No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
DESIGNING FOR LEGAL PRACTITIONERS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM LEGAL TECH DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 June 2023
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Recently, the design and digitalisation approaches have become increasingly utilised in the legal context, typically under the names of legal design and legal tech. One of their goals is to help legal practitioners be more efficient and to provide better quality and more comprehensive legal services. Also, given that both movements rely heavily on participatory and co-design, they will require increased support not only from design practitioners but also from design researchers and educators. Therefore, this paper investigates, from a design research viewpoint, the opportunities and challenges of developing and implementing legal tech, with a particular focus on legal practitioners. It reports on four cases of designing legal tech solutions and their implementation in a law firm. The main insights are related to the importance of value perception through participatory and co-design, the need for efficient and effective testing methodologies, and the opportunity to test a wide range of design methods and tools in the legal context. The paper also complements the legal design and legal tech literature with additional arguments on why designing in the legal context is challenging compared to designing in other domains.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.- Copyright
- The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Barton, T.D., Haapio, H., Passera, S. and Hazard, J.G. (2019), “Successful Contracts: Integrating Design and Technology”, pp. 63–91, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6086-2_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batenburg, R., Helms, R.W. and Versendaal, J. (2006), “PLM roadmap: stepwise PLM implementation based on the concepts of maturity and alignment”, International Journal of Product Lifecycle Management, Vol. 1 No. 4, p. 333, https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJPLM.2006.011053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bues, M.-M. and Matthaei, E. (2017), “LegalTech on the Rise: Technology Changes Legal Work Behaviours, But Does Not Replace Its Profession”, pp. 89–109, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45868-7_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantamessa, M., Montagna, F., Altavilla, S. and Casagrande-Seretti, A. (2020), “Data-driven design: the new challenges of digitalization on product design and development”, Design Science, Vol. 6, p. e27, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2020.25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corrales Compagnucci, M., Forgó, N., Kono, T., Teramoto, S. and Vermeulen, E.P.M. (Eds.). (2020), Legal Tech and the New Sharing Economy, Springer Singapore, Singapore, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1350-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corrales, M., Fenwick, M. and Haapio, H. (2019), “Digital Technologies, Legal Design and the Future of the Legal Profession”, pp. 1–15, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6086-2_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabaghi, K. (2022), “Beyond design thinking and into speculative futures in legal design”, https://dx.doi.org/10.21606/drs.2022.307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donetto, S., Pierri, P., Tsianakas, V. and Robert, G. (2015), “Experience-based Co-design and Healthcare Improvement: Realizing Participatory Design in the Public Sector”, The Design Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 227–248, https://dx.doi.org/10.2752/175630615X14212498964312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fioravanti, C. and Romano, F. (2021), “Legal Design project activities in the immigration domain”, in Ducato, R. and Strowel, A. (Eds.), Legal Design Perspectives: Theoretical and Practical Insights from the Field, 1st ed., Ledizioni, pp. 227–249.Google Scholar
le Gall, A. (2021), “Legal Design beyond Design Thinking: processes and effects of the four spaces of design practices for the legal field”, in Ducato, R. and Strowel, A. (Eds.), Legal Design Perspectives: Theoretical and Practical Insights from the Field, 1st ed., Ledizioni, pp. 27–70.Google Scholar
Hagan, M. (2020), “Legal Design as a Thing: A Theory of Change and a Set of Methods to Craft a Human-Centered Legal System”, Design Issues, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 3–15, https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/desi_a_00600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagan, M. and özenç, F.K. (2020a), “Guest Editor's Introduction”, Design Issues, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 2–2, https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/desi_e_00599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagan, M. and özenç, F.K. (2020b), “A Design Space for Legal and Systems Capability: Interfaces for Self-Help in Complex Systems”, Design Issues, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 61–81, https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/desi_a_00604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helo, P., Anussornnitisarn, P. and Phusavat, K. (2008), “Expectation and reality in ERP implementation: consultant and solution provider perspective”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 108 No. 8, pp. 1045–1059, https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02635570810904604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, D., Kim, M. and Sievert, J.R. (2020), “The Rapid Embrace of Legal Design and the Use of Co-Design to Avoid Enshrining Systemic Bias”, Design Issues, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 16–30, https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/desi_a_00601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, K., Schindler, D. and Strathausen, R. (Eds.). (2020), Liquid Legal, Springer International Publishing, Cham, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48266-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ji, X. (2019), Where Design and Law Meet - An Empirical Study for Understanding Legal Design and Its Implication for Research and Practice, Master Thesis, Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture.Google Scholar
Kim, Y., Lee, Z. and Gosain, S. (2005), “Impediments to successful ERP implementation process”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 158–170, https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14637150510591156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohlmeier, A. and Santuber, J. (2020), “Is the Common Legal Platform a Wicked Problem?”, pp. 125–155, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48266-4_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koomen, B., Hoogeboom, M. and Schellens, V. (2019), “PLM Implementation Success Rate in SME. An Empirical Study of Implementation Projects, Preliminary Findings”, pp. 47–57, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42250-9_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kronblad, C. and Pregmark, J.E. (2019), “Beyond Digital Inventions—Diffusion of Technology and Organizational Capabilities to Change”, pp. 123–146, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6086-2_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laursen, L.N. and Haase, L.M. (2019), “The Shortcomings of Design Thinking when Compared to Designerly Thinking”, The Design Journal, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 813–832, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2019.1652531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, J.M., McGann, M. and Blomkamp, E. (2020), “When design meets power: design thinking, public sector innovation and the politics of policymaking”, Policy & Politics, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 111–130, https://dx.doi.org/10.1332/030557319X15579230420081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markfort, R. and Zamorski, P. (2020), “AI + EI = Future”, pp. 293–310, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48266-4_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, R. and Allbon, E. (2021), “Is law really that special?”, Legal Design Perspectives: Theoretical and Practical Insights from the Field, 1st ed., Ledizioni, pp. 139–158.Google Scholar
Pereira Pessôa, M.V. and Jauregui Becker, J.M. (2020), “Smart design engineering: a literature review of the impact of the 4th industrial revolution on product design and development”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 175–195, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-020-00330-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, G. (2020), “Airlines, Mayonnaise, and Justice: Reflections on the Theory and Practice of Legal Design and Technology”, Design Issues, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 31–44, https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/desi_a_00602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossi, A. and Palmirani, M. (2020), “Can Visual Design Provide Legal Transparency? The Challenges for Successful Implementation of Icons for Data Protection”, Design Issues, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 82–96, https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/desi_a_00605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmer, I. (2019), “Contract Automation: Experiences from Dutch Legal Practice”, pp. 147–171, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6086-2_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolvanen, H. and Toivonen, N. (2021), “Episode 32: Demystifying Legal Tech with Colin Levy”, Legal Design Podcast, 1 December.Google Scholar
Wasserbaur, R., Sakao, T. and Milios, L. (2022), “Interactions of governmental policies and business models for a circular economy: A systematic literature review”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 337, p. 130329, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zalewski, T. (2021), “Basic Principles for the Effective Use of Legal Tech Tools”, Legal Tech, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, pp. 315–332, https://dx.doi.org/10.5771/9783748922834-315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access
Open access