The fact that lawyers may be ignored by more tech-savvy industries, leaving them out in the cold, is something that has been identified as a real threat by a legaltech expert this week.
Speaking a an online event, Rick Seabrook, (left) founder of law firm technology consultancy Panoram, said he was unsure whether the legal industry was capable of competing with financial and insurance businesses, which were more adept at attracting disruptors and avoiding using legal services in the traditional way.
Law firms need to have the courage to employ diverse and even ‘abrasive characters’ who can help disrupt the sector and ensure it does not fall behind other, major industries.
He was backed up by former government technology minister Ed Vaizey, who agreed law firms had to avoid recruiting new lawyers who looked like the existing leadership.
“Will legal be able to keep up… Or will they ultimately get designed out of the system?” Seabrook said.
law firms had to be willing to bring in disruptors, who he described as “change agents”
“Think about fintech, think about insure tech, where a lot of those new propositions, new products are actually being developed with the legal contribution already embedded into the systems.”
He said that law firms had to be willing to bring in disruptors, who he described as “change agents”, when they found the world of fintech or similar more exciting and lucrative.
“How do you encourage change agents to come into your industry? At the moment, frankly, very few of them would consider legal as a rich ground for going in and doing something exciting.
“How do we recruit them and then retain them and reward them? They are often quite abrasive people who churn things up a bit, which is what you need in the early phase [of digital transformation].”
Kathy Valentine, director of knowledge and practice innovation at global law firm Dentons in Washington DC, agreed, saying: “These are often not popular people within their organisations.”
Ed Vaizey, who was tech minister between 2010 and 2016 and previously a family law barrister, said the problem with the legal profession embracing disruption and technology was its make-up.
“It’s behind because it is led by people like me: white, middle-class, Oxbridge-educated, middle-aged men, who are not exactly at the forefront of innovation.”
Instead of simply seeking out graduates from prestigious universities who might one day become partner, law firms should have “an element of humility about it” because they would be hiring people who knew a lot more in some respects about “the digital world we now live in than many of the senior partners in that law firm”.
Mr Vaizey, who stood down at last year’s election, said the legal profession needed fresh thinking that came with diversity, but also leadership from government and the courts.
The key, he said, was “radically rethinking about how the law is done because of technology, rather than trying to shoehorn technology into an analogue system”.
Source: Legal Futures
More from LawFuel
- Ex-Legends Global GC Adam Lister Launches Specialist Sports and Infrastructure Law Firm
- The AI Question BigLaw Doesn’t Want Junior Lawyers Asking
- SpaceX’s $75 Billion Liftoff – Meet the Lawyers Steering History’s Biggest IPO
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher is steering SpaceX through what has become the largest stock market debut ever, while Davis Polk & Wardwell is guiding the underwriting banks led by Goldman Sachs. Reports from Bloomberg indicate that SpaceX has committed to $25.5 million in legal costs in its amended S-1 — a figure that dwarfs the typical IPO legal spend, though it’s broadly in line with what other mega-deals have paid out. For context, the largest US IPO of 2025, Medline’s $6.3 billion listing advised by Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, generated $25.2 million in legal fees and expenses, while Cerebras Systems’ $5.5 billion IPO, handled by Latham & Watkins, racked up $4.1 million. SpaceX’s number sits almost exactly where Medline landed except SpaceX is aiming for a deal roughly twelve times the size. Log in to read . . - Legal AI – Kilpatrick Townsend Launches Kilpatrick Labs
- UK Law Firms Are Finally Coming for the Billable Hour – Sort Of
The billable hour isn’t dead in the UK, but for the first time it’s looking genuinely ill. A growing slice of work is being priced on fixed or value‑based fees, clients are pushing back on “time spent” as a proxy for value, and AI is quietly blowing up the economics of the sacred six‑minute unit. And we’ve talked about the BH’s death many times before. The billable hour’s first real wobble UK legal spend is still mostly billed hourly, but value‑based and fixed‑fee work has crept up to take a sizeable minority share of the market, and it’s moving in one direction. Clients like predictability, finance teams like budgetable numbers, and nobody likes the month‑end surprise when a “quick” matter turns into a timesheet novella. Log in to read . . - UK Private Wealth Dispute Team Add Leading Lawyer
- Top 7 UK Divorce Lawyers for Complex Property and Real Estate Portfolios
