The need for thinking tools stems from the strengths and weaknesses of the mind. Humans are very skilled at recognizing patterns, creating abstract relationships and integrating disparate data. We are not very good at keeping large amounts of detail information organized for ready retrieval. While it is possible to use memory tricks like visualization and acronym cascading to improve detail manipulation when necessary, generally the better solution is to use an external memory and organization aid. This is succinctly summarized in the saying, "My dull pencil is better than your sharp mind at remembering."

This is the reason that all lawyers use tools as an aid to thinking. It may be notes for witness examination scribbled on a legal pad, a white board listing case issues or a well organized trial notebook. In each case, the physical tool is intended to organize and retrieve information as well as to aid in analysis and understanding. These tools work, but they have limitations. The effort required to change or restructure the information is substantial and these tools tend to be primarily linear in organization.

The linear vs. multidimensional issue also relates to the way the brain is organized. The storage method used by the brain is nothing like the lists of items or strings of text that we typically use for storing information on paper. The brain creates memories from networks of connections between cells that form multidimensional arrays. Perhaps for this reason, people are much more adept at recognizing graphical patterns than extracting information from text. For proof of this concept one need only look to the total dominance of modern graphical user interfaces on computers over the older text based interfaces. The ability to see and manipulate graphical images is a much easier system for the brain.

Take a list of cross-examination questions as an example. The ideas for the examination may come in random fashion and at different times. If the lawyer is superbly organized they may all get on the same pad or notebook. More often, they will be scattered over bits and pieces of paper in a rather haphazard fashion. When the time comes to begin the actual outline for the examination, the bits and pieces must be recopied to a new pad or notebook. If any creativity is to be applied to the examination, the questions will be modified many times and whole sections of the examination will be moved around to improve the effect of the examination. Each major change requires a complete rewrite.

The obvious first step is to put the examination in a word processing file as early as possible, making changes and moves much easier. The next incremental improvement is to use the outlining function of the word processor to aid in organization, comprehension and revision.

The outliner is exactly like the outlining process you learned in grammar school, but much easier. Each major topic has its own heading and subsidiary topics can be collapsed to create a simplified overview of the document. This is a great way to keep perspective on the big picture while working on the details. An outline topic can also be moved with its subtopics to reorganize the flow of the document.

As helpful as outlining can be, it suffers from many of the same limitations of paper-based tools. It is inherently linear in nature and it is difficult to portray or understand the relationships between pieces of information other than in a strict hierarchical arrangement. To get beyond these limitations we need to move to a new crop of multidimensional tools.

Multidimensional tool is my term for software tools that facilitate the organization and analysis of ideas by graphically representing the relationships between ideas. Much of the thinking in this area has its origins in the work of Tony Buzan who developed the concept of mindmapping in the 1970's. Mindmapping takes as its premise that people process graphical information more efficiently than text. Take the task of traveling to an unknown location. Most people would find it much easier to grasp the process of reaching the destination by examining a map than by reading a series of instructions. Buzan attributes the ready assimilation of graphical information to the way the brain organizes information. Our memories are stored in a network of associations, grouped by proximity. When we learn a new fact or skill it is not written on a clean sheet of paper, but rather overlaid on preexisting similar stores of information. That is why it is often easier to learn additional elements in a field already mastered.

The key element is that the brain does not organize information in a linear fashion, one element after another, but rather clumps similar information together with new ideas building on the old. This systems places great emphasis on the relationships between ideas, which is wholly lacking in paper and pencil systems. Multidimensional tools overcome this deficiency by allowing a visual representation of the relationships between ideas.

Daily life abounds with examples of the power of visual representation of ideas. Newspapers and magazines are filled with charts, diagrams and illustrations of key ideas in the stories. Textbooks likewise rely heavily on visual communication to explain complex concepts.

How does this actually work in the practice of law? Lets take the structure of litigation as an example. Here are the basic elements you have to work with:

Arguments ? Witnesses ? Exhibits ? Law ? Facts ? Strategy

Within each of these elements we can identify subtopics. After adding subtopics, the outline would look like the following.

The outline gives us an overall structure, but we still lack an easy way to grasp the relationships between the ideas. We can add a visual representation of the relationships by using a Buzan-style mindmap.

Now we have a visual sense of how the elements fit together. For most people, it is easier to grasp the relationships and overall structure in this format than in the linear format of an outline, and much easier than wading through a dense textual description.

How do you actually make these ideas work? You already have an outliner built into your word processor. Both Word and Wordperfect have very adequate outliners. Word goes a step further by creating clickable outline map of your document that allows you to see the structure in a left side window and instantly navigate to any topic by clicking on the outline.

