Connecting Dots

As anyone who's worked on a large project knows, you can start to view the world through the prism of that project. New data gets filtered through the context of that project; patterns emerge.

Which is probably why some recent essays and analysis of fields unrelated to the legal profession are resonating with similarities.

Take, for instance, a very informative and insightful recent post from Barrett Garese, founder and CEO of Spytap Industries, a company specializing in online content and social media strategies.

You can read it in full here, but the upshot is this:

The entertainment industry is at a crossroads because the internet has essentially acted as a disruptive technology, in that it is providing alternative access to content and/or services that were previously the sole domain of thoroughly entrenched, system-wide gatekeepers.

Read that paragraph again, and we could be talking about the legal profession.

Garese notes that "the argument is often made that the internet is putting thousands of people out of work and killing off professional content."

This same argument is heard in legal office hallways, as well, as the internet has modified access to legal content (i.e., online legal forms sites and legal information sites), the cost of legal work (LPO, virtual attorneys, and virtual associates), and the physical proximity of legal service providers (i.e., skype, VOIP, social networking, and every other online tool that allows people thousands of miles apart to share a virtual office).

But Garese dismisses that argument, saying "This may or may not be true, however it’s irrelevant for the following reason: disruptive technologies always put people out of work…temporarily."

Temporarily. Because new models emerge. That is fact. Not a question of 'if', but 'what' and 'when'. Just like a forest fire is nature's way of clearing out the dead mass so that new growth can emerge.

While Garese's summation is aimed at the entertainment industry, it is also so directly appicable to the legal profession that it's worth quoting in full.

Big changes to established industries are both painful to the aforementioned established companies, and an opportunity to the more nimble. Business models will change drastically over the next few years to compensate and remain relevant, but when everyone is comfortable there’s no room or interest in changes.

Right now, entertainment is in a low-to-mid-level state of chaos. There’s little confidence in the status-quo, and unlike past decades no one seems to know what the future will bring. This means that those who are willing to experiment will have first opportunity to rewrite the rules. Those who are content to live with the status quo will be replaced. This is equally true across the entire scale of entertainment, from large to small. We’re well placed in a disrupted field, and that presents unprecedented opportunities.

So what is the future of entertainment? It’s up to us to decide. All of us. Because we now have a seat at the table. Fortune (in all forms) favors the bold.

So grab a seat and speak up.

Legal Rebels

The ABA Journal has started a new feature they're calling Legal Rebels. Their intent is to shine a light on the current transformation taking place in the business of the legal profession.

Obviously, they're preaching to the choir, as far as we're concerned.

The opening paragraphs from their new website frame it nicely:

In these times of great economic chaos lies great opportunity.

The legal profession is not just struggling through a recession, but also undergoing a structural break with the past. There is a growing consensus that the profession that emerges from the recession will be different in fundamental ways from the one that entered it.

Dozens of lawyers nationwide aren't waiting for change. Day by day, they're remaking their corners of the profession. These mavericks are finding new ways to practice law, represent their clients, adjudicate cases and train the next generation of lawyers. Most are leveraging the power of the Internet to help them work better, faster and different.

The Legal Rebels project will profile these innovators and describe the changes they are making. It will tell their stories in the ABA Journal, on this website and through a variety of social media channels using text, pictures, audio and video. The first of these profiles will appear here on August 25. Several will be added weekly through the end of November.

We're looking forward to keeping an eye on the Legal Rebels project.

Large Firms Resisting Change?

As readers of this blog know, much of our focus is on emerging trends in the legal profession. And, at this juncture in time, most observers agree that the profession is in the midst of some profound changes in the business of law.

A flattening, global market; legal process outsourcing; captive offshore legal departments, virtual attorneys and virtual associates; web based legal products; evolving business and billing models; and the U.K.'s Legal Services Act 2007 are just a handful of emerging trends adding new colors to the legal canvass.

However, a recent study indicates that for all the talk and analysis, there may be significantly less change or innovation taking place in large firms. At least significantly less than GC's would like.

As reported this month at law.com, a survey released a few weeks ago by Altman Weil had this to say about General Counsels' opinions regarding the large firms with whom they work:

"75 percent of the responding chief legal officers rated their law firms between zero to four on a 10-point scale, indicating their opinion that firms had little or no interest in change. Only 5 percent of the respondents ranked their outside law firms between eight to 10, with 20 percent falling somewhere in the middle.

"This is a dramatic vote of no confidence from chief legal officers," Altman Weil Principal Daniel J. DiLucchio Jr. said in a statement. "Either many law firms just don't understand that clients today expect greater value and predictability in staffing and pricing legal work, or firms are failing to adequately communicate their understanding and willingness to make real change. In either case, it's a big problem."

This perception on behalf of GC's comes after more than 60% of respondents reported putting legitimate, non-negligible pressure on their law firms to change their value proposition.

So, given what appears to be some dissatisfaction in the degree of change being offered by large firms, it can't be encouraging for these firms to know that the survey also reported that 40% of GC respondents expect to give less work to outside firms this year.

To put that number in perspective, from 2000 through 2007, that expectation never surpassed 20%. Now, in a matter of two years, the expectation to give less work to outside firms has doubled.

While this may simply be a temporary blip fueled by the sour economy, history tells us that this window of time may well see some alternative models take hold that will provide GC's with the evolution they are seeking.