law firms

Subscribe to law firms via RSS

This week on The Geek in Review, we talk with Alex Su and Andy Chagui of Latitude about the shifting economics of law firm talent, the rise of flexible legal staffing, and the pressure AI is placing on traditional leverage models. Su, known across legal circles for his sharp commentary and creative legal industry videos, brings his background as a former Sullivan & Cromwell litigator and federal clerk to his current work leading revenue strategy at Latitude. Chagui adds the perspective of a former Carlton Fields shareholder who spent 15 years handling high-stakes federal litigation before moving into the new law space. Together, they offer a practical view of where law firm staffing is headed as clients, firms, and legal departments all face rising expectations around speed, value, and technology adoption.

Latitude’s model centers on high-end, flexible legal talent, experienced attorneys with Big Law or in-house backgrounds who step into law firms and corporate legal departments for specific engagements. Chagui explains that these lawyers often support overflow work, leave coverage, secondment requests, internal projects, and interim needs across practices ranging from litigation to corporate, labor, and employment. Su adds that staffing itself is not new, yet Latitude focuses on a segment of talent that traditional hiring models often miss, experienced attorneys with strong credentials who prefer engagement-based work over the standard full-time track.

The conversation turns quickly to why this model is gaining traction now. Remote work, post-COVID hiring shifts, and the growing acceptance of distributed teams have made it easier for firms to bring in experienced attorneys without requiring long-term headcount commitments. Chagui notes that many Latitude attorneys have 10 or more years of experience, meaning they often need less supervision than junior lawyers and move quickly into productive work. This matters as firms face inconsistent demand, intense competition for talent, and hesitation around layoffs, which in law firms often signal weakness rather than discipline.

AI adds another layer to the staffing problem. Firms have invested in tools such as Harvey, CoCounsel, and other specialized platforms, yet many knowledge management and innovation teams lack enough subject matter experts to train users, review outputs, build use cases, and handle quality control. Chagui describes Latitude lawyers helping firms train internal AI tools, review AI-generated work, and support practice-specific rollout efforts. Su points out that while some firms offer associates credit for AI training or innovation work, associates under billable hour pressure often choose client work first. Flexible talent gives firms another way to support AI adoption without asking already-stretched associates to carry the full load.

Su also frames flexible talent as a new form of leverage. Clients still trust senior partners and often accept premium rates for high-value judgment, but they are increasingly skeptical of paying top-tier rates for junior-level work. In that middle layer of legal work, AI, technology, and experienced flexible attorneys give firms more options. Su calls this “outsourced leverage,” a way to support the partner-client relationship while rethinking who performs the work underneath. The discussion also highlights a career-path shift for attorneys who prefer specialized, project-based work, especially in areas like knowledge management, AI implementation, and innovation support.

Looking ahead, both guests see uncertainty as the defining feature of the next phase of legal services. Chagui expects the traditional model to keep changing as firms and legal departments seek more flexible options. Su predicts continued upheaval around staffing, AI capabilities, and outside counsel relationships, especially as foundational AI models move further into in-house legal workflows such as NDA review, contract review, and eventually parts of diligence. Yet Su also offers a reminder for law firm leaders: premium legal judgment still has value. The rates for top partners are unlikely to fall simply because AI improves. The pressure will land instead on how firms structure the work beneath them.

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | Substack

[Special Thanks to ⁠Legal Technology Hub⁠ for their sponsoring this episode.]

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Transcript:

Continue Reading Alex Su and Andy Chagui on Flexible Legal Talent, AI Pressure, and the Future of Law Firm Leverage

This week on The Geek in Review, we talk with Kristina Satkunas of CounselLink about what the numbers are saying in a legal market that still talks about change while clinging hard to old billing habits. Kris discusses the hard data behind outside counsel spend, drawing on CounselLink invoice data and Harbor survey results to compare what legal departments say they expect with what the bills are already showing. She makes the case that the objective data is stubbornly clear. Rates are rising, demand is not falling, and the biggest firms continue to capture a larger share of work.

