In a national and international effort to truly incentivize technology, business and other professionals to work at law firms, lawyers are pushing to expand ownership abilities. Some legal observers welcome the change, arguing that law firms' future will only flourish if professionals with various expertise have a say in the legal service delivery.

Last week, Reed Smith joined the initiative to expand ownership when its alternative business structure (ABS) request was granted in the U.K. Reed Smith Europe and Middle East managing partner Tamara Box said the firm considered ABS to improve talent acquisition and retention of highly skilled multidisciplinary professionals. She added that with the ABS structure, the firm is "able to say to people in whatever capacity, you can be an owner in this business, that this is a career path to you."

Box said such a financial incentive is critical for law firms to compete with alternative legal service providers who hire a multitude of talents, including technologists, to address clients' legal needs. 

"The businesses that are leading the way in change are the ones that have a legal tech component to them or they are alternative legal service providers, which many are relying on legal tech," Box noted.

Nationally, lawyers in California, Utah and Arizona are also attempting to amend their state's legal rules of professional conduct and expand law firm ownership to non-J.D. holders.

Last month, Illinois was the latest state to announce an effort to grant law firm equity to nonlawyers with the creation of a Chicago Bar Association/Chicago Bar Foundation task force. The aim is to identify regulatory reform recommendations to enhance legal services, promote career sustainability and increase innovation. 

"Part of that innovation may come from better technology or involvement of nonlawyers in the legal profession in a meaningful way," said task force co-chair and Nijman Franzetti partner Lynn Grayson.

She added that in her opinion, prohibiting nonlawyers from owning a stake in a firm is hindering law firms. 

"We believe that is likely a barrier to innovation and the better use of technology, and we think if nonlawyers had the opportunity to invest in a law firm, it's a decision the law firm has to make."

Indeed, the growing national momentum toward loosening the law firm ownership requirement is part of a larger evolution of legal service delivery, legal observers said.

"Clearly the legal profession is evolving at a more rapid pace than it has historically moved, and the potential for different ownership structures is yet another step in that progression," said legal industry analyst Ari Kaplan of Ari Kaplan Advisors. He added, "As part of this movement there is going to be a variety of service models regardless of who owns the organization because the market is demanding a shift."

Kaplan said he doesn't think U.S. law firms are hesitant toward the ownership change, noting lawyers already work with an array of professionals in their firm, while the U.K. and Australia currently allows professionals without a law degree to acquire an equity stake in law firms. Still, some lawyers are concerned a shift in ownership rights could lead to a downswing in best practices, he said.

"I don't know that whether the firm is run by a lawyer or a professional with an ownership stake is necessarily the issue. The issue is the organization maintains the highest level of ethical standards, commitment to client service and dedication to providing the best training to their professionals, their lawyers and legal professionals."