Posted on

Sandra Monroy

I have over 20 years of legal experience, most of it in-house. I started my professional career working as a legal advisor in the notary service. In 2005, I became general counsel for Telebucaramanga, a subsidiary of the telecommunications company Telefónica. Following this, I spent a year practicing litigation in private practice as a senior associate at Baker McKenzie. In 2008, I moved in-house once again as the manager of Latin American corporate legal affairs for the Colombian oil and gas company Terpel (formerly known as Organización Terpel). During the past ten years, I spent two years at TV Azteca as their legal manager, and four years as a legal and compliance director at CenturyLink in charge of the Northern and Andean regions of Latin America. One of the highlights from my time at CenturyLink was working on a team for the deployment of the first submarine cable connecting Colombia with the Pacific Ocean. I then spent a year at Claro Colombia as director of institutional relations and social responsibility, where one of my biggest achievements came in the form of successfully negotiating roaming agreements for the deployment of 4G networks with Avantel, Telefónica and TIGO.

I am now the legal director for the Andean Region for Uber, and for Panama and the Caribbean for Uber Eats. The recruitment team at Uber contacted me in 2018 and I made the decision to move to Uber because I see its importance as one of the most disruptive companies in the world. Through the use of technology it has a huge impact on the communities in which it operates globally. At Uber I am responsible for litigation, commercial and corporate matters, regulatory issues, competition law, and consumer protection rights. I would never include the word ‘typical’ to describe a working day here. My role requires a constant balance between legal strategy and meeting the business’s goals, and minimising risk for Uber while providing the best legal advice. Every day here is full of challenges, so I have to think outside of the box a lot of the time. I have faced a number of compliance challenges, but my team and I work with the board of directors to manage these crises. The experience I have gained has prepared me to handle such challenges successfully, and I have learned how to make a 360-degree evaluation of complex situations in order to come up with ways to solve them.

One challenge modern companies such as Uber face head-on relates to diversity and inclusion. We are committed to providing a safe and healthy environment for everyone, which includes having policies in place to prevent any form of discrimination or harassment. Uber values the unique contributions of individuals with varying backgrounds and believes that diversity contributes to the success of its business. At Uber, all employees are given the opportunity to develop within diverse employee resource groups (ERGs) such as ‘Pride at Uber’, ‘Able at Uber’, ‘Parents at Uber’, ‘Interfaith at Uber’ and ‘Women of Uber’, among others. These groups promote the diverse nature of Uber’s workforce and improve work behaviours and attitudes every day. ‘Women of Uber’ is an internal group that seeks to find new opportunities, support, and sponsorship for women to ensure all women can speak openly and connect with external networks. It enables them be ‘a voice for women empowerment to change the culture from the inside out’.

“I am strongly committed to empowering the women on my legal team to take risks, to lead and to participate.”

Personally, I promote diversity and inclusion – particularly as it relates to women – by encouraging the women I work with to speak up, to value their own work, and to be confident in bringing their unique knowledge and opinions to the table. I am strongly committed to empowering the women on my legal team to take risks, to lead, to participate in external workshops, and to build their own self-brand. The #MeToo movement created awareness of a difficult reality many people were (and still are) facing in workplace environments. At the beginning of my career, I experienced harassment myself and can assure you that it is not only scary, but it also makes you feel very lonely. What truly amazes me about the #MeToo movement is the way in which it has encouraged women to speak up and support each other. It has certainly proved that ‘unity is a strength’ is more than just four words. The movement has definitely had a major impact on culture and determined a new era in which we women are no longer scared or threatened to speak up for ourselves in unfair situations.

Even though I believe quotas have played a part in creating gender equal workplaces, nowadays we can achieve this in other ways such as by using fair selection processes with clear terms, giving the same opportunities to men and women, and by ensuring we have selection processes that include similar numbers of male and female candidates – as well as male and female interviewers – in order to guarantee inclusive processes that result in fairly elected professionals.

There is an increased understanding of the importance of including women in higher positions and a greater appreciation of women in the professional field. We now see women as high-level partners at top law firms and developing successful careers in leading companies such as Uber. One of the perks in this digital era is having the ability to be connected, and this has an impact on diversity and inclusion. It makes it easier for companies such as Uber to have a global policy on diversity and inclusion that applies worldwide, allowing diversity initiatives to take place without limitations or the excuse of geographical differences.

Posted on

Brenda Puig and Carmen Roman

GC: Please tell us a little about your pathway into law. What made you move from private practice to in-house roles?

Brenda Puig (BP): I spent my first years as a lawyer in a law firm. It was a large and prestigious law firm in Buenos Aires. I worked long hours and I really loved my job. After some years working for this law firm, I got married and became a mother, and balancing my career with my personal life became a challenge. At that time, at least in Argentina, there was not much debate about these issues. Even though both the law firm and I made great efforts to make it work – I actually became the first part-time attorney – after my second son I felt the need to make a change.

I joined Walmart 14 years ago. I found in the corporate world – and especially Walmart – a much more favourable environment for my personal needs. I also found a completely new way of being a lawyer. The in-house world is so different from private practice, and I just love it. I have been very lucky to experience both sides of the profession, and have learnt a lot from both. I believe this combination has made me a better lawyer.

Carmen Roman (CR): Although I started my professional career in a law firm, what made me move to an in-house role was the opportunity to know about the corporate world, to understand its dynamics, its strategic role, its contribution to different stakeholders, and at the same time interact with different professionals in the same ecosystem. I feel that in the in-house role I have been able to maximise my abilities, improve my strategic thinking, and achieve a work-life balance.

GC: What do you believe are the biggest barriers to women progressing in the legal industry? Are the challenges similar across private practice and in-house, or have you seen differences?

BP: There are many different barriers, which I believe are common to so many other professions, not just the legal profession. Work-life balance is an issue for many women, and even more challenging for mothers of young children. Lack of adequate networking opportunities and visibility is another factor; men tend to have better opportunities for this. The fact that there is a much higher percentage of men in leadership positions plays a role as well – there are fewer women role models for emerging talent. In my personal experience, even though law firms have evolved over the past years, I would say that on average the in-house world is more advanced in designing strategies for solving the gap than law firms.

CR: Yes, I agree. Although we have seen some progress in law firms, I believe that there is more flexibility and career development in the in-house world. There are still large barriers for women in private practice. Even though we see the number of women lawyers growing in private practice, they don’t have equal access to senior positions. The working environment and the long office hours in most law firms are still more suitable to male lawyers compared to their female counterparts. The lack of work-life balance is one of the major obstacles that female (and male) lawyers face. A majority of law firms are reticent to innovate or change with the times, meaning in general that the legal profession lags behind other industries in terms of senior women reaching the top. Law firms should adopt different, realistic working options for parents and actively remote working or a flexible-hours system.

