Source: Bruce MacEwen & Janet Stanton of Adam Smith Esq.
For over half a century, the billable hour has been the dominant pricing structure in legal services, despite mounting criticism. Key objections have centred around its misalignment with client interests, arbitrary rate-setting, and lack of correlation between time spent and value delivered. Clients often desire efficient and cost-effective services, while the billable hour incentivises law firms to prolong work for increased fees. The introduction of Generative AI (GenAI) in legal services could bring much-needed disruption to this model, pushing the industry toward more flexible, value-based pricing models.
Generative AI, with its potential to automate tasks like document review, research, and drafting, promises to drastically reduce the number of hours needed for many legal processes. Traditional tasks that would take junior lawyers significant time can now be handled by AI in a fraction of the time and with comparable or superior quality. Under the billable hour model, this would result in law firms absorbing the loss, while clients capture the efficiency gains. This imbalance highlights the unsustainability of the billable hour in an AI-enhanced legal environment, where fewer human hours are required to produce high-quality legal outcomes.
The shift to a value-based pricing model, rooted in marginal utility theory, could finally signal the end of the billable hour. This theory, which prices services based on their value to the client rather than the labour involved, could better reflect the efficiencies AI brings. However, for such a transition to occur, both law firms and clients would need to embrace a radically different approach to pricing—one that aligns more closely with the value delivered rather than time invested.
Read more: Adam Smith Esq.
