive ways? And what if we didn't even frame it as 'legal' - but just as one more part of a wider set of services?

This proposition of people-driven legal services has been rumbling around as a concept in classes, conferences, and discussions about improving the legal system. With the Escambia Project, we are using human-centered design and agile development to get from talk to action.

The Project begins with an existing community hub: Pathways for Change, which has a Family Center building located in Pensacola, right in between four public housing blocks, and which already provides a range of social services. It has a holistic, wraparound mission, providing community members with education, counseling, training, links to social services and government agencies, and beyond. Right now it has a little bit of legal assistance as part of its menu of services for its community - in the form of a volunteer lawyer that drops in for occasional consultations.

The starting challenge for the Escambia Project group was how to make legal help more integrated, more meaningful, and more substantial - to serve the community better.

Pathways for Change has made itself open to us, to help prototype, pilot, and test concepts that we create. They have an existing volunteer staff and community base that can root our projects and engage with them. Our mission is to find the right new concepts to build for Pathways' community, and beyond. We will develop new legal service modes with them, with the idea of scaling them up to serve wider communities based on what we learn from an early pilot.

What We've Been Doing

We started The Escambia Project off at the end of 2016, forming teams and laying the groundwork for this year's design and development sessions. I have been leading the Design Team, in planning out a 3-day design sprint and researching inspiration, models, and methods to use during it.

I've been soliciting other examples of community-driven, integrated legal services and collecting these working programs and concept designs on the Access to Justice Innovations page.

Our teams began to meet on the phone and email, to greet each other, learn about where we're all coming from, and set out how best to use our in-person time well. I planned out a three day schedule, for our design team to come together in person and get through at least one design cycle, of identifying core needs, sketching out a small menu of possible initiatives, soliciting feedback from a range of stakeholders, and then refining our proposed pilot into a more scoped, certain vision.

We would have other teams - like those doing community lawyering work, outreach and engagement, and the steering group, come at the beginning and the end for input and feedback. A smaller cohort of us would spearhead the design work.

For 3 days in early February, we all met at Pathways for Change's Family Center in Pensacola. Connie hosted us in their conference room, and got us all the sticky butcher paper, post-its, and sharpies we needed. She coordinated many different community stakeholders to participate as team-members, interviewees, testers, and droppers-in.

We had three core working groups, each working on a different set of problems and ideas under the broad challenge of 'better, community-driven legal help'. Various community members were with each team, and others came in to participate for as long as they could, but without the requirement that they stay with us for the (long) full working cycle. We had a drop-in, open-door policy: stay with us for as long as you can, to make the designs better - and leave when you need to.

Our 3 days were structured around the flow of the design process.

Day 1 was starting with our broad challenge, and then moving towards a focus on a specific user scenario that we could address. Day 2 was our creative day, in which we'd brainstorm, look at other models, narrow down to a handful of ideas, test them, and sketch out the most promising ones. And Day 3 was refinement, presentation and consensus. Each team would pitch their most promising concept to a wider audience of community members, experts, funders, and community members, and then we'd have a review and selection process. We'd end the day with a game-plan of what we came to consensus on for a Summer 2017 pilot.

And there was lots of food, coffee, sweet tea, pastries, and Southern food to fuel it all.

Kicking off our design work, focusing in on problems

We started off the 3 day sprint with a goals-check. The steering committee set out what they wanted to get out of our time together.

Then we formed into teams, and started off on our discovery work. What did various community members have to say about what kinds of legal help they needed, if they have seen trends or commonalities in their community, and what stands in their way from currently seeking out help.

One of the big barriers in this conversation is that we, as lawyers, tend to think it's obvious what 'legal help' is, and why people need it. But often, we realize, they don't see their housing, or children, or employment issues as 'legal' ones.

We started to make context maps, personas, and user requirements list from these conversations.

Our three teams focused on three different use cases, about the scenarios for help, the user's preferences, and the types of issues needed to be addressed.

We ended Day 1 with a share out of each group's focal point: what people they wanted to serve, what scenario and use case (meaning, what point in this person's life) they'd be focused in on, and what some guiding insights for designing something should be.

During this focus-in phase, many of the groups were not explicitly focused on solving a "legal" problem for their chosen stakeholders. They were thinking more broadly, and more in tune with the mental model of their chosen person rather than of the lawyer. How can I get my life on track? How can I get my kids back? How can I keep my son safe? How can I get my driver's license? These are the way our users were framing their needs - nothing about lawyers, clinics, rights, courts, or legal aid.

We pushed our teams to make this bridge - keep the framing around the people's needs, but then bringing the insight of lawyers to think about what services and help the legal system could bring to them. Because our Project mission was about integrating the power of the legal system to help solve people's problems and protect them, we encouraged the teams to follow the needs and value of their user, and then find opportunity areas around where legal empowerment might serve them.

