Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Printer Friendly Version
Richard Mabey is the CEO at
Juro, a company focused on end-to-end contract management systems. Combining a legal pedigree from Freshfields, in-house secondment experience, commercial acumen from an MBA and a legal product role, Richard founded Juro in 2016.
Both he and his company are dedicated to ending some of the frustrations and tedious process-driven work of in-house lawyers.
Sophie Gould, Head of In-house at LexisNexis, talks to Richard about his career journey, how he is a self-described “legal design obsessive” and what the real impact of technology can be on in-house legal teams.
Tell us a little bit about your background …
I trained at Freshfields in 2010 following a law conversion course at BPP, ending up in the corporate team with an M&A focus. While I was predominately in the London office, I did spend some time in the New York office. During my time at Freshfields,
I was on secondment to clients’ in-house teams. This was my first exposure to day-to-day in-house work and when I first became interested in how tech can be applied to in-house counsel. I saw that the teams were void of good tech solutions to
assist them in day-to-day working and I saw frustration as most of their working lives were being driven by process work. And I thought: how can we make this more efficient?
I decided to change tack slightly and do an MBA at INSEAD. I used this opportunity and time to learn about the business side of things and also to begin experimenting with concepts and ideas – with a view to getting something out in the market.
I did some entrepreneurship units and happily I won a prize which allowed me to build a MVP, which I could start testing with legal teams.
Before I could singularly pursue my own outfit, I got sidetracked by gainful employment. I had been approaching LegalZoom (as I broadly considered it an established “legal start-up”) for work and agreed to take on the role of product
manager. This was an invaluable experience for me to gain experience from the coalface on how you build a legal tech product.
In early 2016 I founded Juro with an engineering friend I met on the MBA, Pavel Kovalevich – who brought all the technical (and much more!) talent to the organisation. And we’ve been on an exciting journey ever since.
So what do we mean by legal design thinking?
A useful starting point is recognising that technology is not a solution in itself. You can’t simply bolt a piece of new technology on top of a bad process and expect returns. I think in-house teams need to go back to basics and this is where legal
design thinking can help. From my own experience with contract management, we quickly realised that there was an awful lot of pain but not any proper solutions.
We decided to drill down into the detail, working with some large clients to see what’s actually happening. We saw that although there are lots of tech options, most of them looked like Windows 95 and weren’t helping the business. This is
where we got interested in design. User experience doesn’t just mean a pretty interface, it means that you solve a problem better. Take contracts as an example – there is an obvious efficiency play but there is also something more fundamental
– the documentation itself needs to change from an impenetrable document to a functional one.
Legal design has yet to be authoritatively defined. Someone like Margaret Hagan from Stanford has lead some of the thinking in this space. Broadly, it borrows a lot from the well-established concept of design thinking in the tech space. It’s a method
of getting to ask the right questions – once you ask the right questions, getting to the real problem isn’t too hard. It hasn’t yet really penetrated in the legal world.
How can novices begin to use legal design thinking?
An easy start for people is to run what we call a design sprint. This is a process-driven event for a team to go through the various steps in thinking through a problem. It is a user-centric way of going about “ideation” – coming up
was great for engagement and a way for lawyers to get out of the cycle of reacting just to their inbox. A critical element of a design sprint – and design thinking more broadly – is to ensure you get input from all the relevant key stakeholders.
This might mean you have tech, operations, legal, management and others feed into it.
How can it help in-house in their day to day work?
One of the things we realised early on was the fact that lawyers and in-house teams get into cycles – responding to their inbox and being told to do more with less. It creates a powerful cycle of “busy-ness” which is difficult to stop.
So one thing we help in-house teams do is to actually step back and radically review. Getting the space to reflect and think more strategically is vital and often very challenging.
But it isn’t just about giving in-house teams more time. Importantly, it gives teams greater access to data. By making the user experience easier, you are more likely to collect more data and this creates a virtuous circle – in fact it can
have a snowball effect. Once you have more and better data, you can report value more effectively to the business and stop being viewed purely as a reactive cost centre.
What impact do you think technology will play in the life of an inhouse lawyer in the next five years?
I have three key take-aways on this point:
Overall you can’t solve everything at once with tech. You need to prioritise what you want to solve first and start with the low hanging-fruit.
Legal Technology – Looking Past the Hype - Download a
free copy of our latest LexisNexis In-house Insights report to get clarity on and learn how your peers are using and benefiting from technology. We surveyed 130 in-house counsel on how legal departments are using and benefiting from
legal tech today. It also uncovered four distinct stages of legal departments driven by defining behaviours displayed and key opportunities in each for in-house teams to increase the value they can demonstrate.
Legal operations: how to do it and why it matters - Download a
free copy of Juro's eBook for insight from more than a dozen in-house thought leaders from some of the world’s best companies on how to make your legal department more efficient.
0330 161 1234