GC: What challenges have you specifically faced in your career, and how did you overcome them?

BP: I have faced many challenges over the years! If I were to find a common ingredient in how I overcame them, I would say that attitude is the key. Whatever challenge you face, having a positive mindset and self-confidence is essential. Believe in yourself and try to find what you can learn from each situation. Also, team-work. No single person on this planet knows everything: we need to rely on our teams, peers, partners, mentors, family and friends. Working collaboratively is a great virtuous circle – help whenever you can, and you will be helped whenever you need.

“Whatever challenge you face, having a positive mindset and self-confidence is essential.”

CR: I am the opposite in that I have never experienced an obstacle that was solely the result of being a woman. I have often been the only woman in the room and almost always the only woman at executive level, but I have never viewed that as an obstacle, because of my attitude. I think the biggest challenge in my career is maintaining a good work-life balance. Progressing in your career while having time for family, friends and hobbies is a constant struggle.

I have always expressed to my different bosses how important family is to me. I request certain benefits as non-tradable. For example, to be able to do school pick-up and drop-off with my children once or twice a week. I make sure this never interferes with my results, and it also has the effect of making my commitment to the company stronger.

GC: Walmart has a strong commitment to empowering women (working with women-owned businesses in its supply chain; the establishment of the Women’s Economic Empowerment Forum). What success have you seen with these initiatives? What metrics are used to measure their success?

BP: We are very much focused on developing our female talent internally and supporting women externally. We truly believe in the power of diversity and inclusion and we put a lot of work and effort into this. We have consistently been working on initiatives for the past ten years. The Global Women Leadership Council was first appointed in 2008 at our US-based headquarters and is an advisory council formed by female business leaders, reporting to our global CEO. This was replicated in each market and we work both locally and globally. I have been part of this council since it was first formed in Argentina in 2009, and I currently serve as its chair. The council is not only focused on the legal department but on the whole company. We have several lines of work and KPIs. I believe that seeing more women in leadership positions as well as in our talent base is the best indicator.

We do awareness activities with men and women: specific training targeted to specific needs of specific groups; mentoring; policies that assure equal representation in recruiting and development; and policies for enabling work-life balance. And we also have an active voice externally. We believe that being such a large company comes with a responsibility because we can inspire change in other companies. We share our best practices and encourage others to have the courage to give it a try. Companies must play their role in improving the work environment and therefore our society.

Our initiatives are both global and local. We have a global framework and there is a lot of market freedom within that framework. We do have company-wide goals and objectives, but challenges around how to tackle those goals and objectives might vary from market to market – the fact is that cultures and realities are different across the region. Each market needs to find the solutions that best fit their specific needs in order to make it locally relevant. And each market can also benefit from benchmarking with other Walmart markets. We like to call it ‘powered by Walmart’.

CR: Yes, that’s right. At Walmart, we know that our people and culture help to make Walmart successful and that different perspectives lead to innovative solutions for our business. Developing inclusive leaders is the key to building a diverse and inclusive workforce. To develop inclusive leadership at Walmart, the executive team has inclusive leadership expectations as part of their annual performance evaluation, and this means (i) participate in at least one approved inclusive leadership education offering such as unconscious bias training, LGBTQ+ training, or sexual harassment awareness training, among others, and (ii) actively mentor two associates, host a mentoring circle, or participate as a mentor in a programme such as our Lean In Mentoring Circles.

In terms of gender, we are focused in developing female talent under the Global Women Leadership Council that Brenda mentioned. We also have a local Diversity and Inclusion Council in Chile; I’ve been a member since 2009 and I’m also currently its president. We are constantly measuring the female participation at leadership level and the programme effectiveness. In addition, I was also part of the International Diversity and Inclusion Council for two years.

Our recent statistics show that 57% of our 51,000 employees are women and 25% of our frontline positions are held by them. At Walmart, we believe that men and women should have the same opportunities, and we ensure internal wage equity with a compensation policy that does not discriminate with respect to gender. We have a range of programmes that promote the development of female leadership within the company:

  • Empowering: Development acceleration programme for women executives with high potential, helping them prepare for the challenges of executive positions in the company.
  • Women in Retail: Development of leaders for the retail of the future through training, networking, and empowerment.
  • Wired Chile: Development, empowerment, and promotion of female talent at Walmart Chile Real Estate through mentoring, conversation sessions, and workshops.
  • More Digital Women: Courses on web development and digital marketing, to contribute to women’s development and empowerment through digital training and employability.

We also have several support programmes for women outside Walmart, because our ethos is about making improvements not just for the women who work for us, but for the communities we serve as well. Some of those programmes include:

  • Women for Chile, developed with the support of ONG ‘Mujeres Empresarias’ (Women Entrepreneurs). Women for Chile seeks to strengthen women-led enterprises through personalised training, boards, and mentoring, with the possibility that some of the selected enterprises will become Walmart Chile suppliers.
  • Solidarity Spaces for women entrepreneurs. These are spaces located in our Leader and Leader Express locations throughout the country. This initiative is developed in partnership with the Ministry of Women and Gender Equity. The women entrepreneurs are given the opportunity to sell and publicise their products in different parts of the country.

GC: Do you think the growth of international companies expanding into Latin America is having a positive effect on LatAm domiciled companies and their D&I initiatives?

BP: Yes, absolutely. We live in a global world today – everybody and everything is connected. Local markets benefit from the influence of international companies that bring best practices. And, likewise, global companies benefit from the local wisdom and practices that can be taken to other geographies. That is the beauty of this synergy.

CR: Definitely. Multinational companies have had more time to develop their best practices, and that is having a positive influence on local markets. In addition, because they are willing to share these good practices with other companies, we are starting to see major cultural changes at the country level.

GC: In what ways do you work with your panel firms to improve representation of women in the legal industry?

BP: This is, again, just using our influence. We look favourably on firms that foster diversity and inclusion, and we give them priority. There are more structured ways and there are other informal ways, such as mentoring other women working for law firms.

CR: We also have ‘Walmart’s Outside Counsel Guidelines’, which establish the expectations the company has of its outside counsel. We expect law firms to stress excellence, integrity, and provide value in resolving legal problems, while also honouring the company’s culture and principles. One of those expectations is to demonstrate commitment to diversity, respect flexible work schedules, promote work-life balance, and to have women as senior partners. We take time to talk about it, and recognise the law firms that advance this cause. Ultimately, we give preference to law firms that foster diversity and inclusion.

