One "thought leader" foresees a shift from lawyers engaging in "performance competition" which involves a focus on "costs and quality of service" to an emphasis on "disruptive competition" which is a term I confess I don't grasp. I do know that lawyers are great disrupters already so presumably if they compete with each other even more intensely in that area we are on the cusp of a Golden Age of Agitating Attorneys.
A couple of legal academics see lawyers as evolving (degenerating?) from professionals into "service providers". One of these ivory tower types even resurrected the term "paradigm shift" from much deserved disuse; actually, to be fair, she used "new paradigm" and "seismic shift" but never p.s. Lawyers are seen as humble lever-pushers of the technology that can better perform what the other academic terms "cookie-cutter-style" legal services.
There was a time when Marxism was a fashionable analytical modality for self-styled futurists and their musings inspired a level of fear and paranoia because Marx's thinking was associated with Soviet-style totalitarianism. Techie futurists are provoking some backlash as well, though I have to say their visions are far blander than class warfare and permanent revolution.
I will make no prediction other than that no tech substitute for good judgment, nor for calm and resolve, will emerge any time soon. With that said, technology can help lawyers deliver better results for clients, provided that lawyers understand both technology's powers, and its limitations.
Marc's Ottawa litigation practice areas include elder abuse, financial advisor negligence, personal injury including motor vehicle accidents and slip and fall accidents, lawyer negligence, commercial disputes, medical and dental malpractice, insurance claims disputes, real estate disputes, accident benefits litigation, LTD litigation, wrongful dismissal, coverage disputes, pension litigation, bank and trust company negligence, product liability, representing victims of financial fraud, and sexual harassment. This blog article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.