Legal Tech Can Differentiate Young Lawyers at Law Firm Interviews
This hiring season, law students interviewing with law firms should lead on legal tech.
August 14, 2019 at 02:00 PM
3 minute read
Law firm interview season is almost upon us. Traditionally, this is when hiring partners quiz law students on their awareness of the law and trends in the wider legal industry. But in today’s rapidly changing legal climate, students can expect to confront a new topic: legal tech.
Now is the time for students to ensure they are primed to face difficult questions about how legal tech is transforming the industry and client delivery and prepared with questions about how the interviewing firm fits within this new ecosystem.
What do new lawyers need to know going into these interviews? To start, they should represent themselves as change agents who embrace legal tech. Firms will want to hear that these interviewees are prepared to play a crucial role in ensuring these technologies are embedded right at the heart of the profession—and their firm.
Firms should seize this opportunity to hire “digital lawyers,” but that is a more nuanced concept than it may seem. In the legal industry, “digital” means more than technology. For example, it’s not about what specific technological tools you use to draw up a contract; it’s knowing that the world is moving too quickly for old-style contracts to keep pace. Digital lawyers adapt to work in ways that evolve in step with technology and deliver work product that does not lose relevance soon after it is created.
Embracing legal tech means bringing lawyers’ thinking into the present day and being eager to navigate the changes ahead.
Digital lawyers set themselves apart by combining legal knowledge with the technological savvy to predict what may happen to that dusty deliverable down the line. They will be the ones suggesting to their firm or business the best new ways to deliver legal services through technology. This could even mean changing the very shape of the law business itself.
What do these technological innovations look like? They go beyond the basic work product—they make work easier.
A key technology quandary for law firms is deciding where to make their next IT investment. Should they retreat to the safety of the well-established and familiar? Or should they venture outside their comfort zone? Reluctance to look beyond current platforms could force a firm to play catch-up. Of course, blind progress brings a whole raft of other problems, including wasted money and time.
New lawyers need to know how the best law businesses approach this issue. As legal tech becomes more widespread, the shrewdest law firms will examine different strata of legal services and reassess how to best resource each layer. That could mean deciding between humans and machines, or determining whether lawyers still need to be housed within the law firm or law department.
There are no easy answers in legal tech to turn to during an interview—or indeed for the wider legal industry. To stand the best chance of impressing interviewers, law students must demonstrate their knowledge of what it takes to become a digital lawyer, what the technological innovations mean for the industry, and how the best law businesses approach them.
Most important, interest in legal tech shouldn’t end at the interview. Becoming a digital lawyer—ready to fully embrace where the legal industry heads next—will be a necessary skill for the length of this next generation’s career.
Dan Reed is the CEO of UnitedLex.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGlobal 200 Firms Gaining Deal Share Amid Race to Build in India
Trending Stories
- 1Weil Practice Leaders Expected to Leave for Paul Weiss, Latham
- 2Senators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anti-Competitive Practices, Fees
- 3Deal Watch: Gibson Dunn, V&E, Kirkland Lead Big Energy Deals in Another Strong Week in Transactions
- 4Advisory Opinion Offers 'Road Map' for Judges Defending Against Campaign Attacks
- 5Commencement of Child Victims Act at Heart of Federal Question Posed to NY's Top Court
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250