We Propecia recommend reading Innovators at the Barricades , a blog post last week by Bruce MacEwen at Adam Smith, Esq. He argues that legal process outsourcing (LPO) is a disruptive force for law firms, citing Clayton Christensen’s The Innovator’s Dilemma . We agree with most of his analysis though take issue with a couple of points. MacEwen notes that “Outsourcing is here to stay” and describes different flavors using a 2 x 2 grid: location on the x-axis with offshore or onshore (”foreign” or “domestic”); ownership on the y-axis with captive or 3rd-party (”owned” or “rented”). MacEwen notes that this model is “by no means exhaustive; it’s merely indicative and representative”. We agree this is a good model for thinking about centralizing support services though we have a small quibble. He cites Integreon as an example of foreign / rented; we are, in fact global, and have onshore facilities in both the UK and US. Most of the post assesses the impact of outsourcing. “Once clients begin to get accustomed to the notion of being able to unbundle, Buy Generic Drugs Without Prescription or unchunk, legal engagements – be they disputed matters or transactional ones – there’s potentially little end to it.” MacEwen argues that LPOs are likely to go upmarket, meaning they perform higher value work, which will threaten law firms. In our view, there is a clear line between legal support and law practice . We do not practice law nor is that part of our corporate strategy. So we see a clear limit to how far “up the value chain” an LPO can go before it practices law and is therefore no longer an LPO.
Read this article:
LPO as a Driver of Law Firm Innovation
