Introduction
Information overload is a concept that has caused concern for several years now, but particularly since the proliferation of the internet and even more recently, the development of web 2.0 technologies. My interest in overload derives from my role over the years, albeit under a number of different guises, but fundamentally as an Information Officer in a number of City law firms. While the ability to handle and disseminate large amounts of information in this role is a given, the realisation dawned some years ago that simply being able to ‘manage’ information does not necessarily equate to immunity to the effects of information overload. Consequently I decided to base my MSc dissertation on this concept. Reading around the subject led me to look further into how it affects the information providers of a law firm; namely Information Officers and Professional Support Lawyers. When I undertook my dissertation study in July 2009, similar research at that point was fairly limited.
Beverley Woolfson
For the purposes of this article, I intend to focus only on whom I shall refer to, from this point, as ‘Information Professionals’ (IPs), as opposed to PSLs as well. The term ‘IP’ is used as a catch-all term to describe those who nowadays tend to be known by a number of different titles, be it the more traditional ‘Law Librarian’, the ‘Information Officer’, or the ‘Research Librarian’, to name but a few.
So what exactly is ‘information overload’?
Over the last 20 years, a number of commentators have attempted to define information overload with varying degrees of success, but the concept is by no means confined to this particular period. We live in what is often termed an ‘information society’, with the invention of the computer, a machine now found in countless offices and homes all over the world, becoming symbolic of a kind of revolution not seen since the early 20th century. Speculation over the potential implications of this ever-increasing amount of information being made available to human beings can be traced back to the musings of a German sociologist named Georg Simmel. One of Simmel's most influential pieces of work was written in 1903, although it took until 1950 to gain worldwide attention, as this was when it was translated into English and published as part of an edited collection of his work.Footnote 1 This piece, titled ‘The Metropolis and Mental Life’ spoke of an
“…‘overload of sensations in the urban world that caused city dwellers to become jaded…an incapacity…to react to new situations with the appropriate energy.’”Footnote 2
It seems to me that this is an excellent early example of the realisation that too much information can lead to feelings of being overwhelmed and exhausted, which in turn, can lead to an inability to absorb even what may be essential information.
A number of definitions of information overload have been proposed in recent years, but one of the most widely accepted today in academic literature remains that of Bawden et al, given in 1999:
“Information overload occurs when information received becomes a hindrance rather than a help when the information is potentially useful.”Footnote 3
More recently, Jonathan Spira, Director and VP of Research at ‘IORG’, (Information Overload Research Group’), conducted a study in America on the effects of overload on what he terms ‘Knowledge Workers.Footnote 4 He defines overload as:
“an excess of information that results in the loss of ability to make decisions, process information expeditiously, and prioritize tasks effectively.”Footnote 5
Spira's study shall be discussed in more detail later on.
Why is information overload relevant to the IP?
A large part of information provision in the commercial law firm often entails providing a current awareness service to fee earners. In 2009, one of the aims of my research was to determine firstly, if IPs ever experienced feelings of information overload when dealing with incoming information for the purposes of this kind of service, and secondly, to establish their methods of counteracting these feelings. Out of the twelve IPs that I interviewed in person, only one responded with a straightforward ‘no’ when asked if he ever experienced overload. However, all of the IPs were in accord that there are a number of coping strategies that can be employed to at least minimise the more sinister consequences of being exposed to ‘too much information’.
So what's causing information overload for IPs?
1) Current awareness alerts (emails/RSS feeds)
By far the most common source of anxiety for IPs was keeping on top of all the incoming feeds of electronic information. There is no doubt that the advent of web 2.0 technology has resulted in a major transformation in terms of how we receive information. One IP talked about the ever-pervading feeling of not quite being able to get on top of it all:
“There are now so many sources of information…we are getting feeds daily from different sources, and you could literally spend half your day, every day, just absorbing information.”
Another IP, however, felt that RSS feeds are an excellent way of consolidating what used to be countless separate email alerts coming into her inbox at all hours of the day (and night!) One problem is that at the time of interviewing, no-one had made the decision to stick with only one format of receiving information, and consequently many were beginning to feel completely bombarded. It is important to remember, however, that RSS feeds are no longer such an unfamiliar concept, and the ability to cope with them and various email alerts may already be less of an issue.
One opinion shared by all of the IPs I interviewed was that as a profession, they are more vulnerable to overload than many others, simply because they are often keeping track of a variety of areas of law for their fee-earners, as well as developments in their own profession and the information community as a whole. While some believe that simply being able to manage your time and organize your work effectively is sufficient to counteract feelings of overload, even this seemingly obvious means of coping does not come naturally to all IPs, despite the fact that dealing with information flow is a pivotal part of their roles. Indeed one IP remarked that:
“…there are lots of places I get updates from and sometimes I do think that I really ought to organise this, in a way that I preach about to the lawyers.”
