What Stands in the Way of Modernizing Legal Services? It Depends on Whom You Ask
Success can be an obstacle to change, Bruce MacEwen said during a discussion on looming transformation in the industry. "If you're doing fine, why risk messing it up?" he said.
February 05, 2020 at 06:04 PM
3 minute read
Bruce MacEwen likens industry disruption to a glacier melting underwater.
"When industries are disrupted, you don't see it until, like a melting glacier, it halves off and falls into the ocean," he said. MacEwen, who is president of consulting firm Adam Smith Esq., doesn't think law firms are experiencing true disruption yet—but if and when they do, the disturbance will begin deep under the surface, barely detectable until it's too late. This is one of the reasons it's so difficult for law firms to innovate.
"Success is a big blocker to change," he said. "If you're doing fine, why risk messing it up?"
During a conversation with more than 50 legal industry leaders at Legalweek New York 2020 on Wednesday, speakers agreed that although there has been some change in the legal industry, law firms—and sometimes clients—have been slow to embrace real transformation.
"Everyone wants change," said Lucy Bassli, founder of InnoLegal Services. "When it comes to what a law firm is designing to sell compared to what in-house counsel and clients are asking for, how do we bridge that miscommunication?"
Indeed, discussion participants highlighted the gulf between what many clients are requesting and what law firms are providing. Clients and their in-house counsel often want a more holistic approach from their law firms, including project management and other value-added services that don't fit into the billable hour. Most law firms, meanwhile, are sticking with traditional legal representation and business models.
Relying on new technology from alternative legal service providers could be one way to better address client need. Bassili, who worked in-house at Microsoft for more than 13 years, said she was managing outside representation, a tech team and multiple other aspects of the company's legal matters—and she wants firms to do more of that work.
"In-house people don't want to manage all of it—we want law firms to be the ones to take on a general contractor role and maintain the relationship," she said. "To best serve the client, don't offer to introduce them to a new technology tool or a third-party service provider. Do it for them."
MacEwen said it wasn't that simple. In the medical profession, multiple people now work together in a doctor's office to provide patient care, from doing intake to running tests to describing treatment plans. Lawyers haven't been able to step back in the same way.
"Unlike a doctor letting go of drawing blood, lawyers don't want to let go of anything," he said.
But MacEwen, who was in-house at Morgan Stanley and practiced at Breed, Abbott & Morgan and Shea & Gould, also said he'd seen clients show an "antibody reaction" against one innovation that law firms have frequently promoted: alternative fee arrangements.
"We would present a thoughtful alternative fee arrangement, and [the client] would just ask for 15% off," he said. "They just wanted to see something tangible."
Event participants weren't exactly sure how to best to bridge the divide between providers and clients, but many sounded a familiar note: bashing the billable hour.
"Everything is driven by the billable hour," a participant said. "As long as that's the case, it's harder to do all of this."
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 AllAkin, Baker Botts, Vinson & Elkins Are First Texas Big Law Firms to Match Milbank Bonuses
4 minute readBCLP Exploring Merger Prospects as Profitability Lags, Partnership Shrinks
Anticipating a New Era of 'Extreme Vetting,' Big Law Immigration Attys Prep for Demand Surge
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
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