83,579
edits
Talk:Legal services delivery: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Talk:Legal services delivery (view source)
Revision as of 10:18, 19 November 2020
, 19 November 2020no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "We hear a lot about the shifting emphasis from “legal service” to “legal service delivery”, either by “right-shoring” or by using tech. But this is to treat legal...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Where legal processes are over-engineered, over-complicated, excessively cautious – which is, basically, everywhere – then wherever they are carried out and however they are delivered, they will be burdensome and wasteful, and will cause confusion, delay and expense. Right-shoring won’t fix that, and is more likely to make it worse. | Where legal processes are over-engineered, over-complicated, excessively cautious – which is, basically, everywhere – then wherever they are carried out and however they are delivered, they will be burdensome and wasteful, and will cause confusion, delay and expense. Right-shoring won’t fix that, and is more likely to make it worse. | ||
Requiring less expensive, less experienced people to handle these over-engineered processes will create not just additional waste, in terms of approvals, escalation and audit workflows, but significant additional risk | Requiring less expensive, less experienced people to handle these over-engineered processes will create not just additional waste, in terms of approvals, escalation and audit workflows, but significant additional risk. | ||
Simplifying existing legal processes by de-cluttering documents, writing them in plain language, removing unnecessary protections and options – with a view to standardising and commoditising the legal product itself, not its “delivery”, will allow us to recast the algorithmic components not as not legal processes at all, but operational processes, which may be automated but, at any rate, do not need legal department involvement at all. We have good examples of where we have achieved this to great effect. | Simplifying existing legal processes by de-cluttering documents, writing them in plain language, removing unnecessary protections and options – with a view to standardising and commoditising the legal product itself, not its “delivery”, will allow us to recast the algorithmic components not as not legal processes at all, but operational processes, which may be automated but, at any rate, do not need legal department involvement at all. We have good examples of where we have achieved this to great effect. | ||
Those legal processes that can’t be simplified should not be right-shored, but instead should be handled by subject matter experts, treating the system (as it is) a complex, dynamic one, with non-linear interconnections and risk, which require experienced people to exercise expert judgments in real time. | Those legal processes that can’t be simplified should not be right-shored, but instead should be handled by subject matter experts, treating the system (as it is) a complex, dynamic one, with non-linear interconnections and risk, which require experienced people to exercise expert judgments in real time. | ||