GC: You have both been commended for being active promoters of female empowerment and leadership in the workplace. Can you give any specific examples where you have helped other women to reach their full potential and progress in their careers?

BP: I believe that the first thing is to walk the talk. When you reach a leadership position, you need to be aware that people are looking at you. In a large organisation, the few women who reach those positions must be good role models. It is not enough to talk about work-life balance or to talk about supporting and empowering women; you need to live it every day and actively show it. If any young talented woman with the ambition of growing within the organisation looks up and sees that the few women who made it have a miserable life, they will not feel inspired to get there. And, of course, mentoring and sharing one’s experiences is very powerful.

CR: I am counsellor of the Chilean NGO Comunidad Mujer (Women’s Community), and for 12 years, I have been mentor of professional women who seek support and guidance in their career development. This activity has given me much satisfaction, and is also something from which I have benefitted greatly.

“If any talented woman with the ambition of growing within the organisation looks up and sees that the few women who made it have a miserable life, they will not feel inspired to get there.”

Ten years ago, I was the first woman to become part of Walmart Chile’s executive team. I believed I opened the door to other female executives. Today we are four women from ten executives.

I have also supported the career development and promotion of a female lawyer from my Chilean team who is now general counsel in Costa Rica and Central America. I’m so proud of her growth.

GC: How do you go about building a diverse team and leading by example?

BP: Of course, recruiting is key, but also important is the way we form teams for specific projects, the way we manage our team members’ requests, the way we act in every day decisions. For example, a team member who has a sick child will feel more confident in being absent if they see there is an understanding environment for family needs. And the way this is shown is by actions, not words: they need to see that such absence is accepted, that their supervisor shows interest in the child’s health, and that the supervisor also takes leave for family if needed.

“Building a diverse team and leading by example has to be something we constantly have in our minds.”

CR: I consciously aim to recruit different types of talent. I listen, and try to get to know the strengths and weaknesses of each of the team members by having deep one-on-one conversations with them, identifying their biases, and helping to mitigate discriminations.

I am a promoter of career development for men and women, and I’m particularly vocal in promoting both maternal and paternal responsibilities: for example, I always encourage my male lawyers to take on childcare responsibilities during the week (e.g. dropping children to school, or picking them up, etc).

In 2014, we launched a special diversity and inclusion programme, developed with the support of Walmart Legal International, where we assisted law school students (selected by gender, ethnic background, and socioeconomic vulnerability) during their third year. We helped them obtain tools useful for their future professional activities such as English language, mentoring (provided by us or our external law firm partners), and advance networking. This has been a very successful programme.

GC: There is quite a divide between those who believe in quotas to address gender imbalance in the workplace, and those who don’t. Do you have any specific thoughts on that?

BP: I am personally not a fan of quotas, and think they may be very harmful. If you force somebody who is not ready into a leadership position, the probability of failure is high. That failure will not only damage that person and may damage their career, but it also sends the wrong message to the organisation. It can be seen as a counter-example and even limit future promotions. What we need to foster is more talented women in leadership positions, although of course this is not just about gender – it is about talent, and generating the conditions for both talented men and women to reach their full potential. Having said that, sometimes an organisation might need to force things a bit to make the wheel start moving. If that is the case, it has to be done very carefully. In my organisation we do not have quotas, but we have mechanisms in place that seek to ensure that opportunities are equal. Let’s say there is leadership training with open positions for a limited amount of people and that a certain business area only presents male candidates; we would challenge that leader to re-visit the list, to look harder and see if there are any women in whom they see potential and wish to invest. The answer might still be no and that is ok; remember, we look for talent, not just gender.

CR: For me, over time, I have become convinced that quotas are necessary to level the playing field. Sometimes, you have to push for things to happen and quotas are certainly one way of achieving more equal representation of men and women. There are plenty of examples of women who are better qualified for senior roles and have more experience, but aren’t being promoted to top positions because of their gender. I think appointing women to senior positions would create greater confidence among other women.

However, the quotas must be essentially transitory to cause the change; later, when the reality has shifted and equality has been achieved, then quotas will no longer be necessary.

GC: If you could give advice to yourself at the start of your career, what would it be?

BP: I would say to enjoy the ride and each experience. I am more experienced and seasoned now; when I was younger, I was tougher on myself. Now I see my life and career from a different perspective. I am very grateful and feel blessed for the life I have and for the opportunities I have been given; and that includes my career. Sometimes we forget to take the time to stop and appreciate what we have; or we fail in finding the time to support others, which I personally find so rewarding.

CR: My advice would be:

  • Feel passion for your work;
  • Your mistakes are learnings and without them, there is no growth;
  • Do not rest until you find the workplace where you feel comfortable and valued and where you can develop your strengths;
  • Be curious about the opportunities that come your way;
  • Take care to always integrate new knowledge and experiences;
  • Find strength in working collaboratively.
Posted on

Alejandro Fernández R-B, Head of Legal, Cotemar

I think technology in the in-house department is not an option anymore. Because, as you know, all companies are cost and profit-driven. So, at some point, the question will be on the table: ‘What is cheaper for me’ or ‘What is more efficient for me?’ To have an in-house department, or just to go find a law firm and try to push down the prices? So, I think the technology will give us, as in house lawyers, more possibilities in order to argue that it’s a good idea to have in-house lawyers. I think every company must start to interact with these new technologies to try to develop an idea or a practice to use that. In my case, of course, I’m trying to bring these new technologies and ideas and be open to the market but, otherwise, I try to bring on board young lawyers with these new ideas, who of course can contribute to the development of the legal department.

We deal a lot with in-house software that manages the areas of litigation, arbitration and conflict management. We focus on these areas because of the amount of litigation that we have. For example, in 2009 there was a drop down of oil prices and, as we are a construction and maintenance company, we had to let go of many people because some of our contracts were shut down. That brought us over 100 cases of litigation. So, taking that into account, and also that we have almost 1,200 active suppliers at the moment, we need to find a way to manage this and try to be more strategic.

We have been working in this project almost two years, I believe. At the beginning, there was a lot of data mining. We tried to obtain as much as data as possible from all our contracts and litigation: the value of the litigation, the name of the parties to the contract, the duration of the contract, the purpose, scope and everything else. We did all of this data mining and uploaded it into the software.

At the moment, the software gives me an idea of when, according to the data, is the most proper moment for me to settle. So, this technology gives me all the tools to make a decision and, of course, to manage this big amount of issues.