Going Wide with Ideas, Sketching them Out

To start Day 2, I led the teams through three kinds of brainstorms. Each person did an individual 10 idea storm, in which they sketched out 10 ideas per person about what they might do to serve their target audiences. Then they came together into their teams, and had to come up with 20 more concepts - with particular emphasis on being more ambitious, challenging, and orthoganal.

Finally, we did a call-and-response brainstorm, in which I presented a possible model from other areas of legal and social services, and the team had to adapt this model to their own use case. They didn't have to adopt it wholecloth as an idea, but rather should make the leap to think "how could we adapt this idea of ____ to our person's situation"? I used this method to expose the groups to some of the new trends in legal tech and service design, and to jumpstart some more surprising ideas about how to connect people with help.

The teams then sorted their brainstorms out into a Difficulty vs. Importance matrix, to make sense of which ideas clusters to prioritize.

From these huge maps of ideas, then the teams chose three to sketch out into concept posters. By lunch on Day 2, each of the teams sketched out three of their top brainstormed ideas into a high-level vision: name, sketch, functions, high-level value, target users, and implementation details. The goal was to get a fleshed out vision, that we could then test with a cohort of community members who would visit for lunch.

There were 3 concepts for our user Joe, the 28 year old who was in jail or just coming out, and wanted to get his life on track. These ideas were Justice on the Block, Learning the Law, and Justice Allies.

For Wilma, our mother who was coming out of prison and wanted to get her kids back and life in order, we had another three ideas: Choose Your Own Adventure Intake, One Stop-Life Shop, and Know Your Rights: You Don't Know What You Don't Know.

And for our final user, Barbara, a young grandmother who wanted to protect her family and stop her son from going to prison, we had another set of ideas: a platform of My Journey to Success, including an Avatar/We-Me/BitMoji.

Early Testing of our Ideabooks

To test these ideas, Connie arranged to have members of Pathways' Men's Residential Treatment program visit the sprint as reviewers. The MRT program is for men who have been convicted of non-violent, non-sexual crimes, who then enter into a multi-stage program of rehabilitation and training provided by Pathways. They live together, go through programs together, and work to get their life reoriented in preparation for release.

Ten of these men visited us for an hour of feedback and testing of our Idea Concept Posters. They each visited with each team and did a 'gallery walk' of the posters, while asking questions, giving thoughts, and explaining what would be most useful to them.

From these rounds of feedback, the teams regrouped and focused in once again. They asked the community members explicitly which ideas should be given priority, and how to shape and detail these concepts to be most useful.

The teams then spent the rest of Day 2 refining the highest priority ideas into a more thought-through project, that they prototyped one level deeper. I introduced some models for this: creating storyboard walkthroughs of their proposed initiative, acting out the services, or mocking up interfaces for tech tools or paper tools.

Over the course of the day, each team went from two-word post-it level of ideas, to concept posters, to sketched out or enacted prototypes. They got their designs ready for sharing out on Day 3 with an even wider set of stakeholders - and making their pitch about why their concept should be piloted in Pensacola during Summer 2017.

Concept 1: One Stop: Life Shop

Team Wilma focused in on coordinating services in one physical place, at one designated time, to make it very easy for a person to get all kinds of social service and government tasks done conveniently. They termed this One Stop: Life Shop. They prototyped a storyboard, a visual intake app, and an enactment of how a person would arrive, be set up, and flow through multiple service experiences in a short visit.

Concept 2: Justice on the Block

Team Joe had a different concept: make legal services come to the community-member, on their terms, in familiar locations, and upon request. They called this idea Justice on the Block.

The concept involved engaging multiple stakeholder groups: people like Joe who have legal issues and want to find help to resolve them, lawyers with untapped volunteer potential, and community centers that would host outreach and consults.

Concept 3: Smart-Story Intake

The final concept, from Team Barbara, was all focused on the interaction between a community member with legal needs (who might not know they have legal options) and a person (maybe not even a lawyer) who can help screen for issues, and get the person started on their legal journey. It would also let the person store their relevant, important docs in a safe place, and manage their data.

Our final consensus

After each of the teams presented their concept, our large group of stakeholders and reviewers talked it through. Was it feasible to do? How would they get people to know about it, and excited about it? How exactly would it work? These questions all pushed the teams to be more specific about feasibility, viability, and the devil of details.

After all the presentations were made (and people enjoyed some lunch), we closed out Day 3 with a debrief conversation. Each of the ideas was strong enough for the group to vote for it to be piloted. Then the question was how to simplify each of the ideas down to a manageable scale, and integrate them with each other to make a coherent system.

I mapped out the conversation, into two categories: what to do this summer, what to save for 'bigger vision' scale further down the road.

The conversation suggested we combine the three proposals so that each would be a service touchpoint in a larger system. Justice on the Block would allow for more outreach to community centers and people, to have them tuned into legal help opportunities.

