Although most law firms accede to the fact that legal outsourcing, especially to India is now a reality, different lawyers have different opinions about it.
Here are some opinions.
Rob Hyndman, technology business lawyer, Toronto, Ontario, Canada: …And at least among lawyers, it’s a pretty notorious fact that in the big firms the work performed by juniors is (too) often completely unsupervised and not adequately reviewed for quality. The firms treat it as ’sink-or-swim’ training, and for that purpose it’s ultimately quite effective. But as to quality control, it’s often effectively outsourced blindly. My suspicion is that work outsourced to India is, at least in that regard, often of superior quality. And I see no difference between outsourcing to a junior, for review by the lead lawyer, and outsourcing to India, for the same review.
Jerome Shestack, former president American Bar Association, head of litigation Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen. “I think a lawyer has a responsibility over his work and he just can-t delegate it…The problem with outsourcing is, how do you keep control over it? How do you see how it’s being done?” …
“Yes, I do have concern about confidence, confidentiality, privacy, conflict of interest, ethical values, and those are issues are a real concern.”
Larry Newman, specialist in corporate transactions: “They have been instrumental in getting favorable results even in complex cases.”
Prism Legal’s Ron Friedmann, member NYC Large Law Firm KM Group: I’ve talked to lawyers who-d like to explore offshoring document review and to CIOs who want to investigate outsourcing help desks. So in my experience, outsourcing is not hype but serious consideration of this option, however, does not guarantee rapid growth. ”