My first experience with technology adoption for a law firm was probably in 1993. I was attending a partner meeting for a top Am Law firm to demonstrate the first version of Lexis on Microsoft Windows. My pitch was strong enough to get a partner to grab the mouse and try for himself. The problem was that he had never used a computer before. When the partner grabbed the mouse, he accidentally highlighted half the screen. Embarrassed, he walked away without saying a word.
Recently, I was speaking with a legal innovator in charge of evaluating Harvey and Legora. My advice was to be realistic and manage expectations regarding likely adoption. Why? Because even the most pervasive AI deployments at firms may have just a small concentration of power users. I wrote earlier about the adoption curve, and in my opinion, most power users are early adopters, comprising a small percentage of attorneys in a firm.
Attorneys are busy and under pressure to achieve billable hour targets. Despite the best intentions, there is often little time to invest in learning a better way. Most attorneys struggle to adopt new technology and adapt to change for this reason.
Mandatory changes, like the shift to Windows 11, are the exception. The new operating system will show up, and attorneys will adapt. Absent a mandate, most attorneys will behave like the early and late majority on the adoption curve. They will change after they see the benefits from their peers. Partners tend to behave like laggards on the adoption curve. Most won’t change unless absolutely necessary. Senior partners may be less familiar with technology in general. It could have been years since they last logged into Westlaw, and they may still make references to the CCH Standard Fed or have a tattered BNA Portfolio on their bookshelf.
Here are three ways to help deal with the adoption challenges:
- Just-In-Time Training
The Lean Manufacturing movement of the late 1980s and early 1990s included a concept called just-in-time. Machines would be retooled to create a custom run when an order was placed. While counterintuitive, the approach was more efficient as it reduced unnecessary inventory and waste.
The same approach might be considered for training on AI initiatives. Your early adopters will jump at the opportunity to learn something new, but the majority of attorneys will not use a new technology until there is a need. That need may arise when a client specifies the use of a new technology. For the majority, training before they have a need is going to be wasteful. Most of the learning will be forgotten, and they will need to be retrained when the need becomes relevant. Training will be most effective when an attorney sees the need to adapt. Consider a video library of training materials developed in conjunction with your early adopters. This can be the basis of a just-in-time training program for the majority of attorneys in the firm. It’s good to recognize this dynamic and embrace it, as it will reduce frustration for all.
Unless there is a need to use a new technology, training can lack effectiveness. Scott Bailey, director of Research and Knowledge Services at Eversheds Sutherland says, “The firm makes a point to use early adopters in their training videos to provide a testimonial of sorts, sharing the benefits of the new AI technology from an attorney’s point of view. It adds credibility and helps with engagement in the training experience.”
- Metrics And Leadership Buy-In
Facts are friendly. Keep track of who your early adopters are and how they distinguish themselves from their peers. If you can find any data that correlates to their adoption of new technology, keep track of it. For example, is it possible to demonstrate higher utilization or greater realization among those who have been trained and use new technology? Also, consider appealing to leadership for a just-in-time approach for training those attorneys in the majority of the adoption curve. Tell them what you are proposing and why.
It is budget season, and perhaps you can justify the expense for better quality training videos or for staffing that needs to be available on-demand for follow-up training when client needs arise. Help leadership understand that adoption will be incremental based on the needs of the firm. Keep track of the number of training sessions, the effort required, and the results of just-in-time training. It may be more costly, but if you can point back to the success of early adopters, it may create the business case you need.
Advocacy and aircover from leadership is empowering and can be the difference between success and failure of initiatives.
- Require Partner Training
As you engage leadership, it may be possible to address the elephant in the room. Partners are going to be less likely to use new technologies, but they do need to understand their capabilities to effectively direct staff and to be more credible in front of clients. If possible, get leadership to agree that cursory, hands-on training will help partners be more effective in their practices and with clients. It may require finding an advocate or two in leadership, but it is worth trying.
Summary
The story of the partner who didn’t know how to use a computer is a strong reminder that the problem of technology adoption in firms is challenging. The successful adoption of an AI initiative requires a holistic view of people, processes, and technology. The natural tendency is to focus on the technology portion.
Training is a significant undertaking and can be underestimated, with a long tail for adoption. Metrics can help explain the challenges and persuade leadership. Establishing realistic expectations for adoption can be the difference between an initiative being viewed as a success or a failure. Set yourself up for success.
Any incremental advocacy from leadership will increase the potential success of your initiatives.
Consider setting the goal of adoption by groups. Can you get 10% of attorneys to lead in the adoption of a new technology? Can you offer just-in-time training for attorneys to respond effectively when the need arises?
Your firm can be better equipped to outpace its peers in AI adoption if you set realistic expectations and meet attorneys where they are at. Make it natural to find training relevant at the right moment, and you’ll attract more converts and advocates!
Ken Crutchfield has over forty years of experience in legal, tax, and other industries. Throughout his career, he has focused on growth, innovation, and business transformation. His consulting practice advises investors, legal tech startups and others. As a strategic thinker who understands markets and creating products to meet customer needs, he has worked in start-ups and large enterprises. He has served in General Management capacities in six businesses. Ken has a pulse on the trends affecting the market. Whether it was the Internet in the 1980s or Generative AI, he understands technology and how it can impact business. Crutchfield started his career as an intern with LexisNexis and has worked at Thomson Reuters, Bloomberg, Dun & Bradstreet, and Wolters Kluwer. Ken has an MBA and holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from The Ohio State University.
The post Approaches To Drive AI Adoption In Biglaw appeared first on Above the Law.
