Business as Usual: 5 Law Firm Activities AI will Seamlessly Transform
Broad adoption of AI in the legal industry will happen when automation of everyday activities like email filing and time capture, become business as usual.
January 29, 2019 at 07:00 AM
5 minute read
Despite all of the overhyped media attention artificial intelligence (AI) receives today, it's still the leading driving force behind productivity innovations and economic growth. Along the same vein of Moore's Law for exponential progress, AI has made huge strides in recent years with machine-learning algorithms becoming more sophisticated and the access to massive amounts of data available to train them.
It's no surprise that businesses are increasingly using AI to automate processes to gain efficiencies, be more competitive and avoid disruption in their markets. According to a recent Accenture survey, 82 percent of executives say their organizations are increasingly using data to drive critical and automated decision-making, at unprecedented scale.
This technology is transforming the nature of work and the workplace itself. According to research by the McKinsey Global Institute, about half of the activities (not jobs) carried out by workers can be automated. The firm's analysis of more than 2,000 work activities across more than 800 occupations shows that certain categories of activities are more easily automatable than others—most notably data collection and data processing.
This shift is evident in today's legal technology industry, where everyday activities, including litigation support, email, e-discovery and the use of databases for case management, are being automated.
And while there is an endless hype-cycle of “innovative” technologies touting the next best thing; what law firm and corporate counsel really want is excellent legal services performed as efficiently and cost effectively as possible. Broad adoption of AI in the legal industry will happen when automation of everyday activities like email filing and time capture, become business as usual.
Here are 5 operational activities that AI will transform so seamlessly, it will become status quo:
1. Ability to recoup lost productivity costs such as billable time. The effort attorneys devote to administrative tasks (like mobile email time capture) displaces an opportunity for more valuable work. In the fee-for-service environment that governs most legal work today, firms not only fail to capture much of the time their attorneys spend on email doing substantive client work, they also face a significant administrative burden trying to document that time so they can bill for it. This is an area in which firms fall short in meeting the new demands of the business of law—to their own detriment and often to the detriment of their client relationships.
2. Reduction of client skepticism of manual time capture and “professional fees.” Law firms have had limited options for capturing labor overhead associated with email management and time capture processes and bill for it, thereby reducing realization rates and eroding profits. Firms could choose to absorb the cost or apply a percentage-based overhead charge for “professional fees” to cover some of the administrative non-billable costs they incur, “buffering” the unknown administrative costs of email and time capture management.
However, a firm can use a variety of AI-based tools that help this problem so when clients question “professional fees” or reconstructed time records and narratives resulting from email communications, they can honestly say that the time is billable without writing off the amounts which are typically discounted or waived due to the absence of detailed substantiation. These tools can document and substantiate client-related work automatically, providing data-based accountability, eliminating a firm's reliance on the memory or estimates of individual attorneys, and significantly reducing cognitive and administrative drag across the firm. Detailed AI-generated narratives documenting substantive matter-related work via email are reassuring to clients and can help ensure prompt payment.
3. Increasing profitability by transforming workflows & processes. Many firms still do not grasp the potential of advanced technologies associated with artificial intelligence (AI) to transform their workflows and processes and to free highly skilled attorneys to focus on what they do best. This blind spot is making it much harder for firms to sustain profitability in a fast-paced marketplace that is increasingly competitive, global and digital. Automation of the majority of manual decision-making processes through administrative AI-based tools can help a law firm bill accordingly with greater realization rates and profit margins.
4. Incorporating AI-technology technology can in fact reduce other overhead costs. For example, mere implementation of predictive automated email management and time capture systems enables an immediate reduction in the actual overhead costs of matter administration and matter management. With AI, firms can bill for an additional 30 to 120 minutes of productive client-facing time per day. Another example is the ability to ensure, nay, guarantee, email compliance and information governance without relying on error-prone human keystrokes.
5. More predictability around forecasting & budgets. Understanding data from the entire firm workflow (through AI-based administrative tools that allows for automation) can provide valuable insights into a firm's operations. For example, you can use data from an AI-powered email management system to identify tasks and activities associated with administrative drag—and provide a solid basis for predictive cost analyses for projected budgets or for fixed-fee quotes on individual matters or matter types. As AI technologies like machine learning evolve over time, firms can be exposed to more related data that can be paired together to create a working dashboard continually increasing precision and generating predictive insights related to costs, workflows and operations.
Ryan Steadman is CRO at Zero, innovative AI-based email management for law firms.
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
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