Tag Archives: AI

It’s life Jim but not as we know it – A refreshingly real ChatGPT story

I know, I know I’m jumping on a bit of a bandwagon here. Doing what every conference presenter is doing and talking about you know what. But this isn’t a AI is going to take all our jobs post, just a very simple real work example of what it can do and an encouragement to go try it.

Last year I posted up a question on twitter. Just something simple to try and crowd source some definitions for a few common legal tech terms. I got a few comments back, some are in the replies but had others outside the platform. Generally there was no consensus and I think I decided to just use matter management for what I needed and ignore the other two to avoid confusing.

Fast forward to this week and I have been playing around with ChatGPT on OpenAI.com. It took a while to even get started as I kept getting the error:

Turns out this is simple to fix, if you’ve NordVPN installed you need to turn off web protection for the period you use openai as it messes with it for some reason?!?

Anyway I decided to ask ChatGPT what it’s definitions of the above would be, here’s what it came up with:

Practice management, in the context of legal software, refers to the tools and processes used by law firms and legal professionals to manage their day-to-day operations and streamline their business processes. It involves the use of technology to handle various aspects of a law firm’s operations, including client management, case management, document management, timekeeping, billing, and financial management.

Practice management software provides a centralized platform that allows law firms to efficiently manage their practice and deliver high-quality legal services. Some common features of practice management software include:

1. Client and contact management: It helps track client information, communication history, and other relevant details, enabling efficient client relationship management.

2. Case and matter management: It allows for the organization and tracking of cases and matters, including managing deadlines, tasks, and related documents.

3. Document management: It provides tools to create, store, search, and retrieve legal documents, improving document organization and version control.

4. Timekeeping and billing: It enables accurate tracking of billable hours, generation of invoices, and integration with accounting systems for seamless financial management.

5. Calendar and task management: It helps schedule appointments, track deadlines, assign tasks, and manage workflows, improving productivity and ensuring timely completion of work.

6. Reporting and analytics: It offers reporting capabilities to analyze firm performance, track key metrics, and make data-driven decisions.

7. Integration and collaboration: Practice management software often integrates with other tools such as email, document management systems, and accounting software, facilitating seamless collaboration and data sharing.

By utilizing practice management software, law firms can streamline their operations, enhance productivity, improve client service, and effectively manage their business aspects, ultimately leading to increased efficiency and profitability.

I was pretty impressed not just with the definition, but also the speed of the response from the platform and the fact it was so readable. So I asked how it differed from matter management?

Matter management and practice management are two distinct concepts in the legal context, although they are closely related and often overlapping in their functionalities.

Matter management primarily focuses on the management of individual legal matters, such as specific cases, transactions, or legal projects. It involves tracking and organizing information, documents, deadlines, tasks, and communication related to each matter. Matter management software provides a centralized platform to manage the lifecycle of a matter from inception to completion, ensuring efficient and effective management of the specific legal work.

Practice management, on the other hand, encompasses a broader scope and refers to the overall management of a law firm or legal practice. It involves the administrative, operational, and financial aspects of running a legal business. Practice management software provides tools and functionalities to manage various aspects of a law firm’s operations, including client management, case/matter management, document management, timekeeping, billing, accounting, reporting, and other business processes.

While matter management focuses on the management of individual matters, practice management includes the management of the entire law firm’s operations and resources. It encompasses functions such as client intake, staff management, marketing, financial management, strategic planning, and performance analysis. Practice management software provides a comprehensive platform to handle these administrative and business aspects, enabling law firms to streamline their operations and improve efficiency.

In summary, matter management is specifically concerned with the management of individual legal matters, while practice management encompasses the broader management of a law firm or legal practice, including matters, clients, staff, finances, and other operational aspects.

And what about case management?

Case management and matter management are two related but distinct concepts in the legal context.

Case management primarily focuses on the specific legal cases or litigation matters that a law firm handles. It involves the organization and coordination of activities and information related to individual cases. Case management typically includes tasks such as tracking deadlines, managing court filings, monitoring case progress, and coordinating communication among team members, clients, and external parties involved in the case. Case management systems are often used by litigation-focused firms or departments.

On the other hand, matter management has a broader scope and encompasses all types of legal matters handled by a law firm or legal department, including both litigation and non-litigation matters. It involves the overall management of legal matters, including tasks such as client intake, matter assignment, document management, collaboration, timekeeping, billing, and reporting. Matter management software provides a comprehensive platform to manage all aspects of legal matters from initiation to completion, covering both the administrative and substantive aspects of legal work.

