Adoption of Contract Analytics All Comes Down to Trust
As part of the Legalweek 2020 Q&A series, Legaltech News speaks with Eric Falkenberry, partner at DLA Piper, on the opportunity for lawyers to become part of development teams, standardization in contract APIs, and more.
January 28, 2020 at 07:00 AM
3 minute read
Contract-centric artificial intelligence and analytics platforms are all the rage these days, but it takes more than throwing technology at a problem to solve it. To truly leverage technology in a new school transactions practice, it takes one of the most old school legal disciplines: transparency.
As part of the run-up to Legalweek 2020, Legaltech News is chatting with a number of speakers from this year's sessions to know. Today's Q&A is with Eric Falkenberry, a partner at DLA Piper. His Legaltech session "Moneyballing with a Killer Contract Analytics Department" will take place on Wednesday, February 5, at 3 p.m.
Legaltech News: What do you think legal tech looks like in 10 years? What will be the biggest opportunities and challenges?
Eric Falkenberry: Rather than focusing on products which seem likely to appeal to the broadest range of customers, legal tech developers (data scientists and computer engineers) will work more closely with subject matter experts (experienced lawyers) to build and test tools which are tailored to particular legal tasks and produce demonstrable increases in efficiency and quality.
This will create a huge opportunity for lawyers to become integral parts of development teams, with the greatest challenge being whether enough experienced lawyers will choose to take time away from busy practices to provide expertise. With large concentrations of SMEs, law firms which invest in technology are particularly well positioned to take advantage of this evolution.
What are the biggest barriers to legal teams to leverage contract analytics?
One of the biggest barriers to the adoption of analytics is trust in their accuracy. Machines are classifying and aggregating huge amounts of data which form the basis of the analytics, and a lack of understanding regarding the manner in which the machines are performing such tasks leads to skepticism.
Legal tech developers need to be transparent about explaining how the sausage is made and what limitations exist, and legal teams need to take the time to ask questions and understand the technologies analyzing the data so that they can determine which analytics should be relied upon, and to what extent.
Is there standardization in terms of the core KPIs used to assess contract performance industry?
KPI standardization for contract performance was slow to develop before things like machine learning and natural language processing enabled companies to analyze and draw analytics from sufficient amounts of contract data to determine which indicators have the greatest predictive power.
What is the biggest misconception you think still persists about legal technology?
That robots will put most lawyers out of work. Technology will make, and has already made, certain legal jobs obsolete, but it is also creating a number of jobs which focus on legal data, analytics and automation. Lawyers which pivot toward technology will find themselves in demand.
What do you hope attendees take away from your Legalweek session?
I hope attendees will not only learn about the various analytics that can be drawn from contracts and how they can form the basis of actionable intelligence, but will also leave with a better understanding of the particular technologies which produce the analytics, something that is critical to widespread adoption.
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
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