I recently attended a Symposium on AI and the New Law Firm Attorney at Northwestern. The purpose of the event was to introduce law students to the topic of AI and the way the diffusion of the technology has changed how legal work is performed today. As I ate my box lunch in Wieboldt Hall on Superior Street just north west of Navy Pier, I surveyed the room and also noticed a number of partners from local Chicago firms in addition to the distinguished panel of Stephen Poor, Partner and Chair Emeritus, Seyfarth Shaw, Dennis Garcia, Assistant General Counsel, Microsoft, Katie DeBord, Global Chief Innovation Officers, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner and Catherine Krow, CEO and Founder of Digitory Legal Corporation. Dan Linna, Senior Lecturer and Director of the Law and Technology Initiative program at Northwestern’s Pritzker School of Law rounded out the speakers and delivered the opening remarks.
The Next Generation
What struck me most about the students next to me was that their conversations and tablet screens revealed a level of sophistication and expectation about the role technology could play in the work they were preparing to do. For instance, one student was coding a sample smart contract, taking notes in her app and texting a classmate all with the ease of a concert pianist. The diverse group on my right was discussing the nuances of document automation and lamenting an experience from a previous summer program where their assignments didn’t make room for the creative application of tools they already knew how to use. These students were poised to bring Dan Linna’s passion about the importance of re-imagining what the future of law could be like, instead of just speeding up what we do today, and designing law so there is compliance from the beginning, to an industry that has been notoriously slow to change at a time when technology has already outpaced many organization’s capabilities to adapt.
Mindsets
As I have reflected on the remarks from Steve Poor and the other panelists, what struck me the most was the difference in their mindset. First, echoing Dan Linna’s sentiments, there was an acknowledgement that even in the world of AI, the best scenario for the client would always be to prevent the problem from happening in the first place, so there wouldn’t be a need for an AI solution or a lawyer for that matter. Katie DeBord reiterated that technology is not a strategy. What is needed, she said, is a holistic conversation about designing what you are trying to do instead of a technical conversation that often just “runs in circles.” At Husch Blackwell our Innovation team focuses on the people we serve – their experience, their business objectives and learning how to re-imagine the way we can solve business problems together – with our without AI.
Second, each speaker in their own way fundamentally thought about a legal service as a process which can be broken down into steps and sequences and sourced in the most optimal manner. While disaggregation isn’t a new concept by any means, what was interesting was the degree to which each panelist could speak fluently to the breakdown of work into its component parts and the application of different tools to address lower level tasks. Many times the conversation around machine learning centers around whether the software and its primary use case are a good fit as an overall solution, in other words whether AI is a square peg for a round hole. What these lawyers spoke to was how AI (in all of its forms) could augment discrete steps within a larger process to accelerate the workflow and that inserting AI at certain points created opportunities for solutions within the work stream which wouldn’t otherwise be possible. By embracing a design mindset panelists were able to learn to see where AI was most advantageous and where lawyers should practice at the top of their license.
Emotional Intelligence
At the Symposium Steve Poor touched on a third theme, the need for more business acumen among lawyers. He advocated that the industry move from a machine-centered to a human-centered approach to innovation because the purpose of technology was to scale the intellectual capital of the people in one’s organization. Poor also emphasized how the advent of machine learning tools only increased the importance of a lawyer’s emotional intelligence, because computers could perform more of the low level work. Catherine Krow re-iterated this point with her own story of becoming a partner at a large firm only to discover that she now needed the skills of an MBA program. From the in-house standpoint Dennis Garcia emphasized the need to collaborate, communicate and become a smart risk taker in order to align with the interests of their business clients. Following the session, Garcia expanded on the topic of why AI actually elevates the need for greater emotional intelligence in his post, “More AI Means We Need More EQ.”
Data Exhaust
The final theme that stood out during this program was the focus on capturing data during the process of completing work, so that it could be analyzed and used to potentially eliminate the need for even the current solution. For those not familiar with the concept of data exhaust, I would recommend reading Scott Synder’s 2018 article, “How to Turn ‘Data Exhaust’ into a Competitive Advantage,” from the Warton School. The crux of his position from the IoT context is that companies should start by considering how valuable the data that results from an activity might be, instead of simply focusing on the connection between things (or integration of systems) as value.
Artificial intelligence tools are often very good at capturing data and providing visibility into patterns which could inform strategy. For instance, Husch Blackwell uses Kira Systems software to process large sets of contracts either for due diligence or compliance. In a number of situations, we have used the data acquired in these projects to have a discussion with our clients about how they can reduce their risk, remove the need for a lawyer’s time negotiating an agreement or automate part of a process. This not only adds value to the relationship but treats our clients as business partners.
Unlike much of the conversation around AI, this Symposium revealed to Northwestern’s law students that the new law firm attorney is not just one who can use smart technology tools, but someone who understands how to elevate their practice with business mindsets and skill sets.
