This is part one of a two part blog aimed at assessing the future of the small law firm. Part one will outline questions and comments that I hope to answer in part two after conducting future research and listening to the opinions that people may have in the comments section of this post.
Although it has been an eye-opening experience to see the future of the profession and the factors at play that will affect it going forward, it seems so far the focus has been more on large, corporate structured firms. However, for myself, this left me pondering how this all could relate to a smaller firm in a smaller city (for example, rural cities in British Columbia). I am curious to know whether these smaller firms in smaller cities will be more or less affected by the innovations anticipated in the coming years. Some say that only the largest, most-established firms will be the firms that survive. However, it seems like these small firms in smaller cities charge lower rates than larger firms. Although this may be a personal intuition, I also have an understanding that some clients in cities like Vancouver outsource some of their work to these smaller firms to reduce costs, especially with the advancement of technology (for example, email, video conferencing, etc.).
With technology advancing and allowing these smaller firms access to information, services, and clients previously not available, will it make them more competitive in the future? Or, perhaps, will larger firms use technology to access these smaller markets themselves? I have read that some say the work smaller firms do will be replaced, to an extent, with software like LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer. However, these services seem to have been around for a while and yet clients are still forwarding the work to lawyers that could easily be done by these programs. Is it possible that people still prefer the human interaction that comes with dealing with an actual lawyer or are the programs still too new for a large consumer base to feel comfortable using them?
Good questions, Brandon, and we’ve certainly talked about this before–the benefits of heading out to practice in a small town.
In light of your questions, I wonder whether there might be a ‘buy local’ movement for legal services, the same sort of consumer movement that’s popping up in other industries. There’s a subset of consumers who want to know their sources and have a relationship with them. This is something that the sole practitioner or small firm can foster.
Thanks for the interesting post Brandon! I don’t think small firms will be going anywhere, especially in small/rural towns. In fact, I see their role expanding. Other industries have seen a similar shift from a decrease in large companies/firms to an increase in independent/small companies. I can see technology really helping small firms to succeed and thrive. Building a niche market, whether it is in a particular legal field or a client base (think small town), can give you a real edge over a large firm. With the technological advances, some of the drawbacks that once existed to small firms (access to information for example) are gone. To answer your question about larger firms poaching small town clientele, I don’t see that as being a real threat. It will be interesting to see what happens with small firms over the next few years.
From a personal standpoint, if I were to have a very complex legal issue, the last thing I would want to do is click through a lot of yes or no questions on the computer or talk to some inflexible automated system. With where technology is at today, I would much prefer connecting to a real lawyer than to a machine (with the added caveat that I can actually afford to do so). With the development of more advanced AI systems (the general AI systems), maybe this will change.
I think there is a very strong “human element” to the law, as lawyers are constantly dealing with human conflicts and very personal affairs. From what I hear about smaller communities, it seems that the desire for this human connection is even stronger. I think legal technology can help lawyers in smaller communities do their work more efficiently and in a more cost effective manner. This in turn could lower the cost of legal services in smaller communities. So in the short term, I think legal technology could help firms in smaller communities become more competitive as they are able to hold the trust and confidence of the clients (through the personal interactions) and are able to offer services at a lower cost. With technology, I think firms in the smaller communities can easily outcompete the larger firms and products like LegalZoom.
I completely agree with Anita’s point that the “human element” is an important aspect of the legal profession in areas ranging from family law to corporate/commercial law. Moreover, one of the major tenets of running a successful business is to have return customers, which, in an increasingly competitive legal market, may boil down to which lawyer is more personable. Replacing people with technology would completely remove this value added service. Lastly, I believe that lawyers in small towns are as necessary now as they will be in the future, and that any fear that technology will continue to replace their skills is a concern that would impact the legal profession as a whole.