There is a widening gap between hope and reality. Legal departments may believe they are on the verge of controlling outside counsel costs, moving more work in house, or shifting matters to smaller firms, but Satkunas notes that the billing data has not caught up to those ambitions. She sees some room for in-house expansion in more routine areas like employment work, especially with AI helping legal teams absorb more volume, yet the largest and most sensitive matters are still flowing to outside counsel. That tension gives the episode much of its energy. Everyone sees pressure building in the system, but the old habits of legal buying and legal staffing remain firmly in place.

The discussion also gets into the mechanics of better decision-making, and where there is practical value for legal operations leaders. Satkunas emphasizes that data only becomes useful when departments have enough discipline in their enterprise legal management systems to categorize work correctly, clean out outliers, and separate different matter types instead of lumping everything into broad buckets like litigation. She also explains why finance data alone will not do the job. The real insight sits inside invoice-level detail, where hours, rates, firms, and timekeepers reveal what is happening beneath the headline spend numbers. For listeners trying to build a stronger legal ops function, this part of the conversation feels like a polite but firm warning that dirty data still tells stories, but some of them are fiction.

There is an obvious strain on the billable hour model that AI is placing on it. Satkunas notes that while average partner rate growth has hovered around 5 percent, top-end lawyers are often raising rates even faster, especially as firms try to protect revenue from the work and people they still believe clients will pay for. At the same time, she argues that alternative fee arrangements have remained stuck for years, though AI may finally force movement toward value-based pricing. If technology reduces the hours required to complete the work, then the old logic behind both hourly billing and many flat fees starts to wobble. That leaves firms facing an uncomfortable question, which is how to price legal services based on value delivered rather than time consumed.

We’d say that Satkunas is neither cheerleader nor doomsayer. She is a patient observer of a market trying to pretend nothing is happening while the floorboards creak under everyone’s feet. Her prediction is that real value-based billing will begin to appear in pockets over the next couple of years, even as firms continue squeezing what they can from the billable hour in the meantime. For law firm leaders, legal ops teams, and general counsel, this episode is a sharp reminder that disruption does not arrive with a trumpet blast. Sometimes it arrives as a spreadsheet, a trend line, and a guest who quietly points out that the data has been trying to warn us for years.

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | Substack

[Special Thanks to ⁠Legal Technology Hub⁠ for their sponsoring this episode.]

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Transcript:

Continue Reading CounselLink’s Kris Satkunas on Rising Legal Spend, Law Firm Rates, and the Future of Value-Based Pricing

This week, we talk with Gabe Pereyra, President and co-founder at Harvey, about his path from DeepMind and Google Brain to launching Harvey with Winston Weinberg; how a roommate’s real-world legal workflows met early GPT-4 access and OpenAI backing; why legal emerged as the right domain for large models; and how personal ties to the profession plus a desire to tackle big societal problems shaped a mission to apply advanced AI where language and law intersect.

Gabe’s core thesis lands hard, “the models are the product.” Rather than narrow tools for single tasks, Harvey opted for a broad assistant approach. Lawyers live in text and email, so dialog becomes the control surface, an “AI associate” supporting partners and teams. Early demos showed useful output across many tasks, which reinforced a generalist design, then productized connections into Outlook and Word, plus a no-code Workflow Builder.

Go-to-market strategy flipped the usual script. Instead of starting small, Harvey partnered early with Allen & Overy and leaders like David Wakeling. Large firms supplied layered review, which reduced risk from model errors and increased learning velocity. From there the build list grew, security and data privacy, dedicated capacity, links to firm systems, case law, DMS, data rooms, and eDiscovery. A matter workspace sits at the center. Adoption rises with surface area, with daily activity approaching seventy percent where four or more product surfaces see regular use. ROI work now includes analysis of write-offs and specialized workflows co-built with firms and clients, for example Orrick, A&O, and PwC.

Talent, training, and experience value come next. Firms worry about job paths, and Gabe does not duck that concern. Models handle complex work, which raises anxiety, yet also shortens learning curves. Harvey collaborates on curricula using past deals, plus partnerships with law schools. Return on experience shows up in recruiting, PwC reports stronger appeal among early-career talent, and quality-of-life gains matter. On litigation use cases, chronology builders require firm expertise and guardrails, with evaluation methods that mirror how senior associates review junior output. Frequent use builds a mental model for where errors tend to appear.

