Collision course: AI and Biglaw

CBDR? But I’m a JD!

CBDR is a maritime term, it stands for “Constant Bearing, Decreasing Range” and what it means is if you look at your radar and see another radar reflection that stays at a constant angle to you, but for which the distance between you and the target is shrinking, eventually you are going to collide. You really don’t need to know anything about the other vessel – it’s speed, direction, whether the captain is drunk or not – none of it matters, all that you need to know is that if one of you doesn’t do something, you are going to hit.

I think the current biglaw business model is in a CBDR situation with AI right now. We can argue about whether AI is currently ready to replace lawyers and when, but I think we all know that the productivity AI will bring will require firms to adjust. 

If your business model depends on selling hours, and all of a sudden you can do twice as much work in an hour, what changes have to happen for you to survive? And even moreso, what should you do to not only survive, but thrive? 

Are we looking at a long term trend in which firms will slowly evolve to business models where value provided is no longer coupled to labor inputs? Or will it be more of Plank’s view of a Kuhnian paradigm shift where firms that don’t get it go extinct and new players take their places?

AI adoption in the legal market may be like the advent of email or the smartphone; productivity tools which gradually became widespread and which were gladly incorporated into existing workflows without really disrupting the underlying model. Or it could be faster and more destructive.  Something like Netflix coming along and doing away with late fees, which were basically Blockbuster’s entire business.

Good question, what do you think? 

As for me, I’m not fully sure, but I do agree with one of my favorite drummers, “no changes are permanent, but change is”

(Note: the quote could be Neal Peart, or Heraclitus of Ephesus, take your pick)