2) Email Overload
An oft-cited problem that I came across, not only when carrying out my interviews, but when reading around the subject of overload in general, was that of ‘email overload’. It's a concept that is often entrenched in general information overload, whereas others regard it as being something totally separate. One commentator describes it as something that occurs when:
“…the number of emails being sent and received becomes too difficult to manage, overwhelming the user.”Footnote 6
There have been numerous studies of the problems created by email in the workplace over the last 20 years, and it is something that provoked a number of different reactions among the study participants. While it cannot be denied that email in itself is a valuable business tool that has completely revolutionised the way in which we work, it is the misuse of the tool that is one of the principal problems in the commercial law firm – and indeed, the workplace on a broader level. Some of the IPs that I spoke to mentioned that one of the by-products of being an information intermediary is being bombarded by emails from publishers and other suppliers, as well as fielding enquiries from fee-earners. This often leads to a feeling of being completely deluged by one's inbox. But it appears that the most common problem surrounding email is when people use it as an inappropriate means of communication; for example, discussing an enquiry back and forth over email, when a 20 second phonecall would clarify the whole matter.
Another source of stress was being needlessly copied into emails that end up being lengthy chains of communication. One IP told me how on one occasion, she stopped paying attention to such a chain as it had just become totally irrelevant to her, but inevitably, it was at that point that she was asked to do something. Such stories undoubtedly emphasise the dangers of using email to impart urgent information or requests; there are simply times when a phonecall or face-to-face discussion would be more appropriate. Sadly, however, this kind of ‘email etiquette’ isn't always adhered to by everyone in the workplace.
3) Searching for information: where do we draw the line?
It became apparent to me that when undertaking research for a fee-earner, a growing concern for many IPs is knowing when to terminate a search. I was keen to understand how the decision to stop searching was made, and if any anxiety was experienced on doing so. The evidence I gathered suggests that IPs often do find it hard to stop searching, and many believe this is in part due to the nature of their roles; chiefly, that if anyone can find information, it is them. Furthermore, an IP usually approaches legal research from the perspective of an information practitioner as opposed to one who is a trained lawyer. A lawyer often has a different ‘feel’ for their subject area and therefore may be more inclined to trust their instincts that there is no obvious answer out there. An IP, on the other hand, tends to carry on searching for a much longer period. The viewpoint was actually mooted by one of the PSLs I spoke to, that to some extent, many online resources are responsible for encouraging people who have less experience in the law, to think in a certain way; that being, that for every research question they are given, a specific answer is simply waiting to be found. Unfortunately in law, this isn't always the case; an ‘answer’ is derived from a number of different sources and opinions. Despite this, however, several IPs describe feeling uncomfortable, and in some cases, anxious, when they don't find any material that they think will at least help to answer the question, if not answer it wholly. The fear of sending an email back to a fee-earner with little or no material, only for the fee-earner to come back and say they found an answer on the internet, is very real indeed for IPs. Consequently most will not stop searching until they have exhausted every possible avenue.
How can we alleviate the situation?
One very positive thing that I took away from my own research was that while information overload is a highly relevant concept to those working with information, there are a number of solutions, or coping mechanisms, that IPs employ in order to gain control over information. Let's just consider a few here in relation to the three main problems outlined above:
1.1 Coping with the influx of information into our inboxes/RSS feeders
One concept that I came across when reading some of the key literature on overload was that when presented with a large amount of information, human beings will often employ, albeit subconsciously, strategies known as either ‘filtering’ or ‘withdrawing’ in order to cope with the amount of material. Filtering and withdrawal mechanisms are explained by SavolainenFootnote 7, following on from empirical research carried out in Finland in 2005 on these ideas. He explains that filtering focuses on:
“…the most useful information by systematically weeding out useless material from sources chosen for use…”Footnote 8
while withdrawal is described as:
“…the personal need to shelter oneself from the excessive bombardment of information…by keeping the number of daily information sources to a minimum.”Footnote 9
It seems that while filtering is aimed at the weeding of superfluous information extracted from a whole range of sources, withdrawal principally involves narrowing down one's range of information sources. It became apparent that the IPs I interviewed would most often ‘filter’ rather than ‘withdraw’, and the correlation is clear between this behaviour and the aforementioned feelings of anxiety when they have been unable to find an answer to a particular question. IPs would often rather filter out the ‘good’ information from a whole range of sources, as opposed to limiting their sources of information in the first instance, because this way, they can assuage the feeling of discomfort that they might miss that vital piece of information somewhere along the line. When monitoring a particular area of law for current awareness purposes, several IPs expressed a preference for receiving a number of alerts from a whole range of sources, and then relying on their information handling abilities to extract what is most important.