Partnerships round out the strategy. Research content from LexisNexis and Wolters Kluwer, work product in iManage and NetDocuments, CLM workflows via Ironclad, with plans for data rooms, eDiscovery, and billing. Vision extends to a complete matter management service, emails, documents, prior work, evaluation, billing links, and strict ethical walls, all organized by client-matter. Global requirements drive multi-region storage and controls, including Australia’s residency rules. The forward look centers on differentiation through customization, firms encode expertise into models, workflows, and agents, then deliver outcomes faster and at software margins. “The value sits in your people,” Gabe says, and firms that convert know-how into systems will lead the pack.

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

[Special Thanks to ⁠Legal Technology Hub⁠ for their sponsoring this episode.]

⁠⁠⁠Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Transcript

Continue Reading The Models Are the Product: Gabe Pereyra on Building an AI Associate and Matter-Centric Workflows

This week we are joined by Patrick DiDomenico and Kevin Klein, two longtime builders of knowledge programs and legal tech gatherings. They walk through the evolution of KM&I for Legal, now entering year three, and the debut of its co-located counterpart, Legal Tech Connect. Both events run in New York on October 22 and 23, with a single community, two distinct agendas, and one big goal, stronger conversations across buyers, builders, and backers of legal tech.

Patrick traces the roots, from the ARK KM era to the launch of KM\&I, then to twisting Kevin’s arm to join as a producer. A larger home opened the door to ambitious programming, Ease Hospitality at 3rd and 40th near Grand Central. Think bright rooms, live plants, strong AV, plenty of seating, and an adjacent tenant lounge with coffee, terrace, and breakout nooks. Lessons from last year show up in smart touches, an overflow room streaming the main stage for those who need to handle calls or email without missing core content, longer breaks for real conversations, and, yes, food worthy of repeat trips.

Format matters here. KM&I holds firm on peer-to-peer sessions led by law firm professionals. Providers participate through tight five-minute spotlights between talks, plus optional demo rooms during generous coffee breaks and lunch. Legal Tech Connect flips the lens, product stories on stage, founder journeys, market forces, and regulatory themes. A crossover ticket lets attendees roam freely between both programs. Breakouts return by popular demand, a C-suite roundtable, KM 101 for newcomers, a track for KM attorneys and PSLs, and a managers and directors forum that grew from attendee feedback.

Themes thread across both days. ROI from AI and KM tools appears throughout, from data strategy as a differentiator to co-development case studies. Expect a lively take on the rise of the legal engineer, with skills for scaling tools and driving adoption, plus a frank discussion about where these roles sit inside firms. Professor Michele DiStefano opens with client centricity, drawing on her research and book, with every attendee receiving a copy. She then moderates a session at Legal Tech Connect on how legal tech companies sell to law firms, bridging provider goals with buyer needs. Another panel stages the AI conversation among a partner, pricing director, client, and innovation lead, a timely look at value, billing, and collaboration.

The bigger story is community. Patrick and Kevin highlight the peer network that forms in hallways and over coffee, mentors found by chance, and ideas that travel home in workable form. Legal Tech Connect brings investors and founders into the mix, which raises the quality of dialogue on funding, product focus, and adoption. Looking ahead, they predict fewer conferences, higher quality bars, and a shift toward substance over appearance. Listeners who want more details, including registration, should visit kmniforlegal.com and legaltechconnect.com. The two events sit side by side in October, and the goal is simple, leave with practical ideas, new contacts, and a clearer view of where legal innovation heads next.

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

[Special Thanks to ⁠Legal Technology Hub⁠ for their sponsoring this episode.]

