Leadership In Law Podcast

33 Ethics and AI in Law Firms with Hardeep Grover

• Marilyn Jenkins • Season 1 • Episode 33

Share episode

Ever thought about how artificial intelligence could reshape the legal industry? Join us as we explore this topic with Hardeep Grover, Principal Attorney at CapEx Legal. From a background in California wineries to establishing a niche law practice in New York, Hardeep's unique journey is all about addressing the needs of small and medium-sized businesses in sectors like hospitality, medical, and entertainment. Discover how he has filled a critical gap in the legal market, offering insight into his innovative use of AI to enhance efficiency and provide affordable legal services.

Navigating the intersection of AI and ethics, we dive into the crucial considerations legal professionals must keep in mind. Hardeep discusses the challenges of maintaining client confidentiality and the ethical implications of integrating AI into legal work. We highlight the American Bar Association's efforts to frame regulations that ensure transparency and inform clients about AI usage, which could significantly impact costs and services. This conversation emphasizes the balance between embracing AI for increased efficiency and upholding ethical standards in client interactions.

Community and support play a vital role in the success of law firm owners, and we shed light on the importance of connecting with peers facing similar challenges. Hardeep shares his experiences and insights on building a network of like-minded professionals striving for legal success. Learn how these shared resources and strategies can bolster your practice. 

Reach Hardeep here:
capex.legal 
https://www.linkedin.com/in/hgrover/


Join our new private community, Law Firm Growth Guild, Your Shortcut to Marketing Mastery and More Clients at https://checkout.lawmarketingzone.com

Join our private community, Law Firm Growth Guild, Your Shortcut to Marketing Mastery and More Clients at
https://checkout.lawmarketingzone.com

Ready to level up your law firm marketing? Book a FREE Discovery Call with Marilyn Here: https://lawmarketingzone.com/bookacall

Leadership In Law Podcast with host, Marilyn Jenkins
Powered by Law Marketing Zone®
https://lawmarketingzone.com
A full-service Digital Marketing Agency helping clients increase Leads, Cases, and Profit by getting their digital marketing right.

Subscribe on your favorite Podcast listening platform!

Like, Share, and Review us!

#leadershipinlawpodcast #leadershipinlaw #lawmarketingzone #marilynjenkins



Speaker 1:

Welcome to the Leadership in Law podcast with host Marilyn Jenkins. Cut through the noise, get actionable insights and inspiring stories delivered straight to your ears your ultimate podcast for navigating the ever-changing world of law firm ownership. In each episode, we dive deep into the critical topics that matter most to you, from unlocking explosive growth to building a thriving team. We connect you with successful firm leaders and industry experts who share their proven strategies and hard-won wisdom. So, whether you're a seasoned leader or just starting your journey as a law firm owner, the Leadership in Law podcast is here to equip you with the knowledge and tools you need to build a successful and fulfilling legal practice.

Speaker 2:

Welcome to another episode of the Leadership in Law podcast. I'm your host, marilyn Jenkins. Please join me in welcoming my guest, hardeep Grover, to the show today. Hardeep is the Principal Attorney at CapEx Legal, where he acts as an on-demand Chief Legal Officer for business enterprises across industries from Main Street to middle market. Hardeep works with businesses throughout the corporate life cycle, including formations and structuring, commercial lease negotiations, trademark and copyright licensing, employment compliance and M&A transactions. He currently serves on the board of directors of the Washington Area Lawyers for the Arts and serves on several committees with the DC Bar. He's the past president of the South Asian Bar Association of Washington DC. He received his JD from George Washington University Law School and his executive MBA from the Quarantic School of Business and Technology. He lives in DC and actively practices in California, new York, dc, maryland and Virginia. I'm excited to have you here, hardik, welcome.

Speaker 3:

Thanks so much, Marilyn. I'm excited to be here too.

Speaker 2:

Fantastic. So let's get started. Tell us a little bit about how you got started, and then we're going to dive into some AI.