While case management is specific to individual legal cases or disputes, matter management encompasses a wider range of legal work, including transactional matters, advisory work, compliance, and general legal operations. Matter management software aims to streamline and centralize the management of all matters, providing a holistic view of the firm’s or department’s workload and resources.

In summary, case management focuses on the management of individual legal cases, while matter management is a broader concept that covers all types of legal matters handled by a law firm or legal department, including litigation and non-litigation matters.

There was quite a lot of text, so I then simply asked it to summarise all of this:

In essence, matter management deals with the management of individual legal matters, practice management encompasses the broader management of a law firm or legal practice, and case management is specifically focused on the management of individual legal cases or litigation matters. These concepts are interconnected and often supported by legal software solutions to streamline operations, improve efficiency, and enhance client service.

What got me is not necessarily the definitions themselves (though they are pretty good) but the fact that the questioning and follow on I gave were the kind of conversational questions that come naturally. I didn’t have to adjust search terms or anything like you would in Google, just asked a logical question as you would of a person in conversation.

It really is pretty impressive!

Like I said at the start this isn’t an “AI will conquer the world” post, more a call to just go and try it. Go to OpenAI.com. sign up and just play around a bit. If nothing else it’ll give you a feel for what it can do and give you some background to question whether or not the answer to that business problem actually is ChatGPT or not.

Share

Dangers of email – is this what’s to come?

We’re in a world where what you say on social media can suddenly have a big impact on your career. Maybe not so much for the average worker, but certainly for anyone in the public eye.

But a recent story on the BBC News site surrounding the Boeing 737 Max debacle could be bringing that level of scrutiny to work email, the release of emails from Boeing has thrown up an email from an employee indicating the plane was “designed by clowns”.

Now this on it’s own probably nothing for you to worry about, but then throw in this story by The Guardian about the development of AI bots being used to detect harassment in emails, to help in flagging bullying and sexual harassment in the workplace and all of a sudden you could be in danger of being the firm equivalent of Alistair Stewart.

I have a an old PST file from many many years ago and as they were not related to my current role or firm I thought I’d share what a simple search for “idiots” brought up, it was an email from a colleague that I’ve deliberately taken one line out of full context for effect.

“if only the people in charge of this firm had a clue as to how much time (and thus money) they’re wasting being bloody stubborn idiots”

I would hope there are laws in place to protect employees from the level of snooping (any technology lawyer like to clarify?) but if not it’s a worrying trend or maybe looking at it another way, the trigger to releasing us all from being slaves to email as we go back to non-electronic communication!

Share

Legal Tech question: Is the abundance of lawyers stifling innovation?

Like at many other legal technology conferences, I’m sure that at ILTA last week in the US there was lots of questions about the billable hour, questions on when law firms are going to change and a good use of the good old buzzword “innovation”.

In fact a quick twitter search and I can find a few quotes from sessions:

But what if the big thing that is really holding everything back isn’t a lack of desire or an inability to do so? Maybe it’s much more simple than that. This thought crossed my mind when I came across this article on UK productivity over the summer break, in particular this part:

“if you provide an economy with an almost endless supply of cheap labour as the UK government has, employers will use it instead of investing in any kind of productivity raising automation?”

I thought maybe this is it for law firms. There is certainly not a shortfall of the number of people entering law, in fact there are probably more than is needed. So are we simply seeing this over supply play through firms? Yes I know there are some exciting ventures into automation and machine learning, but I wonder whether they are mainly driven by marketing the firm than real productivity drivers in the firm?

I would be interested in hearing comments and thoughts, to me it doesn’t yet feel like we’ve hit the tipping point as we did in personal injury and insurance work. A point that really accelerated the use of case management technology in the late 90’s and led to boosted productivity and huge competition in that sector.

Share

A few thoughts on artificial intelligence for both the sceptic and evangelist!

I find myself having more and more conversations about AI (artificial intelligence), whether it’s in Legal IT circles such as the recent panel I chaired at LawExpo 2017 in London or just a discussion with my brother on the ethics of the impact of this “next revolution” on the job market. My stand point has a mix of scepticism about how quickly this will happen and a dose of optimism that we will find a way to navigate this shift without mass unemployment.

