Law Firms Are Still Investing in Tech, but the Pace May Have Slowed
Law firms are continuing to identify tech as an imperative to their ongoing competitive advantage, but a new report indicates that investment in technology may be facing a slight decline as the focus shifts towards solutions that enhance client collaboration.
October 30, 2019 at 10:00 AM
4 minute read
Law firm investment in technology may be trending slightly downwards, according to the new 2019 legal tech report that was released last week by HSBC UK and produced with The Lawyer Magazine.
Comprised of responses from partners and other senior business leaders inside 50 U.K.-based firms, the report found 81% of respondents identified technology as the item that is the most strategically important to their firm.
However, the 2019 report also showed a decline in the amount of revenue firms were investing in technology. In 2017, 75% of firms indicated that they would spend 5% of their revenue or more on tech. That number dropped to 44% in 2018 and declined again to 27% in 2019.
Chloe Clift, head of professional services in commercial banking for HSBC UK, indicated that a variety of factors could be at a play, from uncertainty over Brexit to an abundance of caution over large-scale tech investments.
"[Law firms have] spent a lot of money on new technology over the last three or four years," Clift said. "Possibly cyclical spending has driven the reduction in percent of turnover spent on technology"
However, Beau Mersereau, innovation leader at the firm of Fish & Richardson, said most of the people he's spoken with feel that firms are investing in technology at close to the same levels as they have in the past.
One thing that may have changed is how those expenditures are categorized. Mersereau noted a change in recent years that has seen legal tech products transition from a one-time purchase to a recurring, subscription-based model, such as a cloud service.
Tech's transition from a capital expenditure to an operational expense may be causing some confusion at firms. "I think that their money has shifted into operational expenses. They think they are spending more, but in reality they might not actually be," Mersereau said.
Meanwhile, revenue that is continuing to be invested in tech may be headed in different directions than in years past, with cybersecurity potentially taking a backseat to solutions that improve the client experience.
According to the survey, 44% of respondents are prioritizing client collaboration tools when it comes to their investment in technology, placing those solutions well ahead of other staples like cybersecurity (15%) and automated document production (13%).
Conversely, figures from the 2018 report show that 84% of respondents selected cybersecurity as the top priority for technology investment, followed closely by client collaboration tools at 79% and automated document production at 74%.
Clift attributed the change to an increasingly fragmented and highly competitive legal marketplace, which has made client trust a key metric for law firms.
"You need to be at the forefront of client collaboration to make sure that you are remaining as competitive as you can be and maintaining those relationships," Clift said. She gave the example of firms deploying solutions that help to increase pricing predictability and transparency.
Mersereau said Fish & Richardson began investing in those kinds of tools after the last economic downturn. "We had to because we started offering alternative fee agreements, for example, in our litigation practice," Mersereau said.
Still, there may only be so much tech can do with regards to flexible pricing models.
When asked, 41% of respondents "strongly agreed" that investments in technology could help facilitate the creation of more innovative pricing structures, but only 21% showed the same level of belief toward the possibility that tech could help them shift from the billable hour towards flexible pricing models.
"I think that from speaking to clients that is absolutely the hope that technology will help move into more innovative pricing structures. Whether it's happening in reality I think is still to be proven," Clift said.
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
- 1Two Wilkinson Stekloff Associates Among Victims of DC Plane Crash
- 2Two More Victims Alleged in New Sean Combs Sex Trafficking Indictment
- 3Jackson Lewis Leaders Discuss Firm's Innovation Efforts, From Prompt-a-Thons to Gen AI Pilots
- 4Trump's DOJ Files Lawsuit Seeking to Block $14B Tech Merger
- 5'No Retributive Actions,' Kash Patel Pledges if Confirmed to FBI
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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