Blue Sky: ⁠⁠@geeklawblog.com⁠⁠ ⁠⁠@marlgeb⁠⁠
⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Transcript:

Continue Reading KM&I Meets Legal Tech Connect: Two Tracks, One Community with Patrick DiDomenico and Kevin Klein

In the latest episode of “The Geek in Review” podcast, co-hosts Greg Lambert and Marlene Gebauer continue their series of interviews from this year’s LegalWeek conference by engaging with Joshua Lenon from Clio. As Clio’s Lawyer in Residence, Lenon delves into the insights derived from the company’s Legal Trends Report, emphasizing the data-driven analysis of law firm practices and trends. The report, which leverages aggregated anonymous usage data from tens of thousands of law firms using Clio, offers a unique perspective on the productivity, billing, and technological adoption within the legal industry, particularly among mid-sized law firms.

Lenon shares intriguing findings from the report, highlighting a significant increase in productivity, billable hours, and revenue across the industry over the past eight years. However, a closer examination of mid-sized law firms (defined as those with 20 to 200 lawyers) reveals disparities in matter handling and productivity gains compared to smaller firms. Lenon explains how mid-sized firms maintain a consistent workload per lawyer by adjusting the ratio of lawyers to non-lawyer timekeepers based on demand. This adaptability showcases the strategic management of resources within mid-sized firms to optimize efficiency and service delivery.

The discussion further explores the impact of financial technology (FinTech) on law firms’ operational efficiency. Lenon illustrates how adopting new payment methods and technologies significantly improves firms’ collection rates and client payment experiences. Specifically, mid-sized firms that embrace FinTech and client-centered approaches see notable improvements in their financial health, underscoring the importance of innovation in enhancing legal services delivery.

Lenon also introduces Clio Duo, an in-house AI tool designed to enhance law firms’ access to and interaction with their own data. By providing a chat-based interface for exploring firm data, Clio Duo aims to streamline tasks and improve efficiency, allowing lawyers to focus on high-value work rather than administrative tasks. This development represents Clio’s commitment to leveraging technology to address the evolving needs of the legal profession.

Lenon predicts some of the challenges and opportunities facing the legal profession, particularly in relation to artificial intelligence (AI) and document creation tools. He speculates on the limitations imposed by traditional word processing applications like Microsoft Word and suggests that the future will likely see a paradigm shift towards more interactive and multi-dimensional tools for legal work. This shift, Lenon argues, could dramatically enhance productivity by integrating AI more seamlessly into the legal drafting process, moving beyond the static, page-focused approach of current software.

Throughout the conversation, Lenon’s insights underscore the dynamic interplay between technology and legal practice. As legal technology evolves, so too does the potential for law firms of all sizes to improve efficiency, client satisfaction, and ultimately, profitability. The episode illuminates the importance of data-driven decision-making and technological adaptation in the legal industry’s future. By embracing these tools and insights, law firms can better navigate the challenges of the modern legal landscape, ensuring they remain competitive and responsive to their clients’ needs.

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠

Contact Us: 

Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@gebauerm⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@glambert
⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Threads: @glambertpod or @gebauerm66
Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

⁠⁠Transcript

Continue Reading LegalWeek 2024 Special Part Four: Joshua Lenon from Clio

This week we catch up with ⁠Jeff Pfeifer⁠ and ⁠Serena Wellen⁠ from LexisNexis to discuss the rapid development of AI tools for the legal industry over the past year. Pfeifer and Wellen give us an insider’s view of what it took to bring their ⁠Lexis+ AI⁠ tool to the market and the balance between speed to market and getting solid customer guidance on what they need in a legal-focused Generative AI tool. Between the initial version released to a select group of customers and the current version, the product grew from an open-ended chat interface into more of a guided resource that helps users on creating and following up on prompts. As with most AI tools created in the past year, there is still more potential as more and more customers use it and give critical feedback along the way.

In addition to Lexis+ AI, LexisNexis has now launched two additional AI products – ⁠Lexis Snapshot⁠ and ⁠Lexis Create⁠. Lexis Snapshot summarizes legal complaints to help firms monitor litigation. Lexis Create brings AI capabilities directly into Microsoft Word to assist with drafting and research while lawyers are working on documents. The goal is to embed insights where lawyers are actually doing their work rather than separate AI tools.