Before five years, the only contact with technology from our legal department was the cloud and the files’ source. We PDF’d and scanned all the documents and uploaded them, but there was no ‘correct’ way to manage them. In case you wanted to search for a specific file, there was no way to do it. You needed to spend five or ten minutes to find it – if you found it.

The first challenge was to try to obtain budget. It’s not common for in-house – maybe for firms it’s trendier – but for in house, it’s quite new to have this managed software, and it’s newer that you want to create your own software. So, trying to sell the idea to the CEO in order for them to see the benefits that it eventually will bring to the company was really hard. But I can say for sure: today, they can see those benefits and the company is willing to invest more in software within the legal department. Our software was obtained through our in-house IT department, and we spent almost two years working closely between them and our legal department to create this software.

In terms of ethical issues, I’m not sure if you’re aware of this – in Mexico, when you have a labour case, mainly it’s because the former employee feels that he was entitled to receive a bigger compensation. Some cases, they are right; some cases, they are wrong. But that’s purely mathematics. Even if they are right or wrong, my duty as a head of legal is to see the best interests of the company. So, there are some cases that they are right in asking for these extra compensations. But the software might recommend that I can settle with them for a lower figure that they are entitled to. So, that is the ethical issue. Because in some part, I want to, and it’s my duty with the company, and on the other hand of course, I want to be fair with the former employees. So, that is an ethical issue that I am seeing as a result of this software.

Right now, we are planning for next year to add a new part of the software for insurance management, and also for customs management. For customs, we often import the vessels, and our import permit might be valid for six months, seven months, one year or ten years. You have to renew that permit or you will be fined. So, we are thinking to add this part to the software, in order to have a reminder previous to the due date in order for us to renew the permit. Regarding the insurance, it’s the same. We cannot have our vessels or operations without insurance, so the idea is to create these new parts of the software to manage that.

Both external lawyers and in-house teams have to adapt to new processes. But, at some point, we ask for external lawyers to fit our software: we ask them to do it, but we understand that we are not their only client. So it takes time for them to fit the software, and if the software is not with the proper data, we cannot take the proper decision. So it can be difficult – it’s gymnastics. At some point, we have to work on that, and eventually it will be really natural.

Historically, lawyers are not used to using technology in our profession, and the definition of a lawyer has been to do things the old-fashioned way – with paper, or e-mail. Before we took the decision to develop the software in house, we looked at many options within the market, and we noticed that most of the software was being developed in order to manage, first of all, the billing hours for external lawyers and, secondly, to manage contract drafting – and that’s it.

New generations of young lawyers have a different set-up, a different mindset. I think lawyering is a little bit behind if you compare it with other professions, such as marketing. I think these new generations will push harder to improve new technologies in the law practice.

Posted on

Rafael Dantas, General Counsel and Director – Legal and Compliance Latin America, General Mills

After more than a decade focused on the chemical and pharmaceutical business while working for Bayer, formerly as a tax lawyer and overseeing all the legal areas over the years, I have recently decided to take on an opportunity that has changed my daily routine by moving to General Mills to be part of a great team, working now in the food business. I am now responsible for providing the direction for all legal and compliance matters across our company’s businesses in Latin America. In order to do that, I have a team of six people within the region, and we are now deeply discussing, testing and making a lot of use of technology at General Mills. We are still evaluating tools for litigation – and with my previous experience as head of litigation at Bayer, for me, it is something the company can really make benefit of by having the right data and cost control while using this kind of technology. Nowadays, there is no way you can manage a legal department without making use of technology – and this is for contract, litigation and billing purposes – there is no way you can stay out of it. I am a big believer in technology, and I always try to foster this new technology right at its foundation. So as a business, we are, right now, testing and always looking for new technology, and hopefully we will get it implemented.

In the last three years, the legal sector has offered more in terms of developing technology, and is making real progress. Before that happened, I would say that it was a little behind. I think the legal market is going to keep up this technological momentum, but when compared to other markets, such as finance, we are still behind. I am a big believer that technology helps to streamline and illuminate company overheads. Legal professionals should take technology as part of their job: there is no way you can work in legal [or any other area] without taking technology as part of your job. It will become more and more relevant. You cannot stay away. You have to be prepared. There is no way you can manage a legal department without making use of technology.

For contract management, the use of technology has been helping companies here in Latin America a lot. We have an in-house system for contact management where you can easily pull out a predetermined contract, which dramatically reduces your overhead of in-house lawyers working on standard contracts. This is very helpful in terms of budgeting and overhead production. You are also able to control the workflow within the company: from the start of the contract, when the business unit is negotiating the contract, to the signing of this contact – which goes electronically and by hand. We are also implementing digital signatures for contracts.

For litigation, there has been a lot of upgrading within the systems available in the market – software companies are designing litigation tools: it works both in case management, and in billing. Therefore, you can manage the case and also have your external information managed within the system. This is helpful in both reducing your overhead externally and controlling your case. In the past, companies were used to receiving reports by copying and pasting information into a system. But now we are finding that external law firms are inputting every piece of information on the case, rather than having in-house counsel do this. This technology is making the work of in-house counsel easier.

For budgeting purposes, there has been an evolution in our work because we can now predict cases. You can build your budget on the actual number of cases you have ongoing. You are also able to control the hourly case rate on a case-by-case basis. This brings about more security and predictability on the existing provisions you may have.

I have been implementing new technology within my legal team for a while. It has been more than 12 or 13 years since I began upgrading systems and providing new technology to my team. Like I said, I am a big believer in technology. However, there are two big challenges you face when implementing new technology.

Firstly, the in-house team must be ready to make the change – it demands a lot of work, especially in terms of preparing for change. This requires a lot of work in standardising the documents and the archives for a new system first. You must make sure you are communicating the benefits of such technology to your team, in order to get everyone involved and committed to the project. This is a major internal challenge that you and your in-house team may face.

For budgeting purposes, there has been an evolution in our work because we can now predict cases.

The second challenge concerns external counsel: when you are outsourcing your services to a large number of outside counsels, it is natural that each and every law firm uses their own system and has their own routine. It is difficult to make sure that the external company is using your system or actually providing the information that your company requires. So, when looking into systems, or any new technology, it’s always highly recommended to integrate as much as possible the targeted solution with the existing technology available so no disruption is caused to your routine.

