New Revenue Streams: Transform unprofitable practices into thriving businesses
Learn how Gen AI can help lawyers to transform unprofitable practices into new revenue streams.
September 03, 2024 at 08:45 AM
4 minute read
Law Firms - LargeThe original version of this story was published on Law.com
Law firm leaders perceive that generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) technology is going to have a dramatic impact on how efficiently lawyers are able to complete work assignments for clients. The top priorities for law firms using AI-powered tech are all related to efficiency, according to the 2024 LexisNexis Investing in Legal Innovation Survey:
- Legal research (57%)
- Summarizing documents (53%)
- Drafting documents (38%)
These anticipated gains in efficiency have the potential to benefit clients who will receive legal counsel faster, as well as law firms who may be able to expand into new practice areas or even rehabilitate certain practices that have been struggling.
Transform pressured practice areas
The ability to practice more efficiently has law firms eyeing Gen AI's potential to support their business growth opportunities, according to the new report, Gen AI in Law: Unlocking New Revenues.
A quarter of Am Law 200 firm leaders say using Gen AI for business development reports is a top priority, with 21% saying they want to use Gen AI for real-time comparisons of law across different jurisdictions and connecting AI to organizational data.
"I expect that we'll see a focus on new lines of business and on advisory services that are proactive, rather than reactive," says Jeff Pfeifer, chief product officer at LexisNexis.
Gen AI could also help practice areas where margins are under pressure to become more profitable through repeatable process improvements.
"We hear this consistently among the firms that we're speaking with: they're looking for ways technologies can make a material improvement in work quality and work efficiency," adds Pfeifer. "Doing so makes those lines of business more attractive from a margin perspective."
For example, legal professionals who use Gen AI tools and services from LexisNexis typically free up seven to 11 hours per week, which Pfeifer notes can be used to either follow-up more rapidly on their next tasks or to expand services for other clients.
Clients expecting higher-value work
According to the Gen AI in Law: Unlocking New Revenues report, in-house teams also expect to see Gen AI tools free up their outside lawyers' time so they can focus on higher value work.
"We don't look at AI or Gen AI as being replacements to attorneys, but rather tools that augment what those attorneys are able to do with their own time," says Christy Jo Gedney, senior manager at Liberty Mutual Insurance. "We want our attorneys, whether they're in-house or outside counsel, to be practicing at the top of their licenses. We want them spending their time doing the things that are impactful, such as building relationships or prepping for trial. Using Gen AI tools will help give them the capacity to spend their time on more impactful matters."
For example, McGuireWoods is starting to see notable efficiency gains through adopting Gen AI for M&A due diligence by reviewing hundreds of contracts much faster than would be possible with a team of humans.
"The ability to use AI to surgically go into each one of those contracts and extract the information that you need and organize it into a spreadsheet as the first step of diligence can be a huge time saver," says Peter Geovanes, chief innovation and AI officer at McGuireWoods.
We interviewed a variety of AI leaders from the legal profession to explore how law firms and corporations that embrace Legal AI can generate new revenues through the use of this technology. In addition to the section of the report we unpacked today, which explores how to transform unprofitable practice areas into thriving businesses, other sections of the report include:
- An introduction to your new business development tool;
- Adapting to changing client mindsets about how to assess the value of legal work;
- How to seize new opportunities with the right skills in place; and
- Why law firms should start business innovation now to maximize success.
Read the full report now: Gen AI in Law: Unlocking New Revenues.
To read more insights and thought leadership from Lexis+ Ai, click here.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllClients 'No Longer Need to Be Referred Out': Womble and Lewis Roca Eye Merger Benefits
Dickinson Wright Opens San Diego Office with Focus on Life Sciences Practice
Rupert Murdoch Trust Trial Underscores Lucrative Nature of High-End Private Client Practices
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft and Pryor Cashman have entered appearances for Diageo Americas Supply d/b/a Ciroc Distilling Co. and Sony Songs, a division of Sony Music Publishing, respectively, in a pending lawsuit. The case was filed Sept. 10 in New York Southern District Court by the Bloom Firm and IP Legal Studio on behalf of Dawn Angelique Richard. The plaintiff, who performed as a member of producer Sean 'Diddy' Combs girl group Danity Kane and later his band, Diddy - Dirty Money, claims that she was financially exploited by Combs and subjected to inhumane working conditions. Among other violations, Richard claims that Combs required group members to remain at his residences and studios, deprived them of adequate food and sleep and forced them to rehearse for 36 to 48 hours without breaks. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, is 1:24-cv-06848, Richard v. Combs et al.
Who Got The Work
Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Kevin M. McGinty of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, as well as Jesse W. Belcher-Timme of Doherty, Wallace, Pillsbury & Murphy, have stepped in to defend Peter Pan Bus Lines in a pending consumer class action. The suit, filed Sept. 4 in Massachusetts District Court by Hackett Feinberg PC and KalielGold PLLC, accuses the defendant of charging undisclosed 'junk fees' on top of ticket prices during checkout. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Mark G. Mastroianni, is 3:24-cv-12277, Mulani et al v. Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250