It increases the potential to increase the benefit of the legal firm – study – artificial lawyer

A Lexisnexis study on the economic benefits of he, focused on a large anonymous legal firm operating in North America with $ 1.5 billion in annual income, found that using assets it gives a lot of time, especially undesirable time, or time that becomes repaid. And this can lead to increased benefit.

IE he also makes big law firms the most lucrative (not just small law – see yesterday’s AL article), as the time spent on the matter is then focused on tasks that are billable, not low value work he can do – which customers would either not pay, or write if it were to be billed. So more concentration in billing work and low value work is absorbed. Therefore: he = more profit.

For example using the tools of it:

• ‘Old partners and lawyers saved up to 2.5 hours a week for design and search, releasing capacities for higher value work.’
• ‘Junior Associates recovered up to 35% of hours per year per hour previously written, (or) non -bills.’
• ‘Research staff members saved 225 hours a year in research.’

Lexis did the study with Forrester Consulting. The latter then probably left a little and began to produce all sorts of extrapolated figures that show how amazing the profit increases from the use of it – which may be right, but the way it was reached on this site to feel unsafe for their use. So we are adhering to what is clear.

So what does everything mean?

One might say it goes like this:

1. He absorbs routine tasks that may not be billable, or if billed to be written by customers who see that job as Al are calling it Under the ‘threshold of their value’. These tasks can be performed by partners, co -workers, parallels or others in the firm – which is in force ‘a waste of their valuable time’.
2. If you remove – with him – that ‘inaudible’, or one can call it ‘time of financial waste’ from a firm’s daily operations, then you get that time behind, as human lawyers are not stuck doing it. That time can now be used for work that is billable and will not be ignored or erased by the client.
3. Now, this is where Forrester went a little higher with his predictions how much money you would earn, but enough to say, Al would suggest: If you work 10 hours a day, and you have lost 1 hour at low value, now you have an hour back to do high -value work that is most likely to be billed and paid without a client writing (theory). As your fixed costs are the same and can now bill more. Qed your profits will go up. (At least in theory).
4. How much your profits will grow is hard to say, as this will change in many things.
5. Also, if you take more time back, will there be new jobs to do it can be billed? And this is a major question.

For example, A team of lawyers will do 100 hours of work on a matter. 10 of those hours have little or no value as the client will not pay for them, but still have to be done. So the firm is paid for 90 hours. But …… now they have a 10-hour deficit as a team, which must be completed even if it is able to absorb these 10 hours lost. viz The technique helps to absorb that time lost, but the firm still needs to win the 10 -hour bills to be again.

Do those lawyers find new jobs on new issues to fill that time hole? Yes, if the firm has enough work. No, if they don’t have new work to do.

It cannot be assumed that if a 100-hour job is done faster and removes the 10 hours lost ‘with it that there will be higher value work to do on the issue that will meet the loss, or find new jobs.

But at least if 100-hour matter is with a fixed fee, then the firm is lost nothing, no matter how quickly it is, While the client has paid for the whole issue, come what it may be. If lawyers in the firm can also fill those 10 unknown hours that are ‘reserve’ for a new issue, they are earning even more money. Ie he makes you more profit.

As always the problem is not just ‘inaudible’ work or how to handle it, it is that legal firms are selling time and customers still see time as a representative for value. So he makes a new problem, ie. Time -based efficiency and value are contrary. More time in a world of it do not means more value.

Any way, good to see more data as to why legal firms should use it. Of course, we need clients to then change their views on what ‘value’ is, otherwise we will not get anywhere quickly.

–

Legal Innovators Conference in California, San Francisco, June 11 + 12

If you are interested in the advantage of legal and innovation – and where we are all going – Then come to the legal innovators California, in San Francisco, June 11 and 12, where speakers from the leading law firms, inboh teams and technology companies will share their knowledge and experiences of what is really happening and where we are all going.

We already have an extraordinary list of companies to hear. This includes: Legora, Harvey, Filevine, Structureflow, IVO, Flation Law Group, Pointton, Lexisnexis, Centar, Ebrevia, Legatics, Knowable, Draftwise, Newcode.ai, Riskaway, SimpleClurse, Aracor, etc.

And if you are a startup – for inhouse teams, or for legal firms, or both, and want to be included, then please contact:

robins@cosmonauts.biz

See you all there!

More information and Tickets here.