Rise of the machines
No, I am not about to write a blog post about the next Terminator movie, although for your information the next in the franchise is due to be released in May 2017. Instead, the title to this post refers to the book by Richard and Daniel Susskind, ‘The Future of the Professions’ which predicts that technology will see an end to the professions as we know it. The authors maintain that much of the professional work which is currently being done by lawyers, accountants, doctors and other professionals can be computerised and that any suggestion to the contrary is either intellectual snobbery about the inherent difficulty of the work performed by such professionals or a lack of foresight.
In his Guardian article, Daniel Susskind cites the success of eBay’s online dispute resolution and a robotic pharmacist at the University of California in San Francisco as examples of the brave new world he envisages. Artificial Intelligence and its emerging role in society was also discussed at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, which led to gleeful reporting on the impending extinction of the professions (okay perhaps “gleeful” is an exaggeration, but this is clearly a sensitive topic for me).
I’m certainly not a Luddite and I acknowledge that technology can and should play an important role in how we in the legal profession provide a better service to our clients. I agree that, where possible and suitable, we should seek to automate as much of our work as possible in order to reduce costs. However, I feel that there is a key consideration missing in all the discussion surrounding Artificial Intelligence taking the place of certain professions, which is our humanity. We are hardwired to want to interact with other humans and we can find the constraints of automated systems, particularly in times of stress, excruciating (telephone call centres anyone?). No matter how intuitive Siri is on my iPhone, it is still incapable of pronouncing my name correctly. If my legal adviser, during the course of particularly stressful litigation (regarding probate matters or a divorce, for instance) were unable to pronounce my name, I know I would find this beyond frustrating.
We are social creatures designed for interacting with other humans. As an employment lawyer I do not just provide advice; I am a sounding board, a confidante and most importantly a moral support. Acting in the best interests of my client is not just about the law. Psychology plays an important part in employment law and I often have to take into account considerations that have little to do with the legal merits of a position, such as commercial factors, embarrassment value and the feelings both of my clients and their opponents.
As reported in the Law Society Gazette, a number of law firms are apparently looking into increasing their use of Artificial Intelligence, to create automated processes which will improve efficiency and bring down costs. Both are commendable aims however we must remember that automated is not always good. For instance, I personally prefer interacting with a human being in supermarkets to using an automated till that keeps telling me to remove items from the bagging area!
In my humble opinion, Artificial Intelligence should be used where appropriate to enhance the client experience but is unlikely ever to replace the professional. I base this on the relief we all feel when we are finally put through to a person after putting up with a series of recorded messages. Further, and perhaps this is due to my being a product of the 80s, I am deeply troubled by what I consider our over-reliance on machines and wonder why we seem so keen to create the apocalyptic future prophesised in movies such as Terminator and the Matrix. As Hollywood has warned us all along – no good can come from the rise of the machines!