AIJA Survey Shows Resistance to Innovation Waning Inside Legal Industry
A survey by the International Association of Young Lawyers (AIJA) found that resistance to innovation within the industry is weakening, but some are still 'fearful of investing in the wrong technology.'
January 18, 2019 at 09:00 AM
4 minute read
Young people apparently feel quite strongly about this technology fad.
The International Association of Young Lawyers (AIJA), with the help of the Council of Bars and Law Societies in Europe, recently conducted a survey of 180 European lawyers between the ages of 25 and 45 from 48 different countries around the world.
Bad news first: Approximately 47 percent of respondents consider resistance to innovation to be the number one threat facing the legal industry. The good news? That's a 24 percent drop from the last time the survey was conducted two years ago.
“Generally I would tell you that they're not that fearful of technology. … Over the last few years, we've been discussing this topic and approaching it from very positive perspective,” said Xavier Costa, AIJA president and a partner at Roca Junyent.
He concedes that the 47 percent figure might have bumped higher if the question had been posed to an elder demographic hoping to ride off into the sunset overlooking a retirement community before they were asked to learn yet another password management system.
As for the rest, Costa thinks lawyers are too pragmatic by nature to expend time or willpower in fighting the inevitable and the survey tends to bear him out. Almost half of all respondents (42 percent) expressed confidence that their firms were taking the necessary steps to incorporate tech such as artificial intelligence (AI) tools, automation or the cloud into their workflow.
Costa thinks it's the wide variety of choices on the table, not fear, that's preventing technology adoption from moving at a brisker pace.
“They're willing to embrace this technology, but right now they feel that there are too many tools available. … They are fearful of investing in the wrong technology. So even though they are willing to use the technology and legal tech in their firm today, the level of implementation is surprisingly low still,” Costa said.
The survey found that only 16 percent of lawyers are afraid that the technological advancements of the future will usurp their jobs, a 12 percent drop from 2016.
More anxiety was reserved for the rise of alternative providers of legal services. Among those surveyed, 86 percent believed that firms are more likely to employ non-lawyers to service clients in the name of cost-efficiency and making use of new technologies.
Costa sees this as part of the evolution of the attorney/client relationship, which is shifting from a continuous stream of assignments to larger, project-based work.
“Nowadays, you have to give overall solutions to the client and many times the legal part is a part of this, so you need to do a partnership sometimes with people from the tech sector or other areas,” Costa said.
In the survey, 33 percent of respondents ranked “business-minded” skills as the top choice for abilities needed by lawyers in the future, followed by “general digital competence” and “management skills.”
As technology becomes more intuitive and user friendly, less emphasis may be placed on those skills in favor of the kinds of relationships that an attorney can leverage to service clients like multinational corporations.
“The technology has made globalization even more obvious, but lawyers advise usually only on national law. So having an international network that allows you to provide a full service to your client. … The business with your clients is global,” Costa said.
Correction: Survey respondents were from 48 countries around the world. A previous version of this story said 48 countries in Europe.
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
© 2025 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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Freshfields Name Change Becomes Official
- 2Lawyers on TikTok Seek the Right Mix of Substance and Levity
- 3Chair of Montgomery McCracken Decamps for Morgan Lewis
- 4You Too Can Be a Programmer: Connecting to Legal Platform APIs With Generative AI (Part 2)
- 5Court of Appeals and Appellate Division As Courts of First Instance
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