In my view, AI is going to disrupt the legal profession. In the past, people used to instruct lawyers for basic and simple cases. We had to answer the phone multiple times a day to address standard topics and answer these questions. But now, people are able to interact with a machine where their questions are answered and standard contracts are drafted, which saves companies a lot in terms of in-house counsel overhead needs. I think this is something that is already a reality and it will change dramatically the way we interact with our business. AI is our reality if we wish to develop a more standard and simplified way of building documents and contracts for legal work. This is already a reality and something that I would be happy to have the chance to be implementing within the next five years.

Will I lose my job to a computer in the future? This is a question that all lawyers are asking themselves. But, when it comes to views and interpretation of all nuances concerning either contracts or litigation, I still believe a machine will not be able to do this work. A human will always be required to do the job. Although, I do think for less complex things like mass litigation and standard contracts, I have no doubt that these are going to be performed by machines and may pose a threat to people currently performing these jobs. But, for high profile and specific cases, I still firmly believe there is no way a machine will be able to perform these in the same way a human can.

I think there is one topic regarding the use of technology of which I am a little sceptical and that is the predictive ability of software. By the time we receive a new lawsuit, there might be a high chance that the software will say that we are losing the case based on the current position of the court or the current position of the work in your country. The big challenge yet to be overcome is, again, the nuances of a number of court decisions we have and the way a machine interprets and provides its provision. There are a number of cases still decided and won by means of small details and it might be challenging for a machine to process such information in the same way that humans are able to. So, this is one area regarding the use of technology that I view as there still being more proof required.

So overall, I am fully supportive, and I feel the majority of the technology available has been fully proven. I am a big believer that they have come to help and streamline and eliminate the overhead.

Posted on

Selim Erdil Guvener, General Counsel, International Potato Center (CIP)

CIP is a research organisation conducting agricultural research for development in 22 countries, mainly in the global South – this means we are very much involved with the development of intellectual property. Sustainability in agriculture is a key priority for our organisation. We have reached six million households in sub-Saharan Africa with our sweet potato technologies: we distribute genetic resources so other entities can use them in developing new solutions.

We are very much a capitaliser of technological innovation in terms of agriculture. That is exactly how I see our legal department. We are a service-oriented group of lawyers using technology to support colleagues around the world to be aware of the regulatory elements that they need to be taking into consideration for the implementation of their projects. This is so they can plan, and so that nothing becomes a bottleneck. We organise our portfolio management through a system called OCS – it’s based on ‘Agresso’. This is where we try to automate as much as possible: in terms of creating reports, creating networks for contractual management, and timesheets. An important aspect of our work is supporting the innovation pipeline. We have contracted an external software service provider for management of our IP platform, which covers all IP management processes, from invention disclosure all the way up to licensing. As soon as our colleagues have a brilliant idea, we encourage them to disclose it internally. This triggers a review process, supported by both our legal and finance teams. Then, with approval from assigned leadership, we take all necessary protections, such as intellectual property rights. With our integrated corporate system, we can monitor how we use that technology with different development projects or whether we license it for others to use. We can measure the impact whilst we’re deploying the invention for public benefit. Email almost becomes a burden when you come to the end, with a long exchange of documents from lots of different members of the chain. We work in a decentralised way, so collaborating with Microsoft Teams has been tremendously helpful – it’s fantastic when you’re working across multiple time zones with different people.

We are now a lot closer to our clients thanks to technology. Not only from a telecommunications and technology point of view, but also because we’re able to follow their work and provide support almost instantly.

Now that we have significant information technology support, we can understand what the client’s business actually is.

Let me give you an example: we have a monitoring and evaluation platform where we gather all the information – this is not necessarily legal information. But, we do have the key performance indicators in there. We can look at it and identify the key challenges colleagues are facing. We can see if there is anything related to legal challenges. Therefore, we can pre-empt project implementation challenges before they become real bottlenecks for projects. The ability to work on legal documents in real time is a really big change.

The main challenges we’re experiencing within the legal team concern confidentiality and data security. Now this comes with multiple aspects: it’s not necessarily something the legal department can resolve. We also work in connectivity: we have everything on the cloud, so colleagues are able to operate them when they’re in the field. But, we do have countries and projects where internet connectivity is an issue. In those cases, having world-class technological tools available to us can actually be time-consuming and frustrating. We’ve been looking at how much can we do by teleconferencing rather than travelling, allowing us to have as much face-to-face interaction as possible – without having to travel across the world and contribute to global warming. On one hand, technology is developing significantly, but on the other, there are still parts of the continent that are lagging behind.

For in-house teams, the most important benefit of technology is being able to communicate in real time: shortening the communication time between offices, therefore being able to explain very quickly and provide support from a legal perspective. The legal profession is very much based on the knowledge of the lawyers and the ability to understand the situation at hand: I believe Artificial Intelligence (AI) is particularly useful for in-house teams. The more we can rely on AI, the more we can open up bottlenecks. So, for a small legal department working in multiple jurisdictions, the big challenges are knowledge of local laws and regulations and the language barrier. With local laws and regulations, you can do your research or contract outside counsel. But, with the language barrier, it is more difficult. For example, if you want to work with China, you need both a translator and a lawyer who speaks Chinese. Working with 22 different countries, this has become a bigger challenge. Therefore, AI, in terms of translating written communications, is extremely useful to us today.

With AI, it will be particularly beneficial in streamlining processes for legal teams in the future. I see AI as a continuation and an extension of computing power. We no longer have typewriting, we’re collaborating online via real-time documents – this allows us to work more efficiently. We also see this through Siri and Cortana – they act as a personal assistant, they send an email which causes someone to respond to your queries. If we go from this to ‘hey I am setting up your goals because you have these objectives,’ that would increase the productivity of our legal team. There’s an administrative side. I think we, as lawyers, need to manage AI and it is very dependent on the capabilities of the lawyer. The judgement and understanding of the business that a lawyer has is very difficult to replace with AI, it might be difficult for AI to provide adaptable solutions. I think, for the next ten years, we still need a lawyer to support AI – rather than AI taking over the role of lawyer.

With new technology, new ethical issues are also raised: information is sensitive because it can be personal information, research data and research projects. We want to make sure that our assistance provides efficient protection, but we are constantly challenged by people who want to access our information without proper authorisation. The more digital we become in our work, the more difficult it is to establish network safety and security. So, at the same time, we need to educate the people who are using and accessing our network in order to protect it. This will require training and capacity building for our workforce.

I moved to Latin America six years ago. Previously, I was working in London, Istanbul, Nairobi and Benin. I think the legal profession in Peru is behind the US and Western Europe in terms of adopting new technology. Here, I can still only see technology use at the word processing and some systems levels. But lawyers will need to adapt quickly, as digital transformation is picking up speed, especially in the government.