While the focus of the initial Generative AI tools from LexisNexis were focused on the US market, Serena Wellen and her team are busy expanding that to more of an international reach. This requires adapting the models, content, and interface to different languages and legal systems. This is complex undertaking, but Wellen discusses how LexisNexis has content and editors around the world to help customize the tools. Surprisingly, desired use cases are fairly consistent globally – both simple legal tasks as well as more advanced legal research and drafting.

Greg Lambert brings up a recent LinkedIn discussion that he had with Microsoft’s Jason Barnwell, where Barnwell told him that today’s version of Generative AI tools are “the worst these things will ever be.” In response, Pfeifer says that LexisNexis is focused on continuously improving answer quality to build trust and prove the value of AI to skeptical lawyers. LexisNexis is leveraging relationships with companies like Microsoft to reinforce the stability and progress being made.

Wellen and Pfeifer look into the future and predicted that AI assistants will become highly personalized to individual lawyers. AI agents will also proliferate across platforms to help automate tasks and workflows. Law firms will likely accelerate their adoption of AI tools based on rising expectations and demands from corporate legal departments to work more efficiently.

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠ | ⁠YouTube⁠

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Contact Us: 

Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@gebauerm⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@glambert⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠
Threads: @glambertpod or @gebauerm66
Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

⁠Transcript

Continue Reading Pfeifer and Wellen Give an Inside Look at LexisNexis’ AI Sprint (TGIR Ep. 230)

This week, we cover the highlights of the recent Knowledge Management and Innovation for Legal Conference with our guests, Patrick DiDomenico, founder of Inspire KM Consulting and the organizer of the conference; Tanisha Little, Director of Knowledge Management at Simpson Thatcher; and Sara Miro, Director of Knowledge at Sullivan Cromwell. In a time of Generative AI Hype, the basic ideas behind Knowledge Management have never been more relevant. As much as we believe in the future of a technology that can build upon our current knowledge, how we structure and manage that knowledge will determine just how far we can go. Knowledge management has never been more important than it is today.

The episode begins with an exploration of the organizational complexities behind the inaugural conference. Patrick DiDomenico shares his experiences in orchestrating the event, noting the extensive, months-long commitment it entailed, yet expressing satisfaction with the innovative elements introduced, such as breakout sessions.

We then shift focus to the specific sessions led by our guests. Tanisha Little and Jennifer Mendez conducted a “KM 101” session, effectively orienting newcomers to the field. Additionally, an engaging KM Attorney Roundtable, facilitated by Sara Miro and Patrick Dundas, explored issues such as change management and the implications of generative AI.

Our discussion also covers the most impactful sessions from the conference. Key highlights include Andrea Alliston’s keynote on leadership amidst disruption, Jeff Rovner’s presentation on succession planning, and Mark Smolik’s perspective on aligning law firms with client needs. The consensus underscores the conference’s comprehensive value for professionals across all levels of KM expertise.

A significant aspect of the conference was the notable influx of newcomers to the KM field. Emphasizing the importance of foundational knowledge, Patrick DiDomenico notes that such conferences often attract a substantial proportion of first-time attendees. The provision of introductory content is pivotal for equipping these professionals for more advanced discussions in future gatherings.

For our Crystal Ball Question, there is a unanimous agreement on the transformative potential of generative AI, foreseeing an increase in KM specialization, refined use cases, and enhanced emphasis on data curation. Nevertheless, mastering foundational KM practices, such as change management, is deemed essential for fully capitalizing on these technological advancements. The episode concludes with an optimistic outlook on the continuous growth and evolution in the field of KM.

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠Apple Podcasts⁠ |  ⁠Spotify⁠ | YouTube

⁠⁠⁠⁠Contact Us: 

Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@gebauerm⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@glambert⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠
Threads: @glambertpod or @gebauerm66
Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠

Transcript

Continue Reading The Future of KM is Bright: DiDomenico, Miro, and Little Review the KM&I for Legal Conference (TGIR Ep. 229)

In this episode of The Geek in Review, hosts Greg Lambert and Marlene Gebauer interview three guests from UK law firm Travers Smith about their work on AI: Chief Technology Officer Oliver Bethell, Director of Legal Technology Shawn Curran, and AI Manager Sam Lansley. They discuss Travers Smith’s approach to testing and applying AI tools like generative models.

