As Benjamin Franklin once said, it takes many good deeds to build a good reputation and one bad one to lose it – as a few jewellers, airlines, car manufacturers, newspapers and banks have discovered in recent times. Law firms are, of course, just like any other business and face the same issue. As we all know, there is only so much disaster recovery and business continuity planning a firm can do, as events have a habit of circumventing even the best of them. Minimisation rather than elimination remains the only realistic goal. So, what can law firm leaders do to minimise reputational risk and the damage that can flow from a reputation impacting event?

It’s hard to miss the recent buzz surrounding artificial intelligence (AI), especially in legal tech, with many of the top 200 firms utilising the technology in some manner. But what about the smaller firms? Do they need AI? Can their infrastructure cope with AI? There are misconceptions that AI is only suitable for larger firms – firms with huge budgets and millions of documents – and therefore unsuitable for smaller firms. But many smaller firms could be missing out on the truly transformative benefits.

The chances are that you may not be entirely sure what a bot or a chatbot is. So, the news that, “starting today, DoNotPay is opening up so that anyone can create legal bots for free (with no technical knowledge)” may be a bit opaque. But bots have their devotees. The picture is of Nadia, an Australian bot being developed to give information on disability benefits with the voice of Cate Blanchett. The editor of Chatbots Magazine (OK, no neutral source) is pretty clear about their future. He writes articles with titles like ‘How bots will completely kill websites and mobile apps’. Joshua Browder, the creator of the DoNotPay parking ticket challenger, is behind what he hopes will be this major expansion of legal bots.

There has been a lot of talk about integration in the legal tech world for many years now, and lately it has become more of a buzzword for legal service suppliers when discussing a link between their services and the client’s existing software. The importance of integration is obvious, and when done well, the benefits are many and varied, but it has become clear that there is some confusion around what a proper integration looks like. In my years as a legal IT director and visiting clients in my current role, it has become clear that integration is a loose term that often means different things to different people.

Law firm managers are well versed in carrying out risk assessments to justify and make decisions around IT spend. However, from May next year, risk assessments become more complex when the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) comes into force. Previously, risk assessments focused on risk to the business, for example the financial and reputational impact of a potential security breach. Now, firms must assess risk to the rights and freedoms of their data subjects. This includes respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, freedom to conduct a business and the right to a fair trial. This crucial change means that your risk assessments are now likely to be incorrect and will need to be re-examined.