Is My Lawyer a Robot? Technology's Impact on Professional Services
Professionals embracing technologies such as AI, robotics, data rooms, deal management platforms, client portals, automated reporting and e-signatures will be able to provide their services faster, better and at lower rates.
May 14, 2020 at 10:44 AM
6 minute read
While lawyers, financial advisers, brokers and accountants work to learn about and leverage available technologies to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their client deliverables, technology providers, including many startups, scramble to develop new solutions for the professional consumer in a never-ending race for market-share.
With this come new terminology such as artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning and robotics; and questions such as "will my lawyer or accountant be replaced by a robot?" and "how much of the value and cost savings being created are actually passed through to the end-user/client?"
Professionals embracing technologies such as AI, robotics, data rooms, deal management platforms, client portals, automated reporting and e-signatures will be able to provide their services faster, better and at lower rates. Those unfamiliar with applicable technologies will lack the tools to compete. While very few lawyers still rely on (or even use) physical law libraries, and almost all now use online services for legal research, how many are embracing artificial intelligence to make their research faster and more accurate? If you adversary is familiar with this available technology and you are not, they could show up in court with hard-to-find, but relevant, case law you were not aware of. In addition, the time and costs associated with their research, preparation and other tasks will likely be far less.
As more and more established companies and startups compete to provide this technology to professional service providers, prices drop, the platforms become easier to use, and more professionals have access. Professionals using these technologies solely to maximize their own profits will be ultimately need to push that value down to their clients, which is something that we are now seeing as consumers of professional services (clients) have become more aware of the available technologies and value created, and in some cases, have deployed these technologies themselves internally.
This is particularly true in the construction industry, which is no stranger to sizable documents and ESI productions. The contracts, insurance policies and plans/specifications governing a project and all of the relationships are intricate, unique and voluminous. In addition, a large amount of information is created and exchanged during the course of a project. Managing this information in real time during the projects, as well as after completion in the event of claims, has necessitated implementation of some of this technology.
Just as clients would no longer tolerate brokers sending important, time sensitive deal documents by standard mail, most now complain about any document that cannot be immediately executed electronically from their smart phones. Clients will expect document reviews, legal research, audits and contract negotiations (just to name a few) to be augmented by machine learning, artificial intelligence and robotics (yes, robotics).
The first step is, of course, understanding the terminology.
The concepts of artificial intelligence and machine learning are often confused and used either interchangeably or inappropriately. AI is a broad concept relating to computers or machines performing tasks that simulate human behavior such as reviewing documents, finding case law, comparing property features/values, or identifying accounting discrepancies. Machine learning is a subset of that, allowing that same computer or machine to automatically learn from its prior review of data, without having to be expressly updated or programmed for each case.
AI platforms provide professionals amazing opportunities to be more efficient and accurate. For example, the costs and time spent reviewing electronically stored information (ESI) has come down with the deployment of AI technology and processes. Some systems "learn" as lawyers and paralegals review, select and tag documents for various issues. Once the system has enough examples to be "trained," the rules created can be applied to the larger universe of emails, contracts, and other electronic documents to automatically identify, tag and extract relevant items to then be reviewed by humans.
The same can be done with contract and policy reviews. AI technology using natural language processing can be trained to identify and tag phrases in contracts and insurance policies (among other document types), directing the reviewer to the relevant provisions and language. These systems are a great way to conduct a "first pass" through a document for speed, as well as a "final pass" for accuracy, to confirm that nothing important was missed or changed before being executed. They are becoming more popular and often described as a "second set of eyes"—eyes that don't get tired or bored and aren't rushing home to families (when we are actually back to working at our offices) or off to happy hour.
Robotics, or more appropriately stated, robotic process automation, allows for the performance of process-based activities in the same way a human worker could by performing keyboard and mouse interactions with almost any computer system, application or website. Productivity and speed are substantially faster than a human worker (reportedly 10 to 15 times faster) and robots can work 24/7, 365 days a year (without overtime). The competitive advantages of this technology are significant.
Typical candidates for robotics include repetitive and structured tasks, but developers can add variable and conditional branches to adapt to different scenarios. Of course, as the technology continues to develop, the process flow (script or flow chart) of commands that represent the processes to be automated will be able to handle more sophisticated functions and are already integrating aspects of artificial intelligence.
With these advancing technologies come increased and different risks to manage. Firms will need to continue to implement strong cybersecurity tools and methodologies, Corporate governance and information technology structures, strong internal controls and an ongoing employee education program related to the use of new and emerging technologies.
The good news is that none of these technologies replace the sage judgment, guidance and expertise of human professionals. Clients will still need their lawyers, accountants, and brokers, but they will expect that readily available technologies are being utilized to maximize the value to them.
And, for those who read the title and skipped to the end, no, your lawyer is not a robot. Well, probably not.
Construction attorney Adam Handfinger is Miami co-managing partner of Peckar & Abramson.
Rob M. Drover is vice president-business solutions with Marcum Technology LLC in Philadelphia.
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 AllNavigating Claims Under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and Florida Telemarketing Act
4 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Corporate Counsel's 2024 Award Winners Performed Legal Wizardry, Gave a Hand Up to Others
- 2Goodwin, Polsinelli, Fox Rothschild Find New Phila. Offices
- 3Helping Lawyers Move Away from ‘Grinding’ and Toward a ‘Flow’
- 4How GC-of-Year Sam Khichi Has Helped CVS Barrel Through Challenges
- 5A Website is Not a ‘Place.’ What Took So Long To Get This Right?
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