Posted on

Alejandra Castro and Catalina Morales, Bayer, Costa Rica

GC: Can you tell me about how you use technology in the Bayer legal team in Costa Rica?

Alejandra Castro (AC): The legal headquarters in Germany have organised a worldwide structure in the legal department. We might be a unique global legal department where all our strategies are aligned including the vision on technology that should lead our functions. We centralise in a single IT tool the contracts, compliance cases, and data privacy processes, in addition to the monitoring of regulations in the region, plus patents as well.

As legal departments in Bayer, we handle various databases, and we are currently migrating to a new IT tool handled by regional expert teams, to make sure that everyone uses the same templates for contracts, with the same quality of service and the same regulations. The tool allows being a self-service contract database for contracts that we have already drafted, which will be harmonised for all the legal entities that we have. There will be an ability to make an online request for different templates outside those already drafted, and then these requests for new contracts will done by the legal department. Our expectation – and we are already reviewing this and finding this is what is happening now – is that the workload is getting lowered. We are trying to use these tools in order to make the process more agile, and to speed up all of the negotiations that we have with external vendors and so on.

Catalina Morales (CM): This new tool grants a contract life cycle management system. This means that you can find a template, you can send it to your business partner in legal, you can send it to your provider from the platform, the provider can give any feedback in the platform as well and, if they have the digital signature, they can also sign it online, and then you just store it in the same system. The idea is to use this system for contracts from the beginning.

AC: On the IP side, we have a different tool – it’s the same IT platform, but it’s a different tool where we upload all the patents that we have. It helps us by reminding us, for example, about deadlines and other IP risks that are very important with patents. If you miss a deadline, you can lose your patent, so for us it’s very important to keep a record of the timeline. In the past, patents were handled through local law firms and they were the ones that kept the reminders on the deadlines and the stages of the patent process. Now that we have developed our own patent tools, we do all the surveillance and the follow-up of what the law firms are doing, so it has increased our work in a positive way.

CM: On the compliance side, the tool registers every event or every investigation that we have. All compliance officers in each country or region have to input everything – every advance that has been happening in the case or the investigation. It is a tool where we are recording, but also reporting to global headquarters. It helps to visualise the impact compliance is having and guide future decision-making, such as whether we need to reinforce training or do more work on specific topics in a specific area or country. It is also useful to use as a knowledge system – you can visualise and it even helps you show that, for example, the number of investigations has gone down since you’ve trained, since you’ve provided more information. You can see, actually in a tangible way, the results of your compliance work.

GC: Have there been any particular challenges that you’ve encountered as you’ve been developing these IT platforms?

AC: Yes, there have. The first challenge was to make sure that we have a single template and that we keep the template with the most protection for the company, no matter in which jurisdiction the contract would be enforced. In my region, there are 33 countries in which we have legal operations, all of whom have different regulations, so that was challenging.

The second challenge was that, in the past, each region had developed their own IT tool for contracts. Now that we are migrating to the new tool – which is the single tool that will be used by everyone – it creates an additional challenge for areas or regions that need to leave the tools that were already developed, and migrate to this too.

CM: There’s always going to be challenges with what is a culture change. You need to explain that you’re not going to do this anymore, the way you’ve been doing it for the last 10 years – now you have to do it this way. Obviously, that is going to take time to adjust. There’s always going to be that initial scepticism about the new system – is it really going to work, do we have to do all this change if it won’t work in two or three years? We do have to do a lot of convincing, a lot of explaining why actually the system works and how it is going to benefit you. That’s the key: I think once they see the benefits, they get on board.

GC: Legal is one area where Bayer is implementing artificial intelligence. How are you currently using it and how do you think that use that will evolve from the sorts of things people are currently using it for?

AC: We currently have experience using AI in labour calculations, for example, for severance payments. It has already brought a lot of value to the department and it is just the beginning. I believe that, in contracts for example, we are going to see a lot more development around how artificial intelligence can help us work on our daily tasks.

CM: I think that AI could have an impact on the profession and the positions required in a legal department. A physical lawyer will always be needed, but the amount of lawyers needed in one department may decrease. For the company, or for the law firm, you could say that’s better because you need fewer people to do the same amount of work, but on the human side, as a lawyer, I wouldn’t like to lose my job and be replaced by technology! We need to find a common ground for us to work together.

I believe we will continue to see a rise in automation, too. It’s inevitable. I don’t know if it will change drastically and I don’t how fast it will change, but it will definitely change. The important thing is to have a company that supports this innovation and digitalisation, because it’s going to affect not only legal but every single department in the company. The engagement of the employees is going to be 100% necessary.

GC: How do you think the legal sector compares to other professional service sectors in Latin America when it comes to technology, innovation and working digitally?

AC: I think that lawyers believe they are not comparable. This is why we have sometimes not implemented technology. But I do think that our services are totally comparable to other areas that have already implemented these tools, like in accounting and finance teams. We are able and we can implement those tools – and there is no need to be afraid of that. I remember when we implemented digital signatures for several legal procedures, there was a lot of resistance from lawyers in the region, but now we use it on a regular basis and digital signatures are part of what we implement in contracts and data procedures. I think there are a lot of things that we can do and I think that legal departments are more than prepared to undertake this.

GC: How would you like to see law firms using and adapting to technology?

AC: If I request external counsel advice for legal opinions, I would love to have law firms keep a record of what they have answered to us for corporate housekeeping, to make sure that they have IT tools to give reminders on processes that are done on a yearly basis, like renewal of the corporation or payment of taxes. But it’s hard to find that in the market. At least, in my country group, we don’t have it. I know that I have peers in other country groups where they do have that service, but not in Central America.

‘The law firms that I work with use very little technology in order to provide their services.’

We are undertaking evaluations on outside law firms focused on the technology that they are implementing, so that we can look to use that as well. But, at least in the region where we have our legal department, I don’t think that there is too much going on yet. The law firms that I work with use very little technology in order to provide their services. However, from a global perspective, I know that headquarters have analysed global law firms that are using technology, so we have been able to review those technologies to see if we can apply them in our region or to our IT platforms.

GC: How can in-house teams best prepare and equip themselves for technological changes and disruption in future?

AC: There is a lot of work that has to be done from an investment and budget perspective. I think that is the first challenge that we need to face. The second is training; we’re used to having legal training, but now I think it’s very important to have specific training on the new IT tools that we are implementing, in order to be part of this new era where technology will be leading the legal department.

