Expanding Your Digital Strategy with Robotic Process Automation
Beyond improving efficiency, new advancements in robotic process automation, or RPA, are helping lawyers do more billable work without hiring more people.
June 28, 2019 at 12:00 PM
7 minute read
This article appeared in Cybersecurity Law & Strategy, an ALM publication for privacy and security professionals, Chief Information Security Officers, Chief Information Officers, Chief Technology Officers, Corporate Counsel, Internet and Tech Practitioners, In-House Counsel. Visit the website to learn more.
Lawyers in firms of all sizes are under increasing pressure from all sides: from clients to boost efficiency while streamlining workflows, and from partners to find new ways to maximize billable hours. Firm IT leaders play an important role in their success on both fronts because automation is the key to doing more with less. Beyond improving efficiency, new advancements in robotic process automation, or RPA, are helping lawyers do more billable work without hiring more people.
|RPA: An Overview
Robotic process automation is a solution that uses technology to enable computer software (referred to as robots or bots) to perform routine tasks by interacting with your existing applications. The bots capture and interpret data, manipulate it, use it to perform a task, and convey the results to other digital systems.
RPA involves more than just automating processes. Essentially, RPA creates virtual workers to perform rule-based tasks. Currently, paralegals and attorneys are being paid to perform highly repetitive, time-consuming tasks that could easily be performed by bots, when those people could be better used to perform higher-value, billable work. Robots aren't here to replace lawyers. Rather, RPA can make lawyers better and more efficient at their jobs by freeing them up to focus on the most valuable parts of the job.
|Boosting Billables with RPA
RPA is your key to streamlining your workflows in order to do more billable work without adding more billers. Among the tasks typically performed as part of nearly every matter, many are routine, involving little high-level thought and are also quite time-consuming. A great deal of legal work is rule-based, which doesn't mean the tasks aren't necessary or even important. It just means that these tasks don't need to be performed by staff who could otherwise be performing more valuable billable work for clients. By applying RPA to these routine tasks and freeing up attorneys to focus on billable tasks, firms can finally accomplish the ever-elusive goal of maximizing your billable hours.
The task of basic legal research, for example, is a prime candidate for RPA. While in certain instances legal research might require higher-level thought and analysis, a good portion of the research done on every case involves a paralegal or junior associate running regular keyword searches in research databases and compiling all the results in a handy file of PDFs for a more senior attorney to review. There's no reason for billable workers to be performing that research. Bots can be programmed to run through the exact same steps and produce the same work product, only they can do the work overnight and have it ready for you in the morning. In the meantime, your paralegals and junior associates can focus on billable work that adds actual value to your case.
The same principle applies to any other case work that involves routine searches. Need to run public records searches on your opponent, witnesses, or even your own client? Program a bot to do it. Bots can also be used to compile the crucial data you need to make major strategy decisions in your case. Prior rulings by a judge, decisions in similar cases, or matters involving opposing counsel can all be researched and isolated by programming a bot with a defined set of rules. Once you have the information, you and your team can focus on the important billable work of devising the best case strategy.
RPA also has obvious uses in e-discovery. A large element of document review involves identifying files by keywords, and there's no reason for valuable billable hours to be spent running those searches. The ability to use bots to isolate documents from massive databases has endless applications, including creating witness files and preparing for depositions. Outside of the litigation context, law firms are also using RPA to perform routine tasks such as generating contract templates and preparing other form documentation.
If you stop and think about the typical legal workflow, there are countless ways that automation can be used to boost billable hours. Every matter requires tasks that can be thought of as low-hanging fruit — the things that need to be done but don't require high-level thought or analysis. All those tasks are possible candidates for RPA and currently represent unbilled billable hours.
|Common Barriers to Entry
Despite the widespread potential use of RPA, many firms are failing to take advantage of it. This is primarily due to two of the largest barriers to entry for RPA at law firms: cost and not knowing what to automate.
Implementing RPA is an expensive proposition for law firms that attempt to do it on their own. Fortunately, they don't have to. There are expert vendors in the marketplace who are now offering automation-as-a-service. By outsourcing to a vendor with expertise in RPA, law firms can obtain the desired automation without excessive upfront spending on software and licensing. With automation-as-a-service, law firms simply pay a monthly fee based on the number of bots used. That number can be adjusted up or down as needs change. The as-a-service model offers a much easier entry to the world of RPA, as opposed to spending thousands or even millions of dollars to build the necessary infrastructure it would take to implement RPA without help.
The second common factor that keeps many law firms from pursuing RPA is the fact that they simply don't know which processes to automate to best boost efficiency. Some firms opt to spend money to interview their staff in an attempt to map out a potential automation strategy, but these efforts ultimately don't generate useful information. Instead, firms should be relying on an automation vendor that offers automated process discovery.
Automated process discovery is a sophisticated technological approach to determining what to automate. The vendor will install software that watches firm employees while they work and then creates a map showing what processes can be automated and what the corresponding savings will be. Automated process discovery is invaluable, because RPA is only useful if the right processes are being automated in a way that leads to increased efficiencies and real-world benefits.
|The Takeaway
Continuing to use paralegals and associates to perform routine tasks is a waste of both time and money. Every minute spent by billers on tasks that could be automated is a minute of billable time lost.
The demands of today's legal market are such that you can't afford to be losing those minutes. Clients want to pay for high-value work, and they want it to be done as efficiently as possible. With RPA, the seemingly impossible task of maximizing billable hours is now becoming a reality.
Arup Das is CEO of Alphaserve Technologies. He is an expert in institutional level technology governance and operational risk management standards that are prevalent in hedge funds, private equity funds, venture capital funds and global law firms. Mr. Das regularly writes and speaks for legal and other audiences on topics related to digital transformation.
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
- 1Commission Confirms Three of Newsom's Appellate Court Picks
- 2Judge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
- 3GEICO, Travelers to Pay NY $11.3M for Cybersecurity Breaches
- 4'Professional Misconduct': Maryland Supreme Court Disbars 86-Year-Old Attorney
- 5Capital Markets Partners Expect IPO Resurgence During Trump Administration
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