Legal is ‘Slow to’/’Will Never’ Adopt/Adapt to Technology: Greatest Hits

Last updated on January 9th so I need to add a cacophany of new punditry in the near future. As a side-note: I disagree that lawyers are resistant to tech of innovation. I do agree that legal technology marketers believe that the reason they have a hard time closing deals is that their products don’t meet the benchmark Nir Eyal attributed to the success of #Slack:

“The Slack team understood that it is much easier to displace an existing habit than to create an entirely new one. Slack doesn’t try to radically change user behavior. Instead, it makes existing behaviors easier and more efficient.”

There is no shortage of #LegalTech startups (Bob Ambrogi lists 691) and products and marketing campaigns and salespeople, but what about the industry itself? Well, sadly, for every product, pitch and promise, there are back alley stories of doubt and despair among those who purvey and pundit on the state of legal technology and innovation.

Some observations pulled from my random reading, conversations and from the great and might ‘G’:

They say:

The legal industry has a storied history of resistance to technological change. Everyday business necessities such as the telephone, computer, electronic document management systems and email were all originally met with skepticism by law’s top decision makers. Their excuses against adaptation were always the same: The costs were too high, the system as it currently existed didn’t need improvement, and that new innovations could create potentially harmful security issues for their clients. — How AI is Enabling Law Firms to Adapt to Value-Based Pricing

He says:

…the training that lawyers receive, both in law school and in practice, confers upon them a sense of their own expertise that insulates them from clients in ways that foreclose innovation. — John Alber, “Are Lawyers Really Luddites”

She says:

Law has been slow to change. Lawyers are notoriously late adopters of new technologies because there are serious consequences if they make mistakes. — Basha Rubin, “Why Law is Ripe for Tech Innovation”

She observes:

It sometimes seems that the practice of law is resistant to the kinds of technological disruption that are under way in other sectors from the travel industry to taxi driving. The “Uberisation” of the legal profession is still some way down the road. — Jane Croft, “Law firms programmed for more technological disruption”

This isn’t good:

Our recent research into Legal Transformation suggests that General Counsels will increase investment in technology by 252% in the next two years. Yet, limited technology competencies will lead most to frustration and failure. — Why Legal Tech fails: The top 8 mistakes GCs make

He’s realistic but not sanguine:

“…the tools that keep the wheels of the legal system turning are persistently stuck in the 90s. Think fax machines, Windows XP, and a world without Slack groups. — Holden Page, Legal Tech Fails To Sustain Deal Counts And Dollar Amounts

And him:

The legal industry “is notoriously slow to change and is ripe for innovation.” — Christopher Bavitz, Harvard Law School

And them:

…the in-house legal team is often the last department in the organization to adopt technology solutions. — Etai Rosen, VP of Sales at LawGeex

And her:

The hierarchical structure of law firms has a large role to play in keeping law firms stagnant in terms of innovation…This hesitancy on the part of the senior lawyers is largely based on a lack of understanding of the benefits of technology. — Susanna James

And her:

…adoption of technology in the legal field is still slow. Why do attorneys struggle with adoption of technology? A simplistic answer is that nobody wants to be replaced by technology and most people do not like change. Mary Juetten

Him, as well:

…it’s an exciting time — but the legal market is notoriously slow to change for a reason) David Houlihan

And this:

As it stands, it appears that the legal industry remains rather cautious of any form of tech innovations that are being introduced into the profession, mostly due to the general misconception that technological innovations pose a threat to the livelihoods of law practitioners in the country. — JoFan Pang, “Resistance to Legal Tech Innovations: A Threat To The Rule of Law?”

Oh, this:

It’s not just your imagination, innovating in the legal market is hard. What passes for a radical change in a law practice — a new training program, some alternative billing, an extranet — is old hat in other markets. Over two decades in the legal market, I’ve seen lawyers resist most innovation. — Ron Friedmann, “Why Do Law Firms Resist Innovation?”

She seems to think so, but is hopeful:

Naming the industries that have been reinvented by technology, one has remained conspicuously unchanged: The law. A recent Wired article posited that these barriers are institutional, asserting, “…the lawyering business itself is set up in a way that resists efforts to move fast and break things…” The article offers examples such as competitive, proprietary tools held by law firms and a lack of tech in the courtroom as disincentives to innovate. — Monica Zent, “3 Reasons the Legal Industry’s Ripe for Tech Disruption”

Is claimed #LegalTech innovation an “illusion?”

A new study out of the Faculty of Management at McGill University suggests that while Canadian law firms talk a good “innovation” game, little innovation is actually taking place. — McGill study reveals the ‘illusion’ of innovation at Canadian law firms