CM: As a legal department or a law firm that is not yet very technologically advanced, I would definitely recommend doing due diligence. Start small – start mapping out what systems can make your life easier. Maybe just a repository for a list of contracts, so you can upload a template, so that the whole law firm has a basic template that can be shared within a general system – that way, anyone that needs that type of contract can use it and the organisation has one face towards the client. Because, as a client, maybe one lawyer did the same type of contract differently than another lawyer, then you’re giving me two different versions, and maybe in one we went to labour litigation and with the other one we didn’t. So, at the end, it’s easier because they would have the same standard within.

I’m talking just basic contracts, but it works with other things, like legal opinions. If you’re going to give your client a legal opinion, you need to keep a record of what you said to the company and you can also start showing the benefits of having that to the managerial department, to see the importance of having that IT technology within the company.

Posted on

Patricia Ulian, General Counsel, Archer Daniels Midland, Brazil

I joined ADM a year and a half ago, and in the past year we’ve invested a lot in technology. I myself am a person that really thinks that technology is important, because you really can replace operational work that I think is not a priority for senior lawyers – I try to prioritise the strategic issues and benchmarking, in order to check the other companies and really understand what we have in the market. I try to improve and, if this is the case, we invest externally.

ADM Brazil invests a lot in technology, we’re upfront: we know what works and what doesn’t. When we see something working, we can adopt that solution to what we also do in the future. But, in order to do this, we need to gather the necessary data to take such decisions. And, looking at information necessary to take those decisions, law firms are able to provide information in a better way and in a better form – things like graphics – and some law firms are able to provide us this information, so that we don’t need to do the work, which I consider to be operational, to get this information ourselves. And, it’s on information like that we can take decisions. That’s the point.

It’s never easy to get budget. It’s super difficult: you have to put a business case forward and prove why you need to bring that technology to the company, and make some sort of trade-off – this need not be in monetary terms, it could be efficiency. You need to show how valuable the technology is that you’re investing in. If you’re a big, global company you also need to prove that this technology is in accordance with the entire IT project globally. Not just in terms of local security – because what you are doing on a local level can interfere in security – but, you need to understand that everybody has to approve. Being practical in this way can bring a lot in for the company.

At ADM, we have control technology which allows us to control the litigation cases. The technology we use was acquired in the market but specifically customised to our needs. We have a massive litigation area here, so that technology helps us get the information we need. I wouldn’t call it artificial intelligence because it’s not done alone, but it does allow us to use that information gathered for practice or for analysis. With this, we can see how many cases we’re winning, how many we’ve lost, how much money we’re going to lose and how many cases we’ve received. For example, if we focus on labour pay and want to see why we have so many of these labour cases, you can detect that through our technology, and then this allows legal to brief and train the business to be aware of the current legislation and to be able to reduce these problems in the future. We can do this in relation to any problem. If we see that our consumers have a specific problem in a particular region, then we can make sure we avoid the same problem in the future. It’s a useful strategy to have in legal.

Brazil is very advanced in terms of technology and has very sophisticated solutions concerning IT because of all the investment here. Being a super big and democratic nation, we have a lot of legal work and technology here. But, Latin America consists of many nations. For example, you’ve got both Mexico and Bolivia – these are two totally different countries with different levels of development. When you think of Mexico, there are many differences in culture, and you must also consider the dependency on the US. You also have Brazil, which speaks Portuguese, whilst all other Latin American nations speak Spanish. You have many differences, but Brazil is a pioneer in this area compared to other Latin American countries.

I think that AI is revolutionary for in-house teams. I think that AI, or something related to AI, will create more connections than ever. I think the future is about AI and connection, because as much as we can be connected now, we cannot connect things and people – AI helps with this. When you can make out as many links as you can between people and information – for example, you can now make a complete profile on and of anyone. Before I meet someone, I can go into a web link, see their profile and other information about them – everything – even their personal life: whether they’re married, have kids, where they live and what they like and dislike. This is powerful because I can have a conversation with them and convince them of something, because, essentially, I know them now. Giving a simple example, if you have LinkedIn, Facebook or Instagram, I now know you. So I will know how to process our conversation in a way that I can convince you of something. We can see this when purchasing items on Amazon: when you buy a product, Amazon offers you other related products. This is embryonic and I think the future will be more like that. The more connected we are with information, the more connected we are with people.

AI and technology will not replace lawyers, but it will replace lawyers who don’t use technology. By nature, I think technology and information will become more global. So, I think privacy will become a big problem because everyone will know everything about you, and you won’t be able to have a little bit of privacy. Most of the available information is free right now, because it’s so easy to get this information. What was valuable in the past is not valuable in the future – like information. In the future, you need to be more strategic and use that to your advantage. I think the future is about AI and connecting us to as much information as possible.

Posted on

Juan Pablo Ovalle Arana, Country Counsel, IBM Colombia

For a non-millennial, old-fashioned lawyer, as I am, technology is challenging and represents a large area to explore. At IBM, we are expected to be acquainted and familiar with technology. From an operational perspective, there is a need for lawyers to be tech savvy and understand the technology.

And, it is our responsibility, as professionals, to improve the use of technology and encourage the use of it.

The way lawyers use technology has evolved in the past years and, in my view, we have made progress, but there is still a journey ahead of us. When I joined IBM – eight years ago – you could provide a quality service to your internal clients by knowing the business and products. Now everything moves at a faster pace: regulations have changed, so the only way to catch up with new regulations is by using technology – especially when you work in the fintech environment. As in every industry, there is always room for improvement, and the only way to do it is creating a culture of continuous learning, including hard and soft skills on your learning journey.

Emergent technologies are real, and we have to live with them. Technology is not here to replace a lawyer’s work, but rather to enhance it. There is a human factor that lawyers provide – interpretations, judgement, decisions, solutions and knowledge of legal systems and a particular business situation – that needs to be part of the entire law system – that is why technology and human knowledge are complementary. On the other hand, if a lawyer keeps up with the different technological changes and embraces new technologies, the exercise of the legal profession will be improved. In fact, I believe you will become a better professional.

As with many other countries in the region and globally, Colombia is starting its journey in the use of technology in different professions. Incorporating, for example, AI within in-house legal departments is helping law firms focus in what is really important – their clients – while technology ensures documents are processed in a faster and accurate way, what translates in better services for the clients and time saving for the lawyers.

Where technology is headed is a tricky question – I certainly don’t have an answer to that. New technologies emerge all the time and they develop quickly, so it is very unpredictable. It is hard to predict what’s going to happen, and, what is actually going to come up next and what you think is going to come up next, are not the same thing.