My first experience with technology adoption for a law firm was probably in 1993. I was attending a partner meeting for a top Am Law firm to demonstrate the first version of Lexis on Microsoft Windows. My pitch was strong enough to get a partner to grab the mouse and try for himself. The problem was that he had never used a computer before. When the partner grabbed the mouse, he accidentally highlighted half the screen. Embarrassed, he walked away without saying a word.
Recently, I was speaking with a legal innovator in charge of evaluating Harvey and Legora. My advice was to be realistic and manage expectations regarding likely adoption. Why? Because even the most pervasive AI deployments at firms may have just a small concentration of power users. I wrote earlier about the adoption curve, and in my opinion, most power users are early adopters, comprising a small percentage of attorneys in a firm.
Attorneys are busy and under pressure to achieve billable hour targets. Despite the best intentions, there is often little time to invest in learning a better way. Most attorneys struggle to adopt new technology and adapt to change for this reason.
Mandatory changes, like the shift to Windows 11, are the exception. The new operating system will show up, and attorneys will adapt. Absent a mandate, most attorneys will behave like the early and late majority on the adoption curve. They will change after they see the benefits from their peers. Partners tend to behave like laggards on the adoption curve. Most won’t change unless absolutely necessary. Senior partners may be less familiar with technology in general. It could have been years since they last logged into Westlaw, and they may still make references to the CCH Standard Fed or have a tattered BNA Portfolio on their bookshelf.
Here are three ways to help deal with the adoption challenges:
- Just-In-Time Training
The Lean Manufacturing movement of the late 1980s and early 1990s included a concept called just-in-time. Machines would be retooled to create a custom run when an order was placed. While counterintuitive, the approach was more efficient as it reduced unnecessary inventory and waste.
The same approach might be considered for training on AI initiatives. Your early adopters will jump at the opportunity to learn something new, but the majority of attorneys will not use a new technology until there is a need. That need may arise when a client specifies the use of a new technology. For the majority, training before they have a need is going to be wasteful. Most of the learning will be forgotten, and they will need to be retrained when the need becomes relevant. Training will be most effective when an attorney sees the need to adapt. Consider a video library of training materials developed in conjunction with your early adopters. This can be the basis of a just-in-time training program for the majority of attorneys in the firm. It’s good to recognize this dynamic and embrace it, as it will reduce frustration for all.
Unless there is a need to use a new technology, training can lack effectiveness. Scott Bailey, director of Research and Knowledge Services at Eversheds Sutherland says, “The firm makes a point to use early adopters in their training videos to provide a testimonial of sorts, sharing the benefits of the new AI technology from an attorney’s point of view. It adds credibility and helps with engagement in the training experience.”
- Metrics And Leadership Buy-In
Facts are friendly. Keep track of who your early adopters are and how they distinguish themselves from their peers. If you can find any data that correlates to their adoption of new technology, keep track of it. For example, is it possible to demonstrate higher utilization or greater realization among those who have been trained and use new technology? Also, consider appealing to leadership for a just-in-time approach for training those attorneys in the majority of the adoption curve. Tell them what you are proposing and why.
It is budget season, and perhaps you can justify the expense for better quality training videos or for staffing that needs to be available on-demand for follow-up training when client needs arise. Help leadership understand that adoption will be incremental based on the needs of the firm. Keep track of the number of training sessions, the effort required, and the results of just-in-time training. It may be more costly, but if you can point back to the success of early adopters, it may create the business case you need.
Advocacy and aircover from leadership is empowering and can be the difference between success and failure of initiatives.
- Require Partner Training
As you engage leadership, it may be possible to address the elephant in the room. Partners are going to be less likely to use new technologies, but they do need to understand their capabilities to effectively direct staff and to be more credible in front of clients. If possible, get leadership to agree that cursory, hands-on training will help partners be more effective in their practices and with clients. It may require finding an advocate or two in leadership, but it is worth trying.
Summary
The story of the partner who didn’t know how to use a computer is a strong reminder that the problem of technology adoption in firms is challenging. The successful adoption of an AI initiative requires a holistic view of people, processes, and technology. The natural tendency is to focus on the technology portion.
Training is a significant undertaking and can be underestimated, with a long tail for adoption. Metrics can help explain the challenges and persuade leadership. Establishing realistic expectations for adoption can be the difference between an initiative being viewed as a success or a failure. Set yourself up for success.
Any incremental advocacy from leadership will increase the potential success of your initiatives.
Consider setting the goal of adoption by groups. Can you get 10% of attorneys to lead in the adoption of a new technology? Can you offer just-in-time training for attorneys to respond effectively when the need arises?
Your firm can be better equipped to outpace its peers in AI adoption if you set realistic expectations and meet attorneys where they are at. Make it natural to find training relevant at the right moment, and you’ll attract more converts and advocates!
Ken Crutchfield has over forty years of experience in legal, tax, and other industries. Throughout his career, he has focused on growth, innovation, and business transformation. His consulting practice advises investors, legal tech startups and others. As a strategic thinker who understands markets and creating products to meet customer needs, he has worked in start-ups and large enterprises. He has served in General Management capacities in six businesses. Ken has a pulse on the trends affecting the market. Whether it was the Internet in the 1980s or Generative AI, he understands technology and how it can impact business. Crutchfield started his career as an intern with LexisNexis and has worked at Thomson Reuters, Bloomberg, Dun & Bradstreet, and Wolters Kluwer. Ken has an MBA and holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from The Ohio State University.
The post Approaches To Drive AI Adoption In Biglaw appeared first on Above the Law.
