It seems that we’re finally beyond the “lawyers hate technology” trope. Google the phrase in quotes and you get nothing but articles refuting the claim that lawyers hate tech. That’s good. No one hates technology. Everyone hates crummy technology. Even without law experience, you’ve got some things to look back on that show you this is true. Remember Clippy? Everyone hated Clippy.
Getting back on track: Clippy was an attempt at solving a pretty legitimate problem. MS Office was confusing to navigate, and Microsoft didn’t want to have to offer phone support. The problem was that Clippy didn’t help as much as a person could. It was a poor solution to a legitimate problem.
Shift your focus to the legal tech industry, and you see the same problem. Lawyers don’t have time to sit on the phone with support. Many legal tech companies have platforms that require tens of hours of training in order to become a competent user. Tools like these should just work.
Creative solutions are out there, but many companies are either unable or unwilling to execute them properly. Perhaps the technical expertise isn’t there. Perhaps they aren’t aware of the problem in the first place. Either way, the problem still remains for ediscovery platforms: if you’re not moving forward, you’re moving backward.
A legal tech solution has to be fast, accessible, and platform agnostic to get any true traction these days. Everlaw came on the scene when those things were just starting to become mandatory to compete. In a sense, we were “born” with those skills. Everlaw was one of the first to offer a platform that met those criteria, setting new standards for what lawyers should except in their technology.
No matter what happens in the industry, lawyers deserve better tech, and there isn’t a lot of time to catch up. The problem is that lawyers know they deserve better tech. Litigation tech should be as easy to use as the iPhone (or Android phone!) in their pocket. They’ve seen it in action. They’re not going to settle for less.