Learning the Lessons of John Henry

The Importance for Attorneys of Embracing Automation

We’ve all heard stories of Human v. Machine, where the honest sweat and toil of workers give way to the productivity and efficiency of mechanized processes. Perhaps the most memorable is that of John Henry, the “steel-driving man” who (legend has it) won a race with a steam-powered hammer, only to die from exhaustion soon after with his hammer in his hand. While part of the Drive-By Truckers, Jason Isbell penned “The Day John Henry Died” to describe the march of “progress” and the way it often leaves human destruction and obsolescence in its wake:

It didn’t matter if he won, if he lived, or if he’d run.
They changed the way his job was done. Labor costs were high.
That new machine was cheap as hell and only John would work as well,
So they left him laying where he fell the day John Henry died.

In this age of ubiquitous computer technology, there is no shortage of opinions and predictions regarding the effects that automation may have on many occupations and professions, including the proposition that computers may replace certain jobs entirely.

Once again the human is seemingly pitted against a machine.

A Time of Potential Transformation (and Perhaps not Extinction)

So I am relatively encouraged to read some recent views suggesting that attorneys and law firms (and other businesses) are not necessarily in a death match with high-powered computers. As the New York Times article “The End of Lawyers? Not So Fast” suggested, citing a McKinsey & Company study, technology is “likely to transform, rather than eliminate, jobs.” As the McKinsey study put it:

few occupations will be automated in their entirety in the near or medium term. Rather, certain activities are more likely to be automated, requiring entire business processes to be transformed, and jobs performed by people to be redefined, much like the bank teller’s job was redefined with the advent of ATMs.

In other words, the existence of one set of tools (computer technology) requires an organization to figure out how to use those tools in concert with its other tools (people and business processes).

To put a finer point on the importance of effective computer technology use, the authors of the McKinsey study asked “How Many of Your Daily Tasks Could be Automated?”, and posited two principal benefits of automating tasks: 1) investments in automation generate benefits worth three to ten times the cost; and 2) businesses derive value from activities that employees do instead of the work that is now automated.

In other words, as tasks are automated, lawyers and law firm employees are freed up to do other work, and must determine how to use that time most productively. As the McKinsey Automation potential and wages for US jobs interactive graphic shows (give it a try), 23% of a lawyer’s time could be automated with the use of current technology, and fully 69% of time currently spent by paralegals and legal assistants could be automated. Of course, those statistics also suggest that if law firms do not automate those tasks, someone else will. In other words, the outlook is not so good for those organizations continuing to swing a steel hammer when they should be operating a steam-powered hammer.

Make Sure You Are Using the Right Hammer

The good news for attorneys is that there are a great many “steam-powered hammers” sitting (quite literally) at our fingertips, in the form of available computer tools. Automation in the law office context doesn’t necessarily mean “big data” algorithms and writing software code. Think of computer technology tools helping out with any task that you do over and over again (words, sentences, paragraphs, contacts, pleadings, briefs).

As described in this article from the ABA’s Law Technology Today, automation may involve using your current tools more effectively (email rules, automatic renumbering of sections, spellcheckers, QuickParts, templates), or exploring new automation tools (like voice recognition software or document creation software). For more on using the tools that you have more effectively, see Computer and KM Stuff Good Lawyers Should Know (First Draft), or Every Lawyer is a Technologist: Take a Step Back to Take the First Step Forward.

Render Unto the Lawyers . . .

Other studies cited in “The End of Lawyers: Not So Fast” show how automation complements labor in the workplace, especially in the law office. Significantly, lawyers do a great many tasks that are less structured and not subject to being automated:

As it turns out, being a lawyer involves performing a range of tasks, from reading and analyzing documents, to counseling, appearing in court and persuading juries. Indeed, reading documents accounts for a relatively modest portion of a lawyer’s activities.

Additionally, software programs employed for e-discovery require a great deal of human involvement. The trick is figuring out those tasks that are better suited to automation, rethinking processes to incorporate appropriate automation, and then doing more of the things — like counseling and advocacy, and the client development to have more of that work to do — that the machines don’t do so well.

You Are Smarter Than You Think

Attorneys have the opportunity to transform their practices by working with — and not against — computer technology. As author Clive Thompson wrote, in his book Smarter Than You Think: How Technology is Changing Our Brains for the Better:

Which is smarter at chess — humans or computers?

Neither.

It’s the two together, working side by side.

Unlike John Henry, attorneys are in the position to continue to be relevant, as long as we identify and utilize the strengths of both Human and Machine.