Ride the Lightning

Should Lawyers Fear Disruptive Innovation?

August 18, 2014

The conclusion of Neil Squilante, publisher of TechnoLawyer, is no. Typically, you need to subscribe to TechnoLawyer to access its content, but this article is open and gives you some sense of why subscribing to TechnoLawyer is a good idea. I've been a subscriber almost from its inception.

Neil talks about three types of disruption – low end, new market and professional services. He believes that none of them are a threat to lawyers.

I don't entirely agree with Neil, but then the fun is in having the conversation. One of the problems with disruptive innovation is that it is happening faster and faster – and much of it involves technology. Any number of lawyers have told me that they left the practice of law – or will leave it soon – because they are overwhelmed by the need to become conversant with technology and the demands of the digital era.

Over a companionable beer, I would argue with Neil about the impact of companies like LegalZoom – what LegalZoom offers is precisely the sort of work offered by solo and small firm lawyers – not all of it to be sure – but a considerable amount. And I should know – I have been a solo practitioner for more than 35 years. These days, no matter how much clients like their lawyers, they are intent on saving money – LegalZoom and its brethren are an attractive alternative to the legal fees of most lawyers for garden variety legal matters.

Neil talks about protective regulations such as rules against non-lawyer ownership of law firms and the unauthorized practice of law. I think most people would argue that non-lawyer ownership of law firms has a limited life – even Virginia is now studying this issue – and we certainly are not alone. As for UPL, most states have given up the battle against people who are now doing work once reserved for lawyers, including LegalZoom, accountants, etc. They are more concerned with notario fraud, people who are holding themselves out to be lawyers when they are not, disbarred lawyers who continue to practice, etc.

Even with respect to things like predictive coding, I see a continuing loss of jobs. Some lawyers, especially just out of law school, are eking out a meager living by doing document review without any job security or benefits. While predictive coding will not take out the higher end lawyers, I think it will cut a broad swath through the ranks of those doing contract document review. As the machines become smarter, fewer humans will be required. The machines, in the end, will be cheaper and more accurate. It pains me to say that – for the sake of the humans – but it is true.

The young lawyers are pretty well scared without any of the scaremongering that Neil references. In my year as the VSB President, I visited a number of law schools, asking students what field of law they wanted to practice in. All I heard in return, with more than a touch of desperation, was "I just want a job."

But I do agree with Neil that there are things you can do to distinguish yourself – or to find open space amongst all the horses in the race with you. Sounds like a good idea for an article. 🙂

E-mail:    Phone: 703-359-0700
Digital Forensics/Information Security/Information Technology
http://www.senseient.com
http://twitter.com/sharonnelsonesq