The legal landscape is rapidly evolving, particularly with the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI). If reports, like one from Goldman Sachs, suggest that AI could automate up to 45% of legal tasks, it’s natural to question the future of the legal profession. For anyone considering the traditional path to becoming a lawyer – university, law school, training contracts, and finally, a newly qualified (NQ) lawyer position – it’s crucial to ask: is this still a viable and rewarding career path, or are you entering a field on the decline?
Technology companies like Juro are vocal about the transformative impact of AI on legal work. This raises a significant question: in the face of such dramatic change, is it still sensible to pursue a career to Become A Lawyer? As someone connected to the legal world, these are the questions that come to mind, especially when considering advising younger generations about their career paths.
To gain some perspective, we reached out to professionals with legal backgrounds at Juro, asking them about their initial motivations for choosing law. Their reasons were varied and insightful:
“In school, I was heavily involved in debating. I enjoyed dissecting arguments and building a compelling case. Law seemed like a natural progression for these skills. Plus, I admit, I liked being right!”
“The appeal of arguing for a living was definitely there! I also appreciated the analytical rigor of law. The financial aspect was a draw, and there’s a real sense of empowerment in knowing you can protect yourself and others legally.”
“I was drawn to humanities subjects like history, politics, and economics. Law seemed to bridge these interests with practical, real-world application and solid career prospects. Pop culture, like watching ‘Suits,’ also played a part, I won’t deny it!”
“Simply put, I was tired of expensive family lawyers and thought, ‘Maybe I can do this myself.’”
“It seemed intellectually challenging, a career path that my parents would understand and be proud of.”
Personally, the power of language drew me to law. Having a ‘way with words’ seemed like a valuable asset in the legal field.
However, recent discussions on our Brief Encounters podcast with legal innovators have prompted a deeper reflection on the essence of being a lawyer in the age of AI and automation. These conversations have introduced an element of uncertainty about the conventional understanding of a legal career.
We’ve had the privilege of speaking with Dana Denis-Smith, a pioneering CEO and founder; Andrew Cooke, a relentlessly innovative General Counsel; and Jake Jones, co-founder of the cutting-edge AI startup, Flank. Each of them has taken unique paths and are significantly influencing the delivery of legal services.
Following the modern founder approach, let’s start by asking ‘why’. Why do we need lawyers in the first place?
The sheer volume and complexity of statutes, regulations, and case law in today’s world necessitate the role of lawyers. They are essential for interpreting this complex legal framework and applying it to individuals, businesses, and various situations. Traditionally, lawyers have been valued for their sharp intellect, their ability to recall vast amounts of information, and their critical analytical skills.
However, AI is rapidly advancing in these very areas. It’s quickly becoming adept at processing and analyzing legal information, potentially diminishing the unique selling point of human lawyers in these traditional tasks. This begs the question: why should aspiring professionals still aim to become lawyers?
Are Traditional Motivations Still Valid?
It’s undeniable that certain factors traditionally attract graduates to the legal profession. The financial rewards are a significant draw. Lawyers, whether in large corporate firms or smaller practices, generally earn higher salaries compared to many other professions. The profession also carries a certain social prestige. “Lawyer” is a readily understood and generally respected profession, offering a clear and impressive answer to “What do you do?”.
Starting salaries for NQ lawyers, particularly in major hubs like London, are notably high. Some firms offer starting salaries exceeding £180,000 to lawyers just two years out of law school. This is partly due to market dynamics, especially influenced by the US legal market where law graduates often face substantial student loan debt, sometimes reaching half a million dollars. High salaries are necessary to manage this debt.
When US firms expand to London, they tend to maintain similar compensation levels to ensure internal equity. Consequently, UK firms must offer competitive salaries to attract top talent.
The initial years, as a trainee and then an NQ lawyer, can be exciting and financially rewarding. However, this period also involves a significant amount of routine and administrative work. Many lawyers, including myself in my early career, spent countless hours on tasks like NDA reviews for private equity clients, manually marking up essentially identical contracts repeatedly.
While these tasks require diligence, AI in 2024 can perform them more efficiently and potentially more accurately, and at a fraction of the cost. Yet, traditional law firm billing models often remain high.
Many tasks traditionally assigned to trainees and NQ lawyers are now ripe for automation: due diligence, eDiscovery, and drafting summaries, to name a few. This raises critical questions: without these foundational tasks, how will junior lawyers gain experience and develop their skills? What will be the trajectory of their careers?
If the perspective of innovators like Andrew Cooke holds true – and his insights are compelling – we need to accept a significant shift. The generation of standard legal deliverables – contracts, policies, reviews, and analyses – is likely to be largely automated by AI in the near future, whether in two, five, or ten years.
When this level of automation becomes the norm, what will be the core function of a lawyer?
The Lawyer as a Legal Product Manager
According to Andrew Cooke, the lawyer’s role is evolving towards that of a “product manager” for legal services. Similar to a product manager in technology, the future lawyer will focus on understanding client needs, exhibiting empathy and curiosity, identifying core problems, and designing processes to deliver effective legal solutions.
Their primary focus shifts from the manual execution of legal tasks to the strategic design and oversight of legal service delivery. AI will handle the actual ‘delivery’ – drafting policies in seconds or automating contract reviews with sophisticated AI Assistants.
The crucial human element remains in identifying the need for a legal solution and establishing the strategic parameters for AI tools. Only a human lawyer, with nuanced understanding of business risks, strategic objectives, and stakeholder interests, can design a legal framework that is practical and effective for a growing organization.
My own experience of endless, repetitive NDA reviews as a junior lawyer is a stark reminder of the need for change. It’s a core reason why solutions like Juro are becoming essential. However, my ongoing experiences receiving legal advice and collaborating with legal professionals highlight the irreplaceable value that human lawyers bring – value that transcends the capabilities of AI.
Navigating the Shifting Sands of the Legal Profession
Reflecting on the changing role of lawyers, consider the experience of bringing in an experienced General Counsel, Michael Haynes, at Juro. Initially, he was immersed in the day-to-day contract review process. However, recognizing the inefficiency, Michael proactively shifted his focus upstream. He developed self-service playbooks for the sales team and then implemented AI-powered playbooks within Juro. By training Juro’s AI with his expertise, risk tolerance, and preferred fallback positions, he automated approximately 95% of the routine contract work.
His value now lies in strategic decision-making: defining risk parameters, communicating these strategies to the sales team through technology, and enhancing the team’s legal IQ to foster self-sufficiency. This blend of judgment, situational and commercial awareness, communication skills, and empathy is uniquely human.
While some traditional aspects of the legal profession, like billable hours and traditional court attire, may persist, the legal landscape of 2030 and beyond will be fundamentally different. If the lawyer’s role increasingly resembles that of a product manager, it signifies a significant shift, but also an expansion of their potential impact within and beyond organizations.
The implications for legal training, the roles of trainees and NQ lawyers, and compensation structures are still evolving. However, one thing is clear: change is not on the horizon—it is already here. The path to become a lawyer may look different, but the profession remains vital and offers new avenues for impactful and strategic contributions.
