Speaking directly to SME law firms here - The legal profession across Africa and the Middle East stand at a critical crossroads.

While technology and artificial intelligence reshape industries worldwide, small and medium-sized law firms across these regions remain dangerously resistant to change.

This reluctance to embrace innovation isn't merely a preference for tradition, or a fear of losing what you’ve got — it's a strategic blind spot that threatens the very survival of traditional legal practice.

The Depth of the Problem

The evidence is overwhelming: law firms are falling catastrophically behind in technology adoption.

Research reveals that 53% of legal organisations have not adopted any new legal technology in over five years, while 82% of firms acknowledge that technology would help them provide better value to consumers.

Yet only 4% feel there are no barriers to adopting it.

This isn't limited to global trends. Across the Middle East specifically, more than half of legal professionals describe their firm's adoption of legal technology as 'fair', 'poor' or 'very poor'. Only 12% rated their technology uptake as 'very good'. In Africa, the situation is equally dire, with legal systems still "hampered by outdated infrastructures" and technology adoption remaining "in its early stages".

The profession's conservative nature runs deep. From their first day of law school, lawyers are taught to embrace stare decisis—the principle that precedent shapes legal arguments while valuable in legal reasoning, becomes toxic when applied to business operations.

The result is a profession that prioritises precedent over progress, creating a perfect storm for disruption.

The Rising Threat of Alternative Providers

While traditional law firms cling to outdated practices, alternative legal service providers (ALSPs) are experiencing explosive growth.

The ALSP market has reached $28.5 billion with an 18% compound annual growth rate, and projections suggest it will reach $49.61 billion by 2033.

This was a section of the industry that was derided by big law for many years, and now, is a genuine threat.

These providers leverage AI and automation to deliver services that are faster, cheaper, and often more accurate than traditional firms.

The competitive dynamics are stark. Law firms handled more than 90% of outside legal spend in 2015, but now that number is closer to 86%. That four-percentage-point drop might seem modest, but the pace of loss is accelerating, with much of that market share being absorbed by tech-enabled alternatives.

Legal tech startups are disrupting the profession at an unprecedented scale. Author Richard Susskind estimates there are between 3,000 and 4,000 lawtech startups globally, with the sector securing over $1 billion in funding in 2021 alone.

Companies like CourtAid, LegalZoom, and Clio have reached valuations exceeding $1 billion, proving that alternative models can scale effectively.

The emergence of "Law Firm 2.0" represents a particularly existential threat. These are small, nimble companies fuelled by AI that target specific legal matters and charge fixed fees rather than billing by the hour.

They can handle routine legal tasks like contract reviews and document drafting at 50% of the cost of traditional firms while delivering results in minutes rather than hours.

Client Expectations Have Fundamentally Shifted

Today's clients don't just want legal services—they demand digital convenience, real-time updates, fixed pricing, and transparent communication. Research shows that 81% of legal consumers contact or seriously consider just two attorneys or law firms, making first impressions critical.

More importantly, 57% of consumers take action on their legal needs within a week or less.

Modern clients are sophisticated enough to know that repetitive tasks like contract reviews and proof-reading are easily automated. They're no longer willing to pay premium rates for work that AI can perform better and faster. Corporate legal departments are now evaluating law firms based on their use of technology, with 46% of firms ranking the need to use technology to improve productivity and efficiency as a top need to meet client demands.

The implications are severe for firms that refuse to adapt. Clients are increasingly demanding greater efficiency, outsourcing work to legal service providers, and reducing their use of junior associates.

They want outcomes, not processes, and they expect their legal providers to leverage technology accordingly.

The Billable Hour Model Is Dead

Perhaps nothing illustrates the profession's resistance to change more than its continued reliance on the billable hour. 80% to 90% of law firm work is now done effectively outside the traditional billable hour model due to budget caps imposed by clients. Yet many firms persist with time-based billing structures that reward inefficiency and punish productivity.

AI can complete work in minutes that previously took hours, making time-based billing increasingly untenable. McKinsey projects that up to 44% of legal tasks could be automated by current technologies, while Goldman Sachs suggests that 23% of lawyers' work could be replaced by generative AI. Firms that refuse to embrace these tools because they reduce billable hours are doing "a disservice to clients and staff".

The market is already rejecting the billable hour model. Legal tech is raising over $1 billion in venture capital annually, much of it flowing to companies that offer fixed-fee, outcome-based pricing.

Clients increasingly prefer value-based pricing over time-based billing, forcing even traditional firms to adopt alternative fee arrangements.

The Consequences of Inaction

The penalties for resistance to change are becoming increasingly severe. 49% of law firms fail to meet even half of their billable hour targets, while 45% struggle with financial pressures and actively seek efficiency improvements.

'Task overload' is one of the leading causes of lawyer dissatisfaction, with nearly 50% citing stressful deadlines and unmanageable workloads.

More critically, firms that resist technology adoption risk losing clients to more innovative competitors. 78% of law firms aren't using AI, yet judges are urging lawyers to embrace AI, noting that "it's a must-do to survive in law". The firms that continue to resist may find themselves unable to compete for top talent, as 34% of respondents at non-innovative firms are ready to leave for more innovative alternatives.

The regional challenges in Africa and the Middle East compound these problems. SME law firms in these markets face limited resources, restricted access to international expertise, and difficulties meeting cross-border client demands.

Without technology to level the playing field, these firms become increasingly vulnerable to displacement by global providers who can deliver services remotely at lower costs.

The Path Forward

The message is clear: adapt or face irrelevance. Law firms that recognise this reality and act decisively can still secure their future. The key is understanding that technology must serve clients, not dazzle partners. Successful firms will be those that use tools to become faster, sharper, and more client-focused.

The most successful firms will embrace a hybrid model that combines human expertise with technological efficiency. They'll use AI to automate routine tasks while freeing lawyers to focus on strategic counsel and client relationships.

They'll adopt transparent pricing models, real-time communication systems, and data-driven decision-making tools.

For SME law firms in Africa and the Middle East, the urgency is even greater. These markets are experiencing rapid economic growth and increasing demand for legal services, creating opportunities for firms that can scale efficiently.

It is vital to note - the window for voluntary adaptation is closing rapidly.

Conclusion

The legal profession's resistance to technological change represents more than mere conservatism—it's a strategic failure that threatens the survival of traditional practice models.

Alternative providers leveraging AI and automation are already capturing significant market share, while client expectations continue to evolve beyond what traditional firms can deliver.

SME law firms across Africa and the Middle East face a stark choice: embrace technological transformation or risk being relegated to irrelevance by more agile competitors.

The firms that recognise this reality and act decisively will find themselves well-positioned to serve the legal needs of rapidly growing regional economies.

Those that persist in resistance may discover that their commitment to tradition has become their undoing.

The question isn't whether change is coming—it's whether traditional law firms will lead that change or be left behind by it. For the sake of their clients, their staff, and their own survival, SME law firms must overcome their resistance to innovation before it becomes too late to adapt.

Contact me on rob@thegrmgroup.com

Subscribe to The Future of Law Careers: Rob Green's Substack

‍