Speaker 3:

How I got started in practice. Yeah, oh yeah, sure, no problem. So after law school I just kind of packed up my bags and showed up in California and I worked there for a little while and I was working for a couple of wineries and had a great time. But those wineries went under eventually, just because they're a little bit smaller, and from there I ended up moving to New York. I did litigation and I just absolutely hated litigation. It's just not for me. Obviously we need litigators. It's just not what I'm meant for. So, recognizing that, I kind of crafted a practice around things I love and things I like doing the kind of businesses I like working with, and I started my practice around eight years ago and here we are today Great yeah.

Speaker 2:

I always love hearing how someone niched down or chose what they wanted to do, and it's always interesting to hear when you tried something, you hated it and went in another direction.

Speaker 3:

Yeah, I mean, when I started my practice what I noticed was there was just a lot of the legal market that was uncaptured. You know, the big firms cater to the IBMs and the Microsofts of the world, but there aren't that many law firms that cater directly to small and medium-sized businesses, and that just leaves a large portion of the American populace underserved. So I decided to focus on that subset of the American populace and those kinds of folks to work with, and initially, when I started, I had a lot of ties to the hospitality industry. So I started my practice as a food and beverage attorney and I expanded from there and I work with a variety of practice areas now, from medical and dental to art and entertainment, but really just anything and everything when it comes to business and nonprofit.

Speaker 2:

Very cool. So you help them get all the paperwork in order. I love that. You do everything from formation to M&A, so in to out. That's perfect. That's great. And you're using AI in your practice now. Yes, I am.

Speaker 3:

I use it every day. Frankly, it's been such a great resource for me. I'm a solo, and so I have to focus on efficiency, both as a solo and as someone that caters to small business. My clients can't really afford $100,000 legal bills, and they can't really afford me to take all the time to get into the leads, and so I have to find ways to be efficient so I can best serve them based on where they are and what their needs are, and AI has been a fantastic tool for me.

Speaker 2:

Excellent. So when you're talking about that, so you're making sure that you are efficient, you're keeping the billing down so that your clients can afford you and get the legal assistance that they need. So what areas are you using AI in to be more efficient in?

Speaker 3:

I use it in a variety of areas, to be honest, and there are some low lift areas where it's extremely efficient and other areas where it helps me be a better attorney. And I'll start with the first one. Let's think about proofreading, for example. If I draft a 70-page operating agreement and it takes me an hour to go through it just to look for typos, that's not really efficient for my client and it's going to take me an hour and I might still miss something, whereas if I put it through some kind of AI platform, it might find the typ titles in around four seconds and I can just go through, make those changes in about five minutes and I'm done and I've saved time for my client. I've created a high quality work product. I'm less likely to miss something because 70 pages humanized it. You know they start to glaze over a little while.

Speaker 3:

And with AI, that's not really a concern and it's just shocking how tough it is to catch it. And obviously you know the first 10, 20, 30 times I tried it, I double-checked it, but now I have enough confidence in the systems where, when I'm looking for typos, for example, I don't really need to worry about double-checking. And then, on the other side, sometimes I use it to actually learn and get better information on what's going on. Sometimes I have complicated tax issues happening and I can turn to it to look for code provisions and things where I'm not familiar, just to gain a better understanding and really just a part of diligence. And it's not something where you know it's the decision maker. It's really just a tool to provide me with more information so that I can be a better decision maker for my client.

Speaker 2:

Excellent. Yes, and that is the thing. Are you using Straight Out? I know you use different models, but did you build your own GPT that you can put your documents in and work through, or are you going to the base chat GPT, claude any of those and using those as a tool?

Speaker 3:

I use my own GPTs and I mean I would suggest anyone try it, at least If you have the premium version. There's no additional cost. It takes like three minutes to set up your own GPT and I think I've got something like eight or 10 different GPTs right now for different areas, different needs, and you could use it for literally anything. If you want a GPT for contract law or employment law, you can set up those GPTs. If you want a GPT for fashion, just to make sure you know what you're wearing is stylish these days, as we get older and older, that might be a concern you can set up a GPT for that, and you can. You know even what your preferences are and say, hey, you can set up a GPT for that, and you can you know even what your preferences are and say, hey, I'm looking at this item, tell me if this looks good. Or you know, if you're on Instagram it's basically an ad platform.

