ChatGPT is a potential tool, not a replacement
Here’s why:
These days ChatGPT is rarely out of the news. It is OpenAI that has developed the AI-based chatbot, ChatGPT, which has attracted millions of users worldwide in the space of just a few months.
Many of my friends, spanning a wide range of industries from journalism to programming are using it daily, one citing that he is “never googling anything ever again.” As a potential techno-sceptic, I had far avoided the tool, but what better way to really know the potential advantages and pitfalls than to jump right in. Not knowing where to begin when writing an article on ‘How ChatGPT can help law firms and legal marketers with their submissions’, I started the way most would, by typing the question into ChatGPT.
The results were initially quite impressive. ChatGPT said that it could help firms and legal marketers with content creation, the clarification of submission guidelines, keyword optimization within submissions, identifying the competing strategies of other firms and evaluating the effectiveness of directory listings, among others. However, before succumbing to the fate of being replaced by AI, I decided to ask a few more questions.
After some digging, I realized that ChatGPT fell short of its promises. I asked it to type out a partner bio for a client of mine, and it came back with generic descriptions that I often tell my clients to avoid altogether. Part of the text read:
“X’s practice areas encompass a wide range of corporate matters, including mergers and acquisitions, corporate governance, contract negotiations, intellectual property, and compliance. She is adept at analyzing complex legal issues, identifying potential risks, and developing innovative strategies to protect her clients’ interests. Her comprehensive understanding of corporate law and her ability to navigate legal complexities have earned her a reputation for delivering favorable outcomes.”
This is a good example of what a lot of firms do wrong when they are writing their lawyer bios. A paragraph like this says a lot, but, it is merely regurgitating general roles of a corporate lawyer and the qualities that a corporate lawyer should have. Funnily enough, the partner I typed in is mainly an IP lawyer who has a long history litigating matters relating to women’s rights. Directories want to hear about specific accomplishments and achievements, and about the skills your attorneys have. In this way, ChatGPT provides a basic outline, but it is unable to take your submission to the next level. Furthermore, with data restricted to 2021 at present, it becomes even less useful for lawyers looking to stay current and present.
After this, I asked it to clarify certain submission guidelines, and it just gave me non-specific guidelines that you can find on the directory website. For example, to the question “What is the Legal 500 definition for Mergers and Acquisitions?” the response was:
“As an AI language model, my responses are generated based on a mixture of licensed data, data created by human trainers, and publicly available data. I have not been directly trained on specific proprietary information from Legal 500. However, I can provide you with a general definition of the practice area of mergers and acquisitions (M&A).
Mergers and acquisitions, often referred to as M&A, is a practice area within corporate law that deals with the buying, selling, combining, and restructuring of companies or their assets. It encompasses a range of legal activities involved in corporate transactions, including mergers, acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures, and strategic alliances.”
With some legal directories it is sometimes hard to find certain guidelines or practice area definitions. Many times we have to ask the researcher or attend webinars in order to get clarification. Therefore, it would make sense that ChatGPT would not be able to find certain information and then resort to a dictionary definition of M&A. However, this could be damaging if firms start relying on it as it could lead them to misinterpret the practice area definition that the specific guide is looking for.
It was then that I realized that ChatGPT could not get around the human contact that is so prevalent in the world of legal marketing. If my job could be done with online searches, it would be. However, the reality is that all the online information cannot replace the data collection interviews we have with our clients or corresponding with directory researchers. Furthermore, directories often do not provide all their information on their website and each researcher often has their own criteria. That’s why our Head of Submissions, Adina Grossman-Cutler, makes an annual pilgrimage to London to talk with the directories and specific researchers about their expectations. Directories look for in-depth information that will set a firm apart, and that cannot be done with the type of generic text that ChatGPT generates.
ChatGPT can be a great tool for quick questions that you would want to type into Google or for checking spelling and grammar. In that way, it can be a very useful tool for law firms just starting out with their submissions. Nevertheless, for seasoned legal marketers, the information regarding submissions on ChatGPT is redundant and lacks the depth needed to produce insightful and in-depth marketing content, among them truly informative submissions.
