Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Very naive some posters here.
With internationalization, in future, you can hire a NQ lawyer in low cost regions, that can do the grunt work. The partners then need to check the work to ensure it is correct and send it out.
Why need to hire expensive associates?
It has happened to manufacturing, other service industries…
Even for doctor, those virtual consultations will eventually be replaced with AI.
The grunt work will be at risk of being replaced.
Unless you can do something so different.
If your skill is to read a contract and identify issues, take in comments, you’re at risk of being eliminated.
|
Can tell you're 100% not in law, or you're in a small law firm.
This is not a new thing, tech advances/hiring foreign assocs has been occurring for nigh on 10-20 years, especially at low-level grunt tier. Firms that market themselves as cost-leaders are particularly guilty of these actions.
The thing is, past a certain contract sum, hiring companies plain out do not trust tech, they are willing to pay for multiple rounds hand-reviews (for peace of mind and scanning for errors). Law firm adoption of tech does not depend on the law firm, contrary to what non-lawyers might believe, but instead depends on the client's trust in such systems. No self-respecting client is going to pay for a machine unlearned in the law do to Big Data review of their contract. Even if they allow it, they would want multiple human reviews.
Of course, there are incentives towards keeping the use of tech low (i.e. billables), but I can tell you that the human-heavy workloads are not going to change anytime soon, and not only because of pushback from law firms. It would require enormous mindset shifts from a whole ton of Fortune 500, or large scale companies, who would need individually to push the firms to invest in and adopt such tech.