A key focus is finding ways to safely leverage AI while mitigating risks like copyright issues and hallucination. Travers Smith built an internal chatbot called YCNbot to experiment with generative AI through secure enterprise APIs. They are being cautious on the generative side but see more revolutionary impact from reasoning applications like analyzing documents.

Travers Smith has open sourced tools like YCNbot to spur responsible AI adoption. Collaboration with 273 Ventures helped build in multi-model support. The team is working on reducing dependence on manual prompting and increasing document analysis capabilities. They aim to be model-agnostic to hedge against reliance on a single vendor.

On model safety, Travers Smith emphasizes training data legitimacy, multi-model flexibility, and probing hallucination risks. They co-authored a paper on subtle errors in legal AI. Dedicated roles like prompt engineers are emerging to interface between law and technology. Travers Smith is exploring AI for tasks like contract review but not yet for work product.

When asked about the crystal ball for legal AI, the guests predicted the need for equitable distribution of benefits, growth in reasoning applications vs. generative ones, and movement toward more autonomous agents over manual prompting. Info providers may gain power over intermediaries applying their data.

This wide-ranging discussion provides an inside look at how one forward-thinking firm is advancing legal AI in a prudent and ethical manner. With an open source mindset, Travers Smith is exploring boundaries and sharing solutions to propel the responsible use of emerging technologies in law.

Links:

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠Apple Podcasts⁠ |  ⁠Spotify⁠ | YouTube (NEW!)

Contact Us:

Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@gebauerm⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@glambert⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠
Threads: @glambertpod or @gebauerm66
Voicemail: 713-487-7821 Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠

⁠⁠⁠TranscriptContinue Reading Deploying Cutting-Edge Legal AI: Travers Smith’s Cautious, But Open-source Approach. (TGIR Ep. 216)

In this episode of The Geek in Review, hosts Marlene Gebauer and Greg Lambert interview Laura Leopard, founder and CEO of Leopard Solutions, about succession planning challenges facing law firms. Leopard explains that many firms have partners nearing retirement age but no concrete plans for transitioning clients and leadership. This lack of succession planning threatens law firms’ futures.

Laura mentions that to make matters worse, the path to equity partnership is getting longer, making it harder to retain promising senior associates and counsel. Firms have added non-equity partner roles, keeping equity partner numbers small to inflate profits per partner. Leadership lacks incentives to retire, with no retirement plans or continued compensation. All this will hamper recruiting efforts, as younger generations prioritize work-life balance.

She recommends that in order to retain mid-career attorneys, firms must rethink policies on remote work, billable hours, and flexibility. Virtual firms with better lifestyle offerings are growing competitors. But firms seem unwilling to change. Leopard argues everything should be on the table for analysis by outside consultants. Phased retirements and succession mentoring could also help transition clients and power.

Though Laura Leopard (and even Bruce MacEwan) cannot point to examples of firms that have executed succession planning well, it is possible with courageous leadership. She advises setting retirement age limits, crafting written plans, and easing older partners’ exits. A too-big-to-fail mentality persists despite serious business vulnerabilities if talent is not retained and recruited.

Looking ahead, Leopard predicts the rise of virtual firms will shake up the legal industry as they encroach on Big Law territory with alternative fee arrangements. The pandemic accelerated dissatisfaction with law firm partnership and policies. As generational divides grow, flexible virtual firms will keep gaining ground over more rigid large firms.

This engaging discussion unpacks the complex dynamics around law firm succession planning and existential threats posed by lack of preparation. As partners cling to power, can bold leaders emerge to implement creative solutions and secure these institutions’ longevity? Tune in for an insightful examination of forces reshaping the legal landscape.

Links:

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠Apple Podcasts⁠ |  ⁠Spotify⁠ | YouTube (NEW!)

Contact Us:

Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@gebauerm⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@glambert⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠
Threads: @glambertpod or @gebauerm66
Voicemail: 713-487-7821 Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠

⁠⁠⁠Transcript

Continue Reading Laura Leopard on Law Firms’ Current Succession Planning: Step One – Do Nothing (TGIR Ep. 215)