Posted on

Marcos Jarne, General Counsel, Nubank

Nubank is a Brazilian fintech founded with the objective of fighting complexity in the financial market by offering intuitive products and services. It has grown a lot since I joined, more than four years ago, to start and build the legal team.

Today, Nubank has more than 20 million clients (it is considered the largest digital bank outside Asia) and has recently expanded beyond Brazil to explore other Latam countries. And we are still at the beginning of our journey. One of the secrets to such hyper growth is the focus on the customer. We structure ourselves in four pillars: user experience, design, technology and data science. Technology has allowed us to get where we are today, but the human factor makes the company stand out.

The legal team, like other teams in the company, uses technology to manage information and data to assist in decision making. We have created internal tools to manage certain matters we deal with and which enable us to interact with other teams more efficiently. A current focus for us is smart contract management through a combination of technology and AI.

As a company, even as we increasingly use AI in our daily work, it is worth emphasising that we don’t delegate responsibility for decisions to machines. AI enables richer insights from data and improves the quality and speed of decision making. However, at the end of the day, humans remain accountable for making decisions. We are always called upon to use our judgement in the way we use the information we obtain from AI.

That is why in-house lawyers must be what I would call architects or designers of solutions. In many negotiations and decision-making processes, the human component is essential. Understanding body language and anticipating movements based on a repertoire inaccessible to machines is not an exact science. Science can help and will, more and more, but I believe there will always be a human in the loop, at least for the foreseeable future.

Technology will indeed replace repetitive and administrative tasks. It already allows better management of documents, streamlined due diligence processes and court decisions monitoring. However, lawyers – assisted by an increasingly powerful array of technology and AI tools – will continue as key players in designing solutions.

The legal market as a whole needs to be more prepared for a technological future. Law professionals must learn to harness the power of data and AI as a natural evolution of the profession. It is auspicious the emerging trend of law schools teaching courses on data and technology, and law firms introducing tech to their daily work.

Inside a tech company it’s very enriching to have people from different areas sharing their ideas and seeing how synergies are created between lawyers, engineers, business analysts, designers or data analysts. These interactions contribute a lot to deeply understanding how technology can be a further ally in developing better products, services and solutions, including in the legal area.

All in all, technology is definitely something that is already helping in-house teams and the legal market. And it will help even further, there is no way to avoid it. The key point is understanding how technology can add value while being aware of the importance of legal ethics, data protection and accountability in such discussions.

Posted on

Alberto Vergara, Head of Litigation, Scotiabank Chile

I would say that our legal team is more advanced than other legal teams because the whole bank is making efforts in the area of technology. There are other financial institutions and other companies in other areas that are behind us – sometimes in a very dramatic way – because they don’t, in their businesses, feel that there is an urgency in making the whole business digital. So, obviously, we have an advantage in that area. We also have an advantage because we are an international company. But, on the other hand, sometimes small companies and new companies have an advantage because they start with digital. For us, we are advanced, but sometimes you have to change the habits of people who have several years in the industry – that they have to now learn how to become digital. That’s a difficult issue. Again, we are better in comparison with a lot of other legal teams, but I would say that smaller companies and start-up companies – their legal teams are probably more advanced than us.

Mainly, we use external providers that develop commercial products for the legal industry in Chile. We have different systems: one in the dispute resolution area called Case Tracking, to review the status of your case in the courts. It’s software that is based on cloud computing technology. That provides you with several functionalities that allow you to track and manage your cases and prepare reports, and so on and so forth. It’s a very friendly software, and it’s available for any company or any lawyer and in other Latin American countries, and it’s been very useful for us.

I would say that the challenge is to increase the use of technology. It’s a growing area and there is a big focus on making the whole bank in the legal area digital. So that’s the goal, and that’s the big challenge but, on the other hand, the problem is that you have to invest a lot of time, a lot of money, and especially education in your internal and external stakeholders. So, it’s very challenging, because the world is urging banks, especially in legal areas, to make a big bet on technology and digital tools but, on the other hand, you don’t have the proper resource to do so. Also, the ‘business as usual’ on a daily basis sometimes makes it harder to make that change. I would say we are trying to increase the time and the money that we are spending on digitalisation, but it is difficult to make a schedule or to develop a very precise and clear plan to do so.

IT is often more focused on the commercial side, so it’s difficult in any business to get attention to the legal area. I would say everyone is very keen on improving their digital relationship with the clients, and let’s say the back office of any business is out of their priorities. So, I would say that IT areas are 90% focused on the digitalisation of the relationship with the clients.

I would say there are three main issues where technology is dramatically changing the legal profession.

In first place, the technology is allowing legal areas to do business with less support staff. Right now, you need so many paralegals or so many assistants, so lawyers are increasingly doing, with the support of technology, tasks that in the past would require non-lawyer assistants. That’s the first dramatic change, because it’s making the legal teams – in some cases – all lawyers, and they don’t need too much support from other areas. That probably will increase in the future, and especially general lawyers will very much do everything by themselves. That’s important.

In second place, I would say that the technology is making it so that the legal profession is losing the human touch in a way that, right now, you can negotiate and close a big deal without meeting the other party in person. That’s a dramatic change, because it allows you to work remotely, even in complex fields. The challenge is that by losing the personal touch, it will hurt the lawyers in their capacity to develop negotiation tactics and so forth. You save cost in matters like travel and meetings, but on the other hand, you will lose some useful tools that only the experience of personal relationships provides to lawyers.

In third place, I would say the big question is: how will AI shape the legal profession? Right now many people are talking about AI, but nobody knows for sure how it will work in the legal profession. That’s an open question, and it may imply that some legal teams will invest a lot of money in AI but at the end it will prove useless. On the other hand, some legal teams will find that AI is useful in some areas: for example, smart contracts. In service industries, in which you have a massive contract that you have to sign every day with clients, artificial intelligence in smart contracts could be a useful tool, but again, probably an open question. There could be an important change regarding managing caseloads and case precedents in order to improve your litigation skills but, so far, I haven’t seen any programme that provides you with an edge without an important expense of money.

The innovation ecosystem in Chile is growing, and I would say there are some forces that have driven that growth. Firstly, Chile has been experiencing an economic growth over the last 30 years, which allows us to buy and develop technology. The Chilean economy is also a very open economy, which allows you to look for external experience and allows you to buy and import any solution off any country, without any problem. Also, since we are an open economy, it also provides you an incentive for Chilean companies to expose themselves to other areas. And lastly, since 2008, the Chilean government has been investing big in improving the tech sector – providing incentives to invest public money in the development of new technologies here, and that has been an important governmental push.