I sometimes think though I am alone on both counts though. An example is this long but well written article on how we’re all going to lose our jobs to robots, for those in their twenties this article basically says you’ll all be out of a job before you retire! But then there are other more tempered articles that suggest not all jobs will expire but that we’ll adjust to use the tools in our jobs rather than the tools replace them. Or other more positive views of a future business world with AI.

My sceptical side can’t help but pull out articles like this one from 1992 which talked about the future of speech and pen recognition. “If I were a researcher, I’d feel I had a better return from studying speech recognition” [as oppose to handwriting recognition] and comment about how great a stylus would be for painting and drawing. Some 25 years later with Alexa and the Surface pen/Apple pencil we just about have the tech to achieve each to a reasonably successful degree!

But we will undoubtedly see a revolution that eclipses the industrial revolution and transforms the world of business, whether it’s in 5 or 50 years. And I look to the tech leaders like Bill Gates and Elon Musk who are sounding a warning that pretty much every politician is ignoring.

“I’m increasingly inclined to think that there should be some regulatory oversight, maybe at the national and international level, just to make sure that we don’t do something very foolish. I mean with artificial intelligence we’re summoning the demon.” – Elon Musk

Bill Gates has proposed possible solutions to managing the problem with taxes on robots and the long article linked to first in this post has other options for tackling the transition. We do need to start looking at what this revolution might mean for business and more importantly society, in a very barbell shaped economy more technology will only erode the middle even more and probably also erase the low end job market entirely!

However I think we have time, AI will form a huge part of technology solutions in the next 10 years I am sure, but in very specific applications and the majority of these I think will be in assisting humans rather than eradicating them. After all there will be plenty of companies that follow the Dilbert principle in this cartoon!

Share

Yes sorry it’s another AI (and Uber) post – but also Ravn and iManage!

Honestly this isn’t Legal AI click bait! But on the back of the big news in Legal IT recently (the news regarding Ravn and iManage, not the Tikit and NetDocuments news yesterday) it reminded me of this interesting post on Uber’s use of AI I caught in the tech press.

This was the article, Uber using AI to adjust prices according to the rider. It caught my eye as I am always intrigued by Ubers continued use of technology. Whether it’s pushing the envelope with the AppStore to try and fingerprint itself to track reset devices or use of specific apps to detect and avoid city agencies sting operations with the tool called greyball, their innovative use of tech (if not their moral use of it) is fascinating.

The AI article though got me thinking, is this a use of AI that law firms could utilise? On the face of it it looks a little bit dishonest or a recipe to annoy your clients even more, but factor in some specifics like acceptance of risk the client is likely to take, speed over quality or vice versa, whether they are a key client, a loyal client or a one off engagement, or a client in a market you want to break into, their location (ie for global firms in jurisdictions where the average local rate is much lower than the firms average global rate) etc etc and you could start to get an interesting model that is consistent to the client and tuned to their need, but also financially beneficial to the law firm. Of course as @jordan_law21 put it on twitter, “You can have a flat fee, or you can see our dockets, but not both. Build client trust and they won’t ask for the latter”. As with fixed fees you would need to be up front with the client that this “tailored rate” was in play but they would get the best value using it!

Like I say I’m not sure it would fly, but for innovation to flourish in law firms we need to have a few wild ideas, poke them a bit and be willing to bin them if they just won’t fly.

For those that missed it, this was the Ravn/iManage news that came out of ConnectLive17.

“that iManage, the leading provider of Work Product Management solutions, today announced that it will revolutionise the way companies find, extract and act on key information from documents and emails through its acquisition of RAVN Systems, whom as you know are leading experts in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Cognitive Search” – press release here.

If you’re a customer of either it’s got to be exciting or at the very least interesting news. The possibilities of all that core law firm data in your document stores combined with Cognitive Search and AI are numerous. It also makes the introduction of AI solutions more about what you’re trying to do than about the technology complexity of getting all that volume of information through yet another system.

Share

Experience in Artificial Intelligence – lessons for Legal IT in 2017

To start 2017 I thought I’d have a quick look at 2016’s favourite Legal IT topic, Artificial Intelligence (AI). Reason for picking this topic is down to two pieces of technology that I brought into our household at the end of last year that utilise AI heavily. Those are Nest and Alexa.

