← Previous · All Episodes · Next →
(Aug 2) The rise of Chief AI Officers (CAIOs) in law firms Episode 34

(Aug 2) The rise of Chief AI Officers (CAIOs) in law firms

· 06:19

|

Welcome to Law Tech Daily - the podcast that answers "what happened in legal tech this week?". Join us each Monday, Wednesday, and Friday as we dive into the exciting world of legal tech news. Don't forget to hit that subscribe button to stay up-to-date on the latest episodes! In today's episode, we'll cover the launch of AI tools by Everlaw and Trellis Research, the appointment of the first Chief Process and AI Officer at a large law firm, and the criticism of a report suggesting the automation of legal tasks with AI.

Let's dive in!

Yesterday witnessed a series of noteworthy developments in legal tech, encompassing personnel appointments and substantial investments in this expanding sector. To begin, Everlaw, an e-discovery platform, unveiled its AI tool aimed at optimizing productivity in text-based legal work. RF Investment Partners made an undisclosed investment in Nextpoint, a cloud-based e-discovery company, to support its growth and product development. Simultaneously, LawCatch Inc., a legal software developer, secured $3.5 million in seed funding to enhance the capabilities of its legal editing software, BriefCatch.

There are two notable trends that emerged from these developments. First, AI's importance continues to rise in legal settings, as demonstrated by Everlaw's introduction of EverlawAI and Trellis Research's launch of an AI-powered tool offering market insights to law firms. However, in tandem with technological advancements, there is an escalating need for robust cybersecurity measures. The increasing number of data breaches in law firms underscores this urgent necessity.

Considering the digitization and growing reliance on AI, the legal profession's lack of tech proficiency raises concerns about inefficiencies and cybersecurity vulnerabilities. For instance, despite its importance, Microsoft 365 is underutilized primarily due to a lack of understanding of its potential. The LTC4's initiative to develop learning plans for enhancing tech proficiency is a positive step forward.

Elsewhere, Michael Best, a large law firm, made a significant move by appointing Sarah Alt as its inaugural Chief Process and AI Officer, signifying a growing emphasis on AI in legal workflows. To juxtapose this story, we have the ongoing discussion regarding Generative AI potentially replacing conventional legal tasks initiated by Goldman Sachs remains a topic of interest.

Let's discuss both of these stories in greater detail now.

In a bold move, Biglaw firm Michael Best has taken the lead in embracing artificial intelligence (AI) by establishing a C-suite role solely dedicated to this cutting-edge technology. Sarah Alt, an IT and Ethical AI expert, has been appointed as the firm's inaugural Chief Process and AI Officer. With this new role, Michael Best aims to strategically integrate AI practices into its operations and provide valuable guidance to clients.

By creating this position, Michael Best demonstrates its forward-thinking approach and commitment to responsible AI utilization. The industry has long been hesitant to fully embrace new technologies, but this firm's proactive stance signals a potential turning point. The legal field could witness a significant shift in technology adoption as other firms consider creating similar positions.

Sarah Alt's primary objective is to ensure that AI initiatives are seamlessly incorporated into the firm's existing framework. Her expertise will help drive innovative strategies that harness AI capabilities while maintaining ethical guidelines. With her guidance, Michael Best aims to position itself as a leader in the industry's responsible use of AI.

As legal professionals face increasing pressure to leverage technology for streamlined processes and enhanced client services, Michael Best's proactive approach demonstrates its commitment to staying ahead of the curve. By establishing this C-suite role, the firm recognizes the immense potential of AI and seeks to leverage it for the benefit of both the firm and its clients.

This analysis critiques a widely circulated Goldman Sachs report that proposes Generative AI could automate 44% of legal tasks. However, the author argues that the underlying data used by Goldman Sachs is insufficient and the report lacks specificity on whether AI will replace legal tasks, positions, or work. The author also questions the ambiguous definition of "legal" and the assumption that AI can handle tasks of up to a level 4 difficulty, without providing further details.

Moreover, the author highlights that the report's foundation relies on the input of only 31 lawyers and 134 legal-related professionals, which limits its relevance to the industry. Additionally, the author raises concerns about Goldman Sachs's objectivity, suggesting they may have vested interests in Generative AI technologies. Consequently, the author believes that the widespread panic in the legal sector, regarding AI replacing jobs, is unwarranted due to the report's flawed methodology and lack of clarity.

In conclusion, this analysis provides a critical perspective on the Goldman Sachs report, highlighting its shortcomings and questioning its findings. It asserts that the fear surrounding AI's potential impact on the legal industry is unjustified based on the report's faulty methodology and lack of definitive conclusions.

And that's a wrap.

Subscribe, follow, and join us next time to learn “what happened in legal tech this week?”
... Stay informed, get ahead.

View episode details


Subscribe

Listen to Law Tech Daily using one of many popular podcasting apps or directories.

Apple Podcasts Spotify Overcast Pocket Casts Amazon Music
← Previous · All Episodes · Next →