Community centers could host free legal help sessions, reach out to their audiences, and integrate pro bono and legal aid lawyers more effectively. A person could come with a query for help, and they could be matched with a free lawyer, to speak with in person, over Skype, at office hours, or upon request.

One-Stop Life-Shop would be one branch out of this network of community-based help. We could run one or two rounds of this Life Shop, bringing together all kinds of service-and resource-providers to Pathways' Family Center. It would be an initial test run of getting these providers coordinated and physically co-located. If it went well, then it could become more institutionalized, or even permanent as a regular warehouse space full of all help-providers together.

Finally, the Smart Intake and Personal Legal Itineraries would be a tech-tool that would help with both of these other tracks. It would help an advocate or volunteer (not necessarily a lawyer) better spot when people have a legal issue. Then it would help craft a personalized gameplan for how this person should be accessing legal services.

The more general intake screener at Pathways could adopt this tech-powered version, or it could be run at other community spaces, One-Stop Life-Shop, or anywhere else people might need it. It would be a screener and referral tool, to get more people to the right tracks, resources, and advocates.

What We Will Do Next

Now we are in planning mode, to make sense of all the insights, requirements, and ideas that came out of our sprint. We have marching orders from our stakeholders, about what a possible Summer pilot might be.

In the next few weeks, we are figuring out if we are at the right level of ambition: pushing for a breakthrough, people-oriented system, but in a small enough scale that we can get it off the ground in a few months and test discrete assumptions. We want to create something meaningful and to challenge the status quo, but in just enough of an incremental way that we can actually implement it, fix its bugs, and measure what exactly it's doing.

To do this, we're debriefing in conversations and sketches. For example, here is a map that starts to capture the different tracks of services we'll be developing.

We are also deciding on who we should bring into the Escambia Project's "Build Team", who will be in charge of implementing these various strands of hte system. It will be a mix of community managers, software developers, communications and marketing specialists, and others. We need new digital tools built, but our real, more challenging task is to get more people aware of the programs and resources we are building, and more lawyers willing to give their time to them.

We are also in a second-round of scouting out inspiring models and experts in the field. Rather than try to reinvent models, logistics, and best practices, we're looking for people who have already built out similar parts of the system we're creating in Pensacola. We have some leads in Arizona and Indiana, and we're looking for more. If you have suggestions of projects or people that could inform the development of these new access to justice projects, please send them along!

In our open, agile approach, we want to talk to lots of people, and especially those who are building and implementing great services. Our project team is driving forward to start defining in detail what we're going to build, who we're going to partner with, and how we're going to measure it. Please let us know if you can help us with thoughts, contacts, or otherwise.

Meanwhile, we will continue on our schedule, and we'll update more as our prototypes take shape and we prepare for Summer's pilots.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Community Design for New Modes of Legal Service: The Escambia Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I am part of an ambitious new project in Florida to fundamentally rethink how to get legal help to people - and to do so through an inclusive, interdisciplinary, participatory design approach. In Escambia County, Florida, in Pensacola, the Florida Bar Foundation and a community center, Pathways for Change, are collaborating to launch a ground-up plan for getting legal support to people who need it.

# data[].attributes.body
Présentation "Design Thinking" avec : liens vers des ressources (IDEO), explication de concepts mais aussi des vidéos tops sur toutes les étapes du design thinking, reposant sur des cas concrets

# data[].attributes.body
La "méthode" Google: https://designsprintkit.withgoogle.com/ et le template pour le brief initial

# data[].attributes.body
des ressources 'quick view' a priori visuelles pour comprendre un processus dans son ensemble

# data[].attributes.body
Des CR de sessions legal design un peu partout en Europe http://legaldesignjam.com/jams/past-jams/
Les events de Margaret Hagan (antéchrono): http://www.legaltechdesign.com/hands-on-law-events/
GDPR et in-house legal design (vidéo webinar Juro/Dot): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHt4xkdNAoY&feature=youtu.be

# data[].attributes.body
https://pyramyd-editions.com/products/les-secrets-de-la-pensee-creative

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.wrike.com/blog/techniques-effective-brainstorming/
Stepladder Technique

Developed in 1992, this style of brainstorming encourages every member in the team to contribute individually before being influenced by everyone else. The session begins with the facilitator sharing the topic or question with the whole team. Once the topic is shared, everyone leaves the room except two members of the team. These two members will then discuss the topic and their ideas. Then, one additional member is added to the group. This new member will contribute their ideas BEFORE the other two discuss theirs. Repeat this cycle until everyone from the original group is in the room. This technique is particularly useful for teams who are easily influenced by only one or two members, leading to groupthink. This also helps encourage the shy folks in the group to share their ideas without feeling intimidated by a room full of people.

The stepladder technique is actually one of the more mature brainstorming strategies as it incorporates both an individual and a group participation aspect. This brainstorming technique is useful for medium-sized groups of anywhere from 5 to 15 people. Once the group gets larger however, it takes much longer and may become unwieldy.