How to make technology central to your firm's strategy
Technology is going to transform the legal profession but firms need to work out their strategy now to secure a competitive advantage
February 20, 2018 at 06:03 AM
5 minute read
The development of technology in the delivery of a law firm's services will have a profound effect on the future size, design, profitability and structure of a law firm. As a result, firms need to understand the potential impact of technology on their business and ensure that their strategy properly anticipates and provides for the changes that it will cause.
Technology was, until recently, just part of the plumbing of law firms. It enabled effective document production, time recording, billing and collection and provided a level of financial information on the performance of various parts of the business.
But now, technology is starting to have a major impact on the delivery of legal services. Initially, it has been focused on the analysis of large amounts of data for discovery in litigation, investigations for regulatory compliance and due diligence in relation to corporate and property transactions.
In the next few years it will increasingly move up the 'food chain', with smart contracts and process management eating into areas traditionally reserved for lawyers. The ability to analyse extensive banks of data will enable lawyers to develop negotiating strategies for M&A and other transactions based on extensive analysis of what was or was not acceptable in previous transactions, thereby moving towards the quicker conclusion of an agreed deal. The development of analytics will enable the likelihood or otherwise of success in litigation to be more clearly defined at an early stage, thereby increasing the likelihood of early settlement.
The ability of lawyers to work remotely and flexibly and the effective use of lawyers to work when required (on a contract basis rather than as permanent full-time employees) may materially impact the number of full-time employees needed by a firm and the location and amount of office space necessary to house them.
The UK, largely due to the increased pressure from GCs to modernise service delivery, demonstrate real value and to provide predictable pricing, is at the forefront of the legal tech industry. Accordingly, UK-based law firms have the opportunity to lead this transformation and to achieve a competitive advantage over other countries while reinforcing the role of English law and English lawyers in a post-Brexit environment.
Law firms, when preparing any strategy, need to ask themselves the following questions:
- What impact is technology likely to have on each section of the firm in terms of the price, method of delivery and delivery model?
- How much money and time will the firm need to devote to the development and implementation of technology?
- How prepared is the firm to be an innovator in the use of technology or a follower as certain technologies become established?
- What size will the firm need to be to afford and effectively utilise new technologies?
- To what extent can lawyers and paralegals be used on demand rather than as a fixed cost (eg LOD for lawyers or F-Lex for paralegals)?
- Will the firm need to recruit other professionals such as project managers, process mappers, pricing experts and legal IT professionals to enable such change?
- What requirement will the firm have for trainees, junior lawyers and senior lawyers, how will they be trained, what will their career progression be and what level of attrition will be necessary or desirable?
- What does this mean for the partnership model? Are partners with real client relationship skills and business acumen undervalued while paper producers overvalued?
- Does the firm need outside capital to provide extra working capital and to facilitate a change to the structure and culture of the firm?
Technology during the next five to 10 years is likely to have a profound impact on a range of professional and administrative services. Law will not be immune from this change. Fortunately, change in legal services tends to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary so firms have time to adapt. Also, for many firms, law is still a very profitable business, so firms can afford to change but this profitability also presents a potential impediment to change.
Any firm undertaking a meaningful strategy review has to factor technological change into its thinking. This may require some hard decisions to be made about practice areas to invest in or even divest, and the future needs and skills required by the lawyers and partners of tomorrow. By starting to address issues now, a firm will be well placed to adjust before it is forced to do so. The status quo may feel comfortable, but it can be the most dangerous place in such a dynamic market.
Tony Williams is the founder of Jomati Consultants and a former managing partner of Clifford Chance and Andersen Legal. Janet Day spent 19 years as IT director at Berwin Leighton Paisner before becoming an independent consultant.
- This year's Strategic Technology Forum will once again take place at the Grand Hotel Des Iles Borromees, Lake Maggiore, Italy on 20-22 June. Key topics will include how law firms can defeat the competition to attract the best talent, as well as how to adapt and engage with alternative providers taking a more significant place in the legal market. Please click here to view the full conference programme and book your place.
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 AllPinsent Masons Launches AML Artificial Intelligence Tool in Wake of SRA Crackdown
3 minute readGowling WLG’s Commitment to AI and Innovation Attracts New Director of AI
4 minute readWhat About the Old Partners Who Have No Interest in AI?
Trending Stories
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