Speaker 3:

Now you can see a sale for Black Friday and say, hey, can you? You know, go look at this website, the current sale items. You know what my style is. Pick out a few things for me and for websites. With like 3000 items, I don't have the patience to go through that. I've got fatigue after the first page and so I can outsource that to chat GPT. Obviously, that's just an example of you know how far it goes, but this is across industries. But we're at the point where it's so effective for the legal industry that we just can't ignore it anymore.

Speaker 2:

I agree. I agree. I have a friend that's using it. He's an author and he's building a GBT to learn his author style and so that you know as he's doing papers or summaries. They are in his voice. So it's really interesting. We built one for immigration attorneys that has all the immigration law in it. You just ask questions and it just gives you all the details. They are easy to set up and extremely valuable when it comes to saving time. I do agree with that, and it's not perfect right.

Speaker 3:

Eventually it will probably get there. Eventually it varies in terms of timeline it might be three years, it might be 15 years, we don't know Right now. It's a good starting point and we can use that starting point to double check. If I ask you for code provisions, I have to go double check. That's part of my responsibility and diligence and I had a scenario a little while ago where I was looking for the American Medical Association's opinions on something and I asked it for citations and obviously I double checked those citations. I found they were incorrect. And what I found?

Speaker 3:

is a series of false positives here. Where I questioned the chat, GPT said, hey, I'm not finding this, Can you find something? Can you find me the correct version, or am I making some kind of mistake? And then it either doubled down on one opinion or it said, oh, you're correct, Let me find you the other one. But then those opinions didn't exist either. So it's certainly not infallible, but it at least gave me a starting point where I could then go straight to those resources and go through the AMA opinions and find that the issue I was looking for actually wasn't catered to in the opinions at all. And that's probably why I was getting the false positives, because of the way I structured it and that I was looking for something that didn't exist. But it's my job to double check and at the end of the day it still saved me time to go through that process with chat GPT and get those negative answers and use those to find that true answer that I need.

Speaker 2:

That's an amazing time savings as well, instead of not having to go through books. A lot of the things that we need to research may not necessarily be electronic, so it is very helpful when you're going through that. So what are the ethical and legal implications for using AI in the legal space?

Speaker 3:

Well, I think there's a lot of ethical implications on both sides. You know, on the first side is we have to be thoughtful about how we're using it. There have to be guardrails and, as I mentioned, it's not supposed to be the decision maker. It's supposed to supplement and double check and create efficiencies, but we can't rely on it as being the decision maker. That's our job and we haven't outsourced that just yet to AI and our clients might outsource that, but we can't be outsourcing that. We're the final decision makers and so we have the responsibility to make sure that whatever information we're using is appropriate. We have to double check it and we have to verify it and our names are on the line at the end of the day. But on top of that, we really have to be thoughtful about confidentiality, and I focus on confidentiality rather than privilege, because, from my understanding of the model rules, confidentiality is a lot bigger than privilege in terms of the restrictions and the thoughtfulness that we have to have. And so when we're approaching any kind of AI model, we have to make sure that all the information is confidential, and this comes in a couple flavors and forms of focus.

Speaker 3:

One is if you're using something like ChatGPT, the default settings. Have you set up to feed your information into the model for training purposes? That's a quick toggle button. You can just turn that off. You go into settings, click a couple buttons and it's no longer feeding the training mechanism, and so there's a little bit more security in the information that you're putting in. At the same time, I'm not going to put in any client information. If I'm putting in a contract to double check or proofread, I'm going to remove all the client names, and if there's anything identifiable, in a way I kind of treat it like healthcare treats, pii or PHI, where you want to make sure that that information is removed and anonymized before you put it in the model, even if you have tried to make it so that nothing is part of training, because we just don't know at the end of the day we have to do our best, but we don't know what might happen, even if the safeguards are in place. If there's some kind of hacking issue, we need to be thoughtful about that too. It might be beyond the settings and just focus on overall protection. And I think we also have to be thoughtful about communicating this with our clients and letting them know if we're using AI and making sure they're comfortable with it.

