24.5 percent more on statistics in law department management

One hundred percent of the readers of this blog should realize that I like statistical analyses, think they are insightful, and wish the law department industry had more and better statistics (See my posts of May 31, 2006 urging in-house counsel to become comfortable with statistics; Sept. 4, 2005 on Richard Thaler and the value of statistics and evidence in decisions; and Sept. 4, 2005 on how legal intuition should yield more often to metrics.).

Let’s catalogue the appearances on this blog of 20 or so statistics terms or concepts:

See my posts of Jan. 20, 2006 on Bayesian statistics; May 31, July 25, and Oct. 24, 2005 on bell curves; April 5 and May 10, 2005 on correlation and Jan. 14, 2007 on the amount of variance in an independent variable explained by correlation; June 30, 2006 on several dispersion statistics; Oct. 22, 2006 on Gini coefficients; June 6, 2006 on trend-line equations with least squares calculation; Jan. 3, 2007 and March 10, 2005 on linear and exponential growth; Jan. 14, 2007 on log-log analyses; Dec. 9, 2005 on margin of error; Nov. 30, 2005 on mean, median and average; May 31, 2005 and Jan. 1, 2006 on normalized data; Nov. 13, 2005 on power laws, and bell curves; Aug. 14, 2005 on regression analysis and Feb. 7, 2006 on regression to the mean; Jan. 6, 2006 on rolling averages; Nov. 25, 2006 on weighted averages and references cited; Nov. 6, 2006 on standard deviation; and June 19, 2006 and Feb. 8, 2006 [lawyers and productivity] and Dec. 8, 2006 [patents and financial performance] on statistical significance.

We welcome comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *