We participated in the Junction 2017 hackathon in November. Our goal was to find people to help us reinvent how clients interact with law firms. We were amazed at the solutions that our twelve international teams presented and are excited to start validating the ideas with our clients.
7.12.2017
Reinventing Interaction With Business Law Firms
The Best Client Experience – Digitised
Legal advisory will always be the core value of business law services, but the way services are delivered will change. To meet client expectations in a new digital world, we have to actively explore the opportunities technology is providing.
Setting Up The Challenge
We wanted the participants of our Legal Tech track and challenge ‘Accessing the Law’ to help us reinvent how clients interact with law firms and access the law. We provided the hackers with three examples of areas they could focus on to ensure an interesting hack.
In the first area, we asked the hackers to find a solution for both clients and lawyers to track the progress of a project. In the second area, we encouraged the hackers to create a solution that provides a price estimate for a project. The third possible area to focus on was to create a solution to gather the information needed to run a legal project successfully. In addition to these three areas, we encouraged the hackers to be brave and think outside the box to improve our client experience.
The Clients’ Journey
As we were preparing for Junction, it became clear that defining and communicating the scope of the challenge was no easy task. We wanted the guidelines to help the hackers get onto the right track, but not stifle them or discourage them from bringing new ideas to the table.
Given that our hackers were not necessarily familiar with the legal field, we decided to provide few examples of typical client interactions that take place during a legal assignment. We used the picture below to communicate our challenge to the hackers. We felt that any one of these examples could benefit from a hack and were happy to see our hackers tackle many of them.
Experiencing Groundbreaking Innovation
As a first timer at a Hackathon, we didn’t know what to expect. It felt as if we were taking a leap into the unknown, which is always exciting. On the flip side, we weren’t sure what the hackers would think of our challenge.
At first, it seemed as if they weren’t very interested in our track. Luckily, this turned out not to be the case—quite the opposite actually. Our track was fully booked with over 40 participants.
It was amazing to watch the teams work and admire how they radiated energy and innovativeness. It is difficult to describe the atmosphere at the venue over the weekend. Everyone should have a chance to experience something similar.
The thing that impressed us the most during these two days were the people—their motivation and talent. None of us had experienced this kind of innovation event before.
Teamwork
Junction was concrete proof of the power of teamwork. In this case, this applied not only to the competing teams, but to us as well. We brought a team of our own people and people from our business partners Talent Base, CSI Helsinki, Arc Technology and Taival to support the participants and give them the best shot to succeed in our challenge.
We were so happy to see the seamless collaboration between lawyers, business service experts and our business partners’ experts. Everyone’s expertise was put to good use over the weekend, and we also received excellent feedback both from the teams and Junction’s organisers.
And The Winner Is?
The demos started with a demo expo in which every team had the opportunity to present their project to a larger audience and get feedback to encourage them to develop their ideas further.
Every track chose their own judges who picked the winners of the track. The Legal Tech track judge team consisted of Pia Ek and Heikki Ilvessalo from our firm as well as Asko Relas (Talent Base) and Reko Lehti (Taival). The judges went from table to table to listen to each team. Each team had to demo their project in a maximum of four minutes, after which the judges had two minutes for questions.
Photo: Juha Nurmela
We have to admit that it was very hard to choose the winner from the twelve amazing solutions presented to us.
In the end, we chose the team ‘Discover’ as the winner of the Legal Tech track. The team’s solution redefined interaction between lawyer and client in a unique way. The goal of the solution is to connect lawyers and clients using an intuitive and forward-thinking interface, including document management, time management and project budgeting, where transparency is of utmost importance.
The tied second best teams ‘Legal Timer’ and ‘Lexio’ chose to create a solution for price estimates. Legal Timer’s solution uses machine learning to analyse the data from our ERP system to create a quick price estimate in place of time-consuming manual assessment. The solution uses intuitive visualisation, is easy to use and can be integrated into our existing CRM system. Lexio’s solution provides a price estimate of the probable cost of an assignment. The service also uses ERP data to provide insight on how much the client can expect to spend according to the total costs of similar cases. Lexio’s solution gives the lawyer a starting point for pricing the case and provides an easy to use interface to send the estimate to the client.
We look forward to having interesting follow-up discussions with the winning teams. You can explore all the solutions from here.
Designing the Best Client Experience
We have already started to discuss the results of Junction with our experts and clients to identify the value of the new ideas in terms of improved client experience.
As our client or business partner, we would like to invite you to help us focus our development initiatives. Feel free to contact us for further information on the Junction challenge and the lessons we learned from it or contact your favorite lawyer to start a dialogue on how we can improve our client experience.
Latest insights
Article published 10.10.2024
Revolutionising legal services: Castrén & Snellman’s journey with AI integration
Article published 4.10.2024 – Environment, Energy & Green Transition
Government proposal for an act on offshore wind power in the exclusive economic zone submitted to Parliament
Article published 2.10.2024 – Banking & Finance
Sustainable finance is vital for achieving the objectives of the green transition
Article published 16.9.2024 – Banking & Finance
Private credit – an alternative to bank financing
Mia Ihamuotila
Marius af Schultén, Helinä Teittinen & Kanerva Sunila
Minna Korhonen & Lia Heasman
Tero Tuomisto, Minna Korhonen & Jenny Shahnovskij
Latest references
WithSecure – Sale of open source data collection product and business
We advised WithSecure Oyj in the sale of its open source data collection product and business to Patria Oyj. The divested business combining software and services falls outside WithSecure’s current strategy. Through the sale, WithSecure sharpens its focus on the Elements portfolio. WithSecure is a global cyber security company (listed on NASDAQ OMX Helsinki) with more than 35 years of industry experience. WithSecure offers partners flexible commercial models, ensuring mutual success across the dynamic cyber security landscape. Patria is an international company in the defence and security industry offering defence, security and aviation life cycle support services and technology solutions. As a result of the transaction, Patria will open a new office in Oulu and 10 WithSecure experts currently working in the business area will join Patria.