Speaker 3:

Some companies right now are I've heard at least are saying in a blanket sense they don't want any use of AI, but we're getting to the point where that might not be viable. You know Microsoft uses AI, google is of AI, but we're getting to the point where that might not be viable. You know Microsoft uses AI, google is using AI. Everything has AI built in at some level, and so we can't, as a blanket concept, remove AI. But if we're relying on AI for a lot of work and a lot of time savings, then it might be wise and important to disclose that to the client.

Speaker 3:

And on top of that, fees change right. A lot of us bill by the hour and when you are saving a lot of time. It took me five hours to draft a certain document and with AI now I'm able to do it in an hour and a half. I can't continue charging the client for five hours. I can switch my billing model and I can make it fixed fee and make sure I'm capturing that kind of money if I believe that that's going to create efficiency and competitive advantage for me, but I can't bill for time that I didn't spend anymore, and so we have to be thoughtful about all of these things when we're using AI in terms of protections and guardrails.

Speaker 3:

But on the counter point, I think we're starting to get to the point where it may be soon unethical to not be using AI practice. I'll give you an example. You know I'm pretty efficient with a keyboard at this point. I've grown up in front of a computer. But if I needed to write a 40-page contract and I told my client hey, I'm going to write this with pen, that's going to raise some flags, it's going to take me 30 times as long, and if I'm billing by the hour, well, is that really ethical? I'd say probably not. Right now and in the very near future, we may be hitting that same kind of transition point where we're not being ethical because we're taking too long doing something when there are much better and more efficient alternatives available.

Speaker 2:

That's more of a service to your clients, I agree, and so the ABA has an AI task force right now as well. You were telling me about that. What are they looking into? Are they just looking for red flags? Are they seeing the ethics involved? What is the task force working on, or do you not?

Speaker 3:

Well, I don't have too much deep knowledge, but I do know that they released a model opinion, I believe at the end of July, and that talked about the use of AI and thoughtfulness in AI, and they focused on very specific parts of the model rules 1.1, which is competence, 1.4, which is communications, 1.5, which is fees, and 1.6 in confidentiality. And I mean, we touched on all of these just now, I believe. But in model room 1.1, we have a duty of competence and for most jurisdictions, from my understanding, that now includes being aware of technological advances and utilizing them. That might include, on one side of things, making sure that sensitive emails are encrypted, and on the other side, we could say that includes the use of AI, because that is how you're competent, the communications you know.

Speaker 3:

Again, it might be wise to disclose to clients when you're using AI and how you're using AI, and in some cases it might make sense to give them the choice when it comes to things like document review for large-scale litigation, if you have to fill a room with 50 lawyers and that document review is going to cost you a million dollars, or if there is an AI model that might be close enough or possibly even better that cost you a hundred thousand dollars. Can you reasonably actually charge the million dollars without offering the $100,000 option to your client? I would say we might be at the point where you can't anymore. If you're aware, first of all you have a duty to be aware of these options and once you're aware of these options, I think you might have a reasonable duty to disclose these options to your client when it can have that meaningful effect on fees.

Speaker 2:

Yes, document analysis. That's a lot of things. From what I understand, attorneys are using it for is the analysis of documents and then going back through, and it does save a lot of time and you're finding that as well. So are you having it? Do you use it also to like analyze old contracts, or are you just starting over again with thinking of the small businesses that you come in and help?

Speaker 3:

Yeah, I mean, I use it in all kinds of ways. I'll be honest, I used I put old contracts in and it's not like one of those change the names things, but it's more like hey, you know, here's our scenario right now. Here's a contract. Give me a bullet list of things that you would suggest changing. And with something like that, it makes me more.

Speaker 3:

I guess the word I want to use is a curator. Right, I can dive deep into a document and I can structure everything from scratch. Or I can turn to ChatGPT and say here's what we're looking for and give me things that you think are important or things that I might've missed. And I have the experience where I can use that bullet list and say, no, this isn't necessary, I don't agree with this. But actually this is a really good point I hadn't considered and it may be valuable in this context for this reason, and I can then ask chat GPT to build out that provision for me, or I can build it myself if I want to be a little bit more thoughtful and diligent and just have it proofread and say do you see any ambiguity in this provision? Are there any typos in this provision?

