How often have you wondered whether the mega bucks you’re paying for your lawyer is really worth it or whether you are just paying big-bucks for a brand-named lawyer in a big law firm who’s not worth his weight in gold?

 

Many websites have a rating system built into their interface, since trust is such an issue in an online world of anonymous identities. The most obvious example is ebay, where sellers and buyers can be rated by people that they transact with. In essence, a buyer can rate a seller whether the product that was sent to him arrived on time and was in the same condition as advertised, whilst a seller can rate a buyer on whether he pays on time. This online rating is very much worth its weight in gold as a good rating will ensure that potential purchasers/sellers will more easily transact with you.

 

In this web 2.0 world of information sharing a new website, called Avvo (http://www.avvo.com), is addressing just this issue in respect of lawyers, allowing the general public to find and rate a lawyer, very much like the rating system of ebay. The system has (luckily for lawyers!) a multi-tiered approach to rating lawyers.

 

Firstly the system compiles a list of lawyers from databases of the different law societies. Then the system compiles a