This Week In Legal Tech: Should Tech Training For Lawyers Be Mandatory?

Technology is as essential to law practice as are case law and legal briefs.

tech technology training happy computer programmers software developersI’ve just returned from a trip in which I presented a four-hour program on legal technology ethics to members of the Solo & Small Firm Section of the Florida Bar. Florida last year became the first state to mandate technology CLE for lawyers. My program was about tech ethics, not tech training, but it left me wondering whether other states should follow Florida’s lead in requiring technology training.

Given my background as a technology writer, you might think I would immediately and wholeheartedly endorse mandatory tech training. My reservation, however, is that I am unconvinced that we need mandatory CLE of any kind. Massachusetts, where I practice, does not mandate CLE. Yet lawyers pursue it nonetheless, out of an interest in improving their skills and knowledge, not just to fulfill a rote requirement.

Whether they are required to or not, good lawyers will maintain their skills and competence, I believe. Meanwhile, bad lawyers will not be made into good lawyers by forcing them to sit through a lecture they don’t want to hear.

But technology presents a unique concern. The fact is, many lawyers are downright afraid of technology. They steer clear of it because they do not know how or where to begin with it.

At the outset of my Florida Bar program, I asked for a show of hands from those who considered themselves total Luddites. A few lawyers raised their hands, most of them appearing to be on the north side of 60. I then asked about other levels of technology skills, ending with technology expert. Only one lawyer raised his hand for that.

In fact, the truth about these lawyers’ technology skills was more nuanced. One lawyer, a member of the bar for 45 years, professed almost total ignorance about technology, but then, in an offline conversation, regaled me with stories of his advanced Photoshop skills. Meanwhile, the self-professed technology expert, during a break about midway through my presentation, said to me that maybe his tech skills were not as advanced as he’d thought.

A majority of states now explicitly mandate technology competence in their rules of professional conduct. Even among states that have yet to mandate tech competence by rule, several have recognized through court or ethics opinions that lawyers have a duty to understand technology.

Sponsored

Florida is the only state to have gone even farther and mandated technology CLE. Last year, in an order that also adopted the duty of technology competence, the Supreme Court of Florida revised its minimum CLE requirements to add three hours every three years in approved technology programs. The revision came at the urging of The Florida Bar. While the Supreme Court did not explain its reasoning for adopting the tech CLE requirement, it described the bar’s proposal as “straightforward.”

“Straightforward” might be a judicious way of saying “no brainer.” Technology is as essential to law practice as are case law and legal briefs. A lawyer cannot competently perform legal work or represent clients without at least a basic understanding of common technologies. If lawyers are to receive ongoing training in minimum standards of practice, then it is a no brainer that such training must include technology.

Forty-five states mandate CLE. If those states are going to mandate CLE, then they should follow Florida’s lead and include within that mandate technology training. Too many lawyers are too fearful of technology to do this on their own. Basic training in tech will help these lawyers get over their fears and acquire at least a minimal level of technology competence.

For those states that do not mandate CLE, I am not going to suggest that they mandate technology training. But I do suggest that they develop entry-level technology training programs and make those programs easily and readily accessible to all members of their bars. Furthermore, they should consider adopting incentives to spur lawyers to take tech training.

In 2012, the ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 concluded:

Sponsored

Technology has irrevocably changed and continues to alter the practice of law in fundamental ways. Legal work can be, and is, more easily disaggregated; business development can be done with new tools; and new processes facilitate legal work and communication with clients. Lawyers must understand technology in order to provide clients with the competent and cost-effective services that they expect and deserve.

Consider that first sentence. Technology has irrevocably changed law practice in fundamental ways. No one can argue with the truth of that. Yet, five years later, far too many lawyers have failed to keep pace. It is time for every state – mandatory CLE jurisdiction or not – to make technology training for every lawyer an expectation, if not a requirement.


Robert Ambrogi Bob AmbrogiRobert Ambrogi is a Massachusetts lawyer and journalist who has been covering legal technology and the web for more than 20 years, primarily through his blog LawSites.com. Former editor-in-chief of several legal newspapers, he is a fellow of the College of Law Practice Management and an inaugural Fastcase 50 honoree. He can be reached by email at ambrogi@gmail.com, and you can follow him on Twitter (@BobAmbrogi).

CRM Banner