Speaker 2:

Excellent, okay, great Now. So, thinking about that, how can lawyers ensure like accuracy so I know you said you know you're checking the citations but the accuracy and the reliability of these tools. What do you find that one is more accurate over the other? How does would an attorney ensure that what they're doing is accurate and reliable in the tool?

Speaker 3:

So I heard a simile recently. It might've been the president of the ABA, it might've been someone else, but the way I heard it described is that AI is like a really intelligent intern that is very eager to please you and sometimes lies to you in furtherance of that, and I've kind of taken that to heart right.

Speaker 3:

You know, if you have an intern, they may try really hard but they don't have the necessary capabilities and information experience to actually come out on an issue or resolve a problem or give you perfect information.

Speaker 3:

But they give you a really good starting point, and I think that should be the focus for now. We will probably get to the point in a few years where that intern is now as good as an associate or as good as a partner, but for now I think it's wise to treat it kind of like an intern that doesn't have all the information and wants to get you an answer but maybe doesn't understand where to look or how, and so at the end of the day, the accuracy is on us. Everything has to be double checked. When it comes to proofreading again, what I'm talking about is a document that I've maybe drafted 20 times and I'm asking it to go through and look for errors. Or I might ask it to do a first pass for errors and grammatical errors and punctuation errors and typos, and then I can go through and as I'm going through I can review everything else, but it just helps me ensure that I'm not missing something.

Speaker 2:

Okay, so you're using it as an assistant. I love the analogy of an intern that's over-eager. That makes a lot of sense there. Do you think AI can predict the outcomes of cases?

Speaker 3:

Well, there are tools for that. Lex Machina is one that seems to be getting a lot of traction and that is a tool for litigation trends and it's literally meant to predict the outcomes of cases, and I've never used it. I'm not a litigator, so I can't speak too much about it. If I go to the website, they've got testimonials from some pretty big firms out there and some pretty big companies. I've heard great things.

Speaker 3:

Because I don't have the litigation experience, I can't guarantee it's a great product or anything like that. But I'll say, conceptually I'm able to use AI for things like game theory. I'll set the stage, tell it you know it's a game theory expert and give it a scenario and I can say give me the probabilities of each potential outcome, the likelihood of each potential outcome, and then I can use that at baseline and say, okay, if I tweak it this way, what are the probabilities now? And you could use this for something like litigation, or you can use it for negotiation, or you could probably use it for your fantasy football draft if you wanted to, if that's your thing.

Speaker 2:

And I love it in the prompt and you probably said this in your GPTs in the prompts what a lot of people are using GPT don't realize it's designed to be an admin assistant. You have to tell it what to be. You know. So when you in your prompt, if you're looking to write sales copy, then you can choose someone you know as an expert copywriter, in the style of Dan Kennedy or something like that. So I love that you're. You're giving it a role and do you also, when you're doing these opinions, do you also include in your prompt? Ask me any clarifying questions. I do.

Speaker 3:

I do. But I think the framework that you build out, the prompt creation, that's everything, that's literally everything. It's kind of like Google, right? You don't just type the word book into Google and expect to get the best book you've ever read. In the same way, we have to approach chat GPT by creating a framework for its knowledge base, its expertise, otherwise it's just too broad. If we consider Google as the repository of all human information, chatgpt is a step beyond that. It's the repository of all information, with all reasoning capabilities necessary to interpret and utilize that information, and we can't just put in a basic one-liner asking it a question and expect it to spit out the response that is optimized for what we actually want. We need to tell it what its information source is, what its basis is, and give it some guidance on what we're expecting. And if we fail to do that, then we're not really treating the technology the way it should be treated and the way it needs to be treated, and we're not going to be happy with the outcomes we receive.

Speaker 2:

Yes, like I'm an old programmer, with this garbage in, garbage out, you've got to have good data to go in to get the good data out. Absolutely.

Speaker 3:

I love that. That's really the way to approach it.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, exactly. Are there any regulations or standards of using the AI in, or is that something the ABA is working on?