In either program you can immediately begin structuring your case by starting a case plan document with top level heading for the issues in the case. Then you can go back and fill in detail as you get facts or think of new ideas. The outline makes it easy to zoom in or out for greater or lesser levels of detail. You can also collapse all but one area to focus your thinking. When you run out of steam in an area, collapse to top level topics and look for another area that you can add to. This approach generates ideas by allowing you to concentrate on different aspects of the case with minimal effort.

To move to the multidimensional tools will require a modest investment in additional software. Mindmapping was invented before personal computers existed and was therefore originally a paper and pencil exercise. Even in that format, mindmapping can be a useful tool for organizing and understanding ideas. It particular lends itself to complex financial cases where it is easy to lose the forest for the trees. The mindmap gives an instant overview of a case by taking advantage of the brain's inherently superior processing of images. Concepts and relationships that would take considerable time and effort to absorb from plain text are immediately clear when presented in an intelligent visual format.

The problem is that mindmapping is unduly labor-intensive for complex projects because of the effort involved in reorganizing and adding new material as a complicated structure evolves.

This is a perfect problem for a computer solution because of the inherent ability of the computer to create the maps in easily modifiable silicon memory rather than paper. With a computer mindmap the first effort is simply the beginning of multiple iterations that incrementally refine and expand the concepts until the map reflects the clearest and best thinking of the creator. Take this example of a case plan:

The mindmap above was created with Mindmanager, an easy and versatile mindmapping tool available on the web at www.mindman.com. There is a fully functional trial version online for download. Mindmanager is a very comfortable and powerful tool because it handles the details of the map layout while allowing considerable flexibility in creating a structure that communicates well. The ability to quickly and easily add graphics dramatically increases the impact and usefulness of the map.

A different elaboration of the visual thinking tool is a software product called The Brain. The Brain also uses the visual organization concept unconstrained by the limitations of paper. The visual structure exists only on the computer so it is possible to create elaborate linking structures that are easily navigable and provide multiple views of the data. Our litigation structure would have a top level view like this.

You can link views in virtually unlimited ways, connect to files and generally create a pattern of knowledge as complex as necessary to represent and analyze your case. Brain's creator, Natrificial, has the same download and try program available at their website: www.thebrain.com. One limitation of The Brain is that you have very little control over layout, and in fact, it changes constantly as you add new ideas. This gives up some of the power of linking an idea to a particular physical location.

Decision Explorer is another visual tool, but with a different approach than the Mindmanager mindmapping paradigm. Decision Explorer is based on cognitive mapping. The most obvious difference is that unlike mindmaps, cognitive maps can have multiple start points and frequently loop back to create complex networks of interconnection. The documentation asserts that Decision Explorer is particularly useful for attempting to structure "messy" problems in research, an apt description of most legal entanglements.

By laying out the key elements of the problem with terse descriptions, then charting the connections between the elements with links, patterns begin to emerge that would be difficult or impossible to spot using traditional methods. The example below is part of a cognitive map that I have developed as part of a project to understand the systemic problems in the existing divorce procedures.

Once the concepts are laid out in the map, Decision Explorer can analyze the importance and relationships among them through the use of a command language. For example, commands can tell you how "central" a given concept is or find all "orphan" concepts that have no links to other concepts. In addition, by creating sets of concepts, you can selectively add and subtract categories. For example, you could create sets of assets that were actively managed and passively managed, or liquid and illiquid assets.

Decision Explorer is distributed by Sage Publications and information and a trial version can be found on the Web at www.sagepub.com/sagepage/SOFTWARE.HTM

Analyzing the case is very important, but it is only half of the battle. To actually perform the analysis or present the case, you have to lay your hands on the raw material of the case, the documents, interview notes, depositions and other primary source material that supports your theory of the case. The category of software that supports this function is often referred to as case management software. There are commercially available, special purpose tools that do a creditable job of organizing your case. If you find one that performs the functions you need and suits your personal style, the law oriented tools are the least expensive, simplest way to solve the problem.

My experience several years ago was that no legal-specific program did everything I needed. I therefore created a case management system from scratch using Lotus Notes. While you would probably not want to undertake this rather complex task unless you have a great interest in programming, it is possible to hire a Notes consultant to customize a system to your specification. In any event, the methodology will be instructive as to the functions a good divorce case management system should perform.

An efficient law office delegates work to the most cost-effective provider. At a given time, several attorneys and paralegals may (and should) be working on the same case at the same time. How does each service provider keep up to date on the case to avoid reinventing the wheel and appearing incompetent because of lack of access to information someone else has obtained?

Typical strategies to cope with information sharing are staff meetings and circulating memos. Both of these options take a great deal of time and still are passing on information that is somewhat stale.

The strategy we use to share information quickly with minimal effort is an electronic case file system that we developed in Notes. Here is how is works.

We create an electronic case file for every new client, much as you would create a new paper file. The electronic file, however, is always instantly available to everyone simultaneously, is never incomplete or out of date and allows electronic searching for information in the file.

Each file has the following views (similar to the index in a paper file):