Trial Court Services/Pillar Technology Joint Research Effort to Understand Court Information Needs

By Gretchen McNeely, User Experience Strategist, Pillar Technology

A moose head mounted on the wall, an ancient dumbwaiter, and an adorable collection of stuffed bears were just a few of the many surprises that awaited Pillar Technology and the TCS analyst team as they launched an ethnographic project this past August to better understand the information needs of Michigan judges in circuit, probate, and district courts.

As the Michigan Supreme Court looks toward fulfilling the forthcoming e-filing systems mandate, it's seeking to capture the ways judges access, retrieve, review, and use e-filed documents in the course of daily work at the court.  For this project, that meant observing judges in chambers and on the bench, as well as conducting in-depth interviews to pinpoint the tasks they perform, the way they think about their roles and the tools they use, and even how their positions as judges make them feel in terms of helping the larger population.

Our interviewees included judges from courts that are using an e-filing system, courts using other electronic tools, and those who are sticking to pen and paper for the moment.  By turning our lens on technologies, attitudes, and information ecosystems of all stripes, we gained a broader sense of what's needed when considering e-filing — as well as what courts are doing now to meet those needs.

We began our investigative efforts in beautiful Grand Traverse County, later exploring the U.P. and counties across the state, from Arenac to Isabella and points in between.  Our research wrapped up in the Third Circuit Court (Wayne County), where Judge Robert J. Colombo, Jr. generously spent most of his work day supporting our research efforts.  Here’s a more-detailed look at what we discovered in terms of both behaviors (what people do) and needs (what people must have in order to do it).

1. Judges function at the document level, while many clerks and staffers conduct much of their work at the case file level. This means that judges may need to see a specific attorney-filed brief, for example, while their clerks are focusing on maintaining, auditing, and monitoring elements of the overall case history. This can result in different ways that each user desires to interact with e-filed documents.
2. Stemming from that is a judge’s typical interest in reviewing specific elements of a case before presiding over a hearing with the interested parties. Right now, clerks “bundle” these documents for judges ahead of time, either electronically or in paper form.
3. Tabs, sticky notes, and handwritten jottings are the order of the day, whether to alert judges to the presence of a late-filed document or to request that a clerk adjust notations on a judge’s order.

 In terms of tasks — what researchers call functional needs — judges highlighted the following:

●     Reviewing and signing orders; reviewing and accepting or rejecting filings,

●     Modifying and annotating e-filed documents for clerk response,

●     Routing documents to clerks for further action,

●     Searching for specific documents within a database or even within a case file,

●     Reviewing late-filed case documents before a hearing or other courtroom event, and

●     Viewing multiple case-file documents simultaneously when writing a decision.

While the judges we spoke to naturally varied in terms of caseload, gender, age, experience, geography, and court type, they were remarkably (and unsurprisingly) similar in terms of their needs when it came to the experience of using an e-filing system.

We identified selected elements of an improved user experience including:

●     Opacity (working within a single interface for all tasks, even when content is being drawn from multiple databases),

●     Ease of use (feeling comfortable within an interface and not being afraid to experiment),

●     Confidence in the speed and efficiency of a document-location search,

●     Smooth interaction flow (moving easily between tasks with e-filed documents), and

●     Control over multiple documents (accessing groups of documents to aid decision-making).

Ultimately, judges’ highest-level needs, which are rarely articulated per se, often come down to the following:

●     Comfort and confidence,

●     Effectiveness and a sense of control, and

●     Flexibility and ease in moving an information environment from micro (document) to macro (case file) and from chambers to the bench.

Keep up-to-date on the statewide e-Filing initiative at http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/Pages/E-Filing%20Initiative.aspx.

Gretchen McNeely is a user experience strategist with Pillar Technology.  Her focus is on effective and actionable research that informs and inspires design, user experience, content, and business strategy.  Prior to Pillar, Gretchen worked with with FutureBrand/Speck, Ziba Design, and Leo Burnett, among other consultancies.  Her BA is from Dartmouth College.  Gretchen is a Fulbright Scholar and holds a master's degree in information science from the University of Michigan.