Speaker 3:

I believe the ABA is working on it. From, you know, I would think that each state bar has the ability to come out on this issue. But my guess would be, because the ABA has got a task force that is, you know, created with members of various bars across the country, that most states are probably waiting on the APA to come out with its opinions. And I mean, this is it's such a big issue and I think a lot of people say it's, you know, world changing and life changing, and for some folks that might be hyperbole. For me I don't think it is. I think this kind of helps us step into the next phase of the information age and so just coming up with premature regulations on, you know, hunches, that's probably not helpful At some level. We have to see how this stuff plays out before we can start regulating it.

Speaker 2:

Right, yeah, I do agree. I mean, it's so powerful in saving time and even like running through a white paper or something and say you know what's missing or you know, I love the implications of it can save a lot of time. I use it a lot and I applaud my team when they do. You know it. Just it's that sometimes you just get a writer's block when you're trying to put something out and it just helps you get around that. So, but never take the output as etched in stone. You always have to put an eye on it and edit it as you need to.

Speaker 3:

Yeah, agreed, I attended. There's like 20 years ago. I attended a talk, I think it was, with Justice Scalia and someone else that he wrote a book with, and one of the principles they gave again paraphrasing was write fast and edit ruthlessly, and I kind of took that to heart as a concept in writing and how I approach writing and I think here for like the first pass or the second pass, it's extremely helpful. You can have it try and write the first round in your voice, or you can write the first round and have it try to edit ruthlessly, edit for you as that first pass before you continue on. And the way I treat it is a conversation.

Speaker 3:

You know, if I want to write a blog, let's say I might draft the first part of the blog, tell it what I'm looking for, what I want, tell it to edit, and then it'll send me something back and I'm not going to be happy with that, just like an intern, and I'll go through that round and I'll edit it myself. Send it back, say this is more what I'm looking for, Can you edit again? I might have three or four rounds with it back and forth. At the end of the day, it's taking me substantially less time than if I were to try and write it and edit it over and over myself, and I've arguably a better work product.

Speaker 2:

Right, right. I absolutely agree, and so the thinking about going forward. I mean, we've talked about technology advancements in the past have always like replaced blue collar jobs, and with AI, you know people are like, oh my God, ai is going to take my job. I think we're going to see, or it's going to imply taking white collar jobs this time. So I think the change in technology is groundbreaking in what jobs it will replace. What is your feeling on?

Speaker 3:

that. So I guess I would split my answer into two parts. There's two sides of the squeeze here. I think you're right. You know that in the past couple hundred years, as technology advances, it's always been blue collar jobs that have been replaced, and there's a subset of white collar folks that cares and tries to fix it and there's probably a subset that doesn't, and that might be why we are where we are in the country right now. This is the first time where I feel like white-collar jobs are potentially going to be replaced, but I think that's an oversimplification to just say it like that, and that's why I want to separate the two sides of a squeeze here.

Speaker 3:

On the one side we have folks that are, let's say, lower market folks, folks that maybe were not going to hire the big firm or any firm. They now have resources to have contracts or file lawsuits on their own without the help of a lawyer, and so some potential jobs are being replaced. You know the lower level jobs that I guess. How do I step back? There are folks that were never going to find a lawyer and they now have resources, and there might be some folks that would have hired a lawyer but now have the resources to to approach it directly. On the other side of this, you know, potential squeeze is we have lawyers that are going to adopt AI and those that are not going to adopt AI or at least not adopt it fast enough. And in terms of competitive advantage, I think the competitive advantage for lawyers having AI is unreal If we're billing on an hourly basis.

Speaker 3:

If something took me 10 hours to bill and I can now do it in three, it now costs my client one third as much. They're going to come to me more. I'll have much more volume in my business. I won't have to worry about having a few bigger projects. What I now focus on is more volume, because I can now handle more volume. In the time it took me to handle one client's needs, I can now handle three clients' needs and I get the same income and I'm putting out the same time and work. But I'm able to save clients so much money that they're more likely to come back to me, more likely to recommend me. And that's just on a small scale example, but I think it rings true.

