The movement toward more judicial involvement in case management represents a reversal of a 40-year trend toward turning control of the litigation process over to the parties and their representatives. The terms of this fundamental shift emphasize a movement away from formalism; the judge will not primarily decide cases but rather will move the business of the courts. To evaluate the reformers' proposals advocating an active level of judicial intervention, it is necessary to determine what judges are already doing along these lines and to postulate whether recommended changes will have the desired effects. Data from a recent survey of judges were analyzed for this investigation. The survey addressed 10 specific activities that judges could perform, such as setting and holding a firm trial date. Frequency, intensity, and impact and intervention were evaluated. Findings revealed that the greater intensity of the intervention, the greater the likelihood of that intervention having an impact. However, efforts to impose significant changes in judicial routines have often met with substantial resistance. Other means of reform, such as providing economic incentives for rapid case disposition, might be considered before changes which would substantially alter the nature of the court system and the judge's role are implemented. Two tables and 30 footnotes are included.