Case published 30.9.2024
A. Ahlström – ESG advisory and corporate sustainability due diligence process planning
We advised A. Ahlström in establishing a corporate sustainability due diligence process plan which incorporates best practices and tailored solutions based on our expertise within relevant business sectors. Our comprehensive ESG offering also included tailored training for members of the investment team and management team and the board of directors of several portfolio companies. ‘The ESG team at Castrén & Snellman provided us with legal and practical advice around the ESG regulatory tsunami that we need to incorporate in our ESG work,’ comments Camilla Sågbom, Director, Sustainability and Communications, at A. Ahlström Oy. A. Ahlström is a family-owned industrial company, developing leading global specialist positions in Forest & Fiber and Environmental technology sectors.
Case published 5.9.2024
Vapaus Bikes Finland – Series A funding round
We represented Vapaus Bikes Finland Oy, a company offering employee benefit bikes, in its international EUR 10 million Series A funding round. The investors behind the funding are private equity investors Shift4Good and Superhero Capital Ltd as well as Tesi together with the European Guarantee Fund of the European Investment Bank. The equity-based funding will support the company’s international expansion, software development, platform automation, and the growth of its concept for the second-hand market of bikes. Vapaus Bikes Finland is at the forefront of sustainable mobility services and has been a pioneer in the Employee Benefit Bikes sector since late 2020. It has been ranked among Finland’s fastest growing companies. Shift4Good is an impact venture capital fund focused on the decarbonisation of the transportation sector. Tesi (officially Finnish Industry Investment Ltd) is a state-owned, market-driven investment company that invests in venture capital and private equity funds and directly in Finnish startups and growth companies.
Case published 21.8.2024
City of Rovaniemi – Former employees ordered to pay damages in an investment decision matter
We successfully acted for the City of Rovaniemi in a matter concerning offence in public office and damages claims in relation to a significant investment decision made by the city. The defendants were the city’s former municipal corporate officer, who was in an employment relationship, and a city treasurer, who was in a public-service employment relationship and acted as the supervisor of the municipal corporate officer. The criminal matter related to the City Board’s decision to invest EUR 2 million of the city’s funds in bonds offered by a newly established investment company in accordance with a decision prepared by the defendants. A significant part of the company’s operations involved quick loan business. The main legal question in the matter was whether the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and whether regulation on offences in public office therefore becomes applicable even to a person in an employment relationship. The municipal corporate officer in an employment relationship was charged with aggravated abuse of public office based on her negligence in the preparation and presentation of the investment decision as well as based on a conflict of interest due to the fact that she had invested her own money in a company that received funding from the investment target presented to the City Board. The charges of an offence in public office against the city treasurer concerned his position as the supervisor and reporter of the city’s investment activities. He was also involved in the preparation and presentation of the City Board’s decision. The processing of the matter started in the District Court of Lapland in June 2022. In its judgment given in August 2022, the District Court stated, based among other things on our argumentation, that the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that regulation on offences in public office can therefore be applied to the municipal corporate officer. The District Court deemed that the conduct of the former municipal corporate officer fulfils the characteristics of abuse of public office and that the conduct of the former city treasurer fulfils the characteristics of violation of official duty with respect to the preparation of the investment decision, but the right to bring charges had become time-barred. Punishments could therefore not be imposed on the defendants, but the defendants were ordered to jointly and severally pay the city approximately EUR 114,000 in damages plus interest for late payment. The city treasurer’s share of the amount was 10%. The prosecutor accepted the judgment but the other parties appealed it to the Court of Appeal. Acting for the city, we pursued claims for both punishment and damages in the Court of Appeal. The Rovaniemi Court of Appeal processed the matter in November and December 2023. In its judgment given in June 2024, the Court of Appeal upheld the District Court’s judgment with respect to the abuse of public office and violation of official duty. The Court of Appeal deemed that the municipal corporate officer had failed in her duty to declare the conflict of interest. In addition, she had failed in her duty to ensure that the prepared decision was in compliance with the city’s investment guidelines and that it had been properly put out to tender. The Court of Appeal also found that the text of the investment proposal was insufficient and misleading and that the municipal corporate officer’s conduct was intentional. As regards the city treasurer, the Court of Appeal held that he had failed in his duty to ensure that the investment proposal to the City Board complied with the investment guidelines, that the presentation was not misleading and that risks were taken into account as required by the investment guidelines. With the judgement, the Court of Appeal took a clear position that abuse in public offices and when exercising public authority is not acceptable. The judgment is also significant as it declares that investing public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that the liability for acts in office therefore becomes applicable even to persons in employment relationships. In addition, a key question for the Court of Appeal to assess was defining the amount of economic damage in a matter related to investment activities. The Court of Appeal held based on our arguments that the conduct of the municipal corporate officer and the city treasurer had caused damage to the city. The Court of Appeal increased the amount of damages to EUR 210,000 with the city treasurer’s share limited to 10%. The amount was increased because the Court of Appeal deemed that the city had suffered damage not only in terms of the loss of capital but also in terms of the loss of estimated return on investment. The judgement is not final.
Case published 21.8.2024