2.1 Counteracting ‘email overload’
During the course of each interview I carried out, a number of strategies were proposed with regard to overcoming the problems that ‘too much’ email can create. One of these ideas was that every firm should have an email ‘policy’, thereby encouraging more efficient use of email, and helping people to learn when to use the ‘reply all’ button more appropriately. Another common suggestion was setting up folders to file messages – and moreover, filing emails on a regular basis so as to keep one's inbox as ‘clean’ as possible. Developing the habit of only handling messages once then deleting or filing them was probably the most favoured way of keeping email overload at bay. The inbox is best used as a prompt list by only retaining in it emails that have yet to be or are in the process of being dealt with. One IP also mentions organising emails in her inbox by categories denoted by different coloured flags, while another converts emails into tasks (a functionality of some versions of Outlook) as an alternative means of clearing the inbox. Furthermore, it seems that many IPs do not just file emails, but also set up ‘rules’, which ensure that messages from particular senders or on particular subjects, are filed immediately into another folder, and therefore bypass the inbox completely.
3.1 Knowing when to stop searching
One of the most common methods suggested to me was simply to trust your instincts when it comes to stopping searching for information. It seems that very often, the searcher can get a ‘feel’ for the topic within the first 20 minutes of searching online and so can make a judgment call as to whether or not to keep searching online or perhaps revert to hard copy sources. Depending on the timeframe available to find the information, IPs also prefer to discuss the matter with a colleague if their searches bear little or no useful information. The last resort for most of the IPs I interviewed is to push the query back to the fee-earner for whom they're doing the work, telling them where has been searched thus far and asking if they think it is viable for the search to be continued.
Information overload: the future
In July 2011, I took part in a webinar organised by Dow Jones Knowledge Professionals Alliance, aimed at highlighting the dangers of information overload with regard to ‘Knowledge Workers’. As IPs we meet the criteria of these so-called ‘Knowledge Workers’, therefore I was keen to learn more. The webinar was hosted by Jonathan Spira and focused on the results of research he carried out when writing a book on the hazards of too much information in the workplace.
He talked about how, as people who are creating and communicating knowledge, we not only risk becoming overloaded ourselves, but actually have the potential to contribute to the overload of others in our firm. This is undoubtedly an interesting viewpoint and one which is particularly pertinent to those of us who are providing a ‘push’ current awareness service; i.e. whereby the latest items on a particular topic are sent to a fee-earner without them having to ask for them. However, I believe that over time, we acquire an understanding of how a particular fee-earner works and we realise that while some may like to be informed of as many sources as possible regarding the same piece of news, there are others who will only want the key items. I think the challenge lies with the IP in terms of wading through the many incoming sources of information and deciding what to send to a particular fee-earner.
Spira also maintains that in the last 25 years, more information has been created than in the last five centuries. This claim in itself is mind-blowing, and a clear example of why we are more at risk than ever from the effects of too much information. Not surprisingly, he cites web 2.0 technology such as Twitter as a prime example of how easy it is nowadays, to relay information on a seemingly never-ending basis.
Having examined some of the methods of coping with overload that IPs themselves cited, I thought it particularly apt to conclude this article with a look at some of Spira's suggestions. I believe there are distinct similarities between the methods of counteracting overload mentioned above and with those that Spira discusses in the course of the webinar. With regard to searching for a particular piece of information, he advises us to ‘argue’ with our results; by which he means we should filter our results from several thousand to a more selected number of highly relevant results. He also mentioned the ‘dangers’ of Google and how there is an almost infinite number of websites available to be found; but as Google scours the entire worldwide web, how can we ever be sure of a website's authority? His solution: always use an assortment of search tools and never rely on just one source. I am sure I am not the only IP who spends a significant amount of time instilling this very notion into the firm's trainees, therefore it is definitely true that comprehension when searching is of utmost importance to ensure that we do not get bogged down by a host of irrelevant websites. Instead we focus only on the most authoritative and the most relevant to our particular piece of work.
The final piece of advice Spira gives is only relevant to those in firms who have adopted an instant messaging system; something that in itself, much like Twitter or RSS feeds, has the capacity to become just another means of information bombardment. He advises on always maintaining one's status correctly to avoid unnecessary interruptions and the resultant time wasted when forced to stop one task and think about another. Therefore, if we are working on a time-sensitive or complex matter, we should always make sure that our IM status reflects this and thereby prevents people from disturbing us at that time. Given that Spira mentions earlier that for every thirty second interruption, it takes the average person five minutes to regain their train of thought, the importance of this cannot be underestimated.
In conclusion
It is unlikely that analysis of the concept of information overload and its detrimental effects on the worker and workplace in general will stop any time soon. Interest in the topic has grown exponentially alongside the rapid influx in sources and methods of imparting information. With regard to the law firm, the role of the IP is fundamental to the battle against overload, in that they must ensure that they do not become a cause of it, as Spira highlights, is indeed a risk. Moreover the very crux of this article is to illustrate that it is also vital that the IP is aware of the ease with which they could become completely overwhelmed by the sheer volume of information available to them; and that they should seek to implement strategies such as those outlined above, in order to ensure that they remain in control not only of their inbox, but of their sanity as well!