Speaker 3:

If I want to buy an electric bicycle and I've got someone that's given me a great product for $10,000 and someone that's given me an equally great product for $3,300. Why would I not go to the $3,300? Right, as long as it's equally good, and that's the main issue here. And if the $3,300 product is somehow better than the $10,000 product, there is no way I'm going to consider that $10,000 product. That product will eventually go defunct, and I think that is what, as lawyers, we need to be focused on here. If you're not going to adopt AI, that's when you risk being replaced by it. As long as you're adopting it, I think our jobs are fairly secure and I think the nature of our jobs might change. We might become more like those curators that I spoke about a moment ago, where the way we approach law changes, but as lawyers, we're still going to be necessary. It's really when we fail to adopt this new technology Just like if I fail to start using a laptop and relied on writing by pen, I would get outsourced and replaced pretty fast.

Speaker 2:

Right, exactly, I love the analogy there, I agree. So how can lawyers stay up to date on the advancement in AI technology and the potential impact on the practice?

Speaker 3:

I think we already have that responsibility and it's part of competence and that's part of diligence. You know, just like you know, do we have a responsibility to encrypt our emails or can we be using the free version of this or that? You know, probably not the latter. We probably have to focus on data security and just in the same ways that we have to be focused on data security whether it is through CLEs or hiring experts in the industry to come in and be our IT people and our data security people In either of those ways we're covered because we are either doing the work ourselves or we're hiring experts. In the same way, we need coverage here.

Speaker 3:

People need to stay abreast of what's going on. They need to be aware of what the tools are, the efficacy of those tools and how to use those tools. Now, they probably can't charge for learning how to use those tools, but they can charge for the use of those tools. If I play around on LexisNexis' new AI case research platform, if I'm playing around on that, I probably can't charge the client for that, but for the time I use on there actually doing the research and using their AI tools, I can definitely charge for that. So it's just being aware of how it is, and sometimes you lose a little bit of money, or lose a little bit of time, which in this case equals money learning about what options are available and becoming an expert in it, and that's okay. It's a small cost to actually become the expert.

Speaker 2:

It is a small cost. That learning curve will save you so much time in the future and I love the way you equate that that you can do three clients work in the time it would have taken you once. In the end, you're going to grow your practice because of referrals and repeat business, so a very interesting way of looking at it. I like that. I know my listeners are probably going to want to connect with you and learn more about what you're doing. What's the best place that people can connect with you?

Speaker 3:

They can go to my website, which is capexlegal C-A-P-E-Xlegal. I'm also starting a YouTube channel and a little bit of an Instagram presence and for Instagram it's capexlegal, just like the website, so I'll be available all around. If you search for CapEx Legal, there's another one in India. It's not that law firm, it's the United.

Speaker 2:

States law firm. So just look for that. Okay, great, this has been very interesting. I really appreciate your time today, and we'll make sure that your links are in the show notes so anyone who wants to reach out to you and check you out on Instagram or YouTube they can certainly do that, cool.

Speaker 3:

That sounds great. Yeah, this was so much fun, thank you.

Speaker 4:

Thank you so much.

Speaker 4:

Thanks for joining me today for this episode. As we wrap up, I'd love for you to do two things. First, subscribe to this podcast so you don't miss an episode, and if you find value here, I'd love it if you would rate it and review it. That really does make a difference in helping other people to discover this podcast. Second, you can connect with me on LinkedIn to keep up with what I'm currently learning and thinking about. And if you're ready to take the next step with a digital strategist to help you grow your law firm, I'd be honored to help you. Just go to lawmarketingzonecom to book a call with me. Stay tuned for our next episode next week. Until then, as always, thanks for listening to Leadership in Law podcast and be sure to subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts so you don't miss the next episode.

Speaker 1:

Thanks for joining us on another episode of the Leadership in Law podcast. Remember you're not alone on this journey. There's a whole community of law firm owners out there facing similar challenges and striving for the same success. Head over to our website at lawmarketingzonecom. From there, connect with other listeners, access valuable resources and stay up to date on the latest episodes. Don't forget to subscribe and leave us a review on your favorite podcast platform. Until next time, keep leading with vision and keep growing your firm.

People on this episode

Head Shot

Marilyn Jenkins

Host