The former has brought home to me what I think is going to be a key issue in adoption of AI in law firms, that is trust. My Nest thermostat “learns” over time and one of the key aspects of this is watching for when you go out of the house, the system then reacts by turning thee heating down. At the same time it triggers my Nest security camera to turn on. Over Christmas though I’ve noticed, on odd occasions, when we were out that the camera would turn on but the thermostat wouldn’t drop the temperature. Other times though it would, there seemed to be no consistency. After a lot of old style IT troubleshooting and a lot of googling, I eventually found that this wasn’t a bug, but that Nest had learnt patterns and our locations and kept the heating on when it thought our trip was local and brief, thus in its mind turning off the heating was less efficient (as otherwise it would need to heat the whole house from scratch on our return). The camera though it realised should be on immediately.

This is my trust point, until I fully understood what was going on I didn’t trust the technology. I thought it was just not working, so I had taken to manually overriding the settings when we went out. In reality it was working very well and actually better at predicting things that would save energy than I was! This issue though will be the same with Legal IT AI, getting the trust will take time and will probably need a full understanding of how the machine is learning before people will accept AI into the mainstream functions.

Alexa to me is voice recognition starting to become useful, moving from the smartphone (Siri) or the computer (Cortana) to being “in the room” makes so much sense and is much more useful. Whether it’s controlling the lights or simply putting on some music it genuinely is useful rather than a gimmick. It is impressive how Alexa is using all the data it is gathering to improve, however it also shows how far AI has to go in terms of human interaction. It is way beyond having to specifically phrase your commands or questions, but there is so far to go to get beyond a few “skills” it has now.

These two areas fuel my scepticism around AI. No that’s not fair,  it’s not scepticism it’s just wanting an injection of reality into AI within Legal. I am impressed with Alexa and Nest and the more I use them the more I get impressed by the learning, however my expectations for the technology (particularly for Alexa) were not overoptimistic. I think if we adopt a realistic approach for AI in Legal in 2017 then it can and will be a great enabling technology for firms. If we don’t temper the hype though, we’ll be disappointed or fail to trust it and it’ll go in the bin for years before we try it again!

Share

“Lawyers are like any other machine….”

“Lawyers are like any other machine. They’re either a benefit or a hazard. If they’re a benefit, it’s not my problem”

Rick Deckard, Los Angeles, Nov 2019.

 

The last time I really looked at Artificial Intelligence (AI) was when I studied it in my second year at university as a module for my degree. AI bookOver the last year I’ve seen it pop up again and again at various Legal IT events and in a number of Legal publications. If the talks and articles are to be believed, then in the next 10 years or so we’re going to see AI become pervasive in the legal sector, both through the need to legislate against its usage in society and as a replacement for trainees and junior lawyers (Note: this is a link to a pay walled article, though you can read the synopsis). In fact the latter view point is becoming the new topic of choice on the Legal IT event circuit, Richard Susskind has talked about it, Dr Michio Kaku keynote at the recent British Legal Technology Forum has talked about it, Rohit Talwar talked about it at last year’s ILTA in Nashville and there are many many more examples.

I’m not convinced by the timescales, but it’s daft not to think this will feature in the reasonably near future. But then a recent article in The Spectator made me start to doubt whether this in fact will be our future? The article was actually about this year’s re-release of Ridley Scott’s ‘Final Cut’ of Blade Runner and the announcement of the sequel. But it talked about the concept of “virtual paranoia” in the original Philip K. Dick book. The uncertainty of what is real and what is not. Will this fear be the one to scupper AI in the legal profession? Will virtual paranoia mean we’ll never have the digital lawyer? Well if you’re after a key piece of legal work or advice would you be happy a computer giving it you or would you insist on a human being? I think there would be a bit of worry, this virtual paranoia is already creeping into society. We see people dislike the their online actions being used to tailor adverts for them, so much so they are removing themselves from sites that facilitate this.

The other point that struck me from this article was the question “What is the meaning of memory, now everything is a click away on Google?”, something this article on the ABA Journals site also raised recently. Will this aspect further enhance our virtual paranoia?

Maybe though what we’ll see is a future that will be somewhere between the extremes. Rather than full on replacement of the lawyer, we’ll see AI support the lawyer. AI used to speed up the legal process, provide the knowledge to the lawyer and become the KM function of law firms. I think it is unlikely that AI will ever become “human” enough, they may pass the Turing Test but I’m sure there is something of human interaction, of human behaviour and thought that will mean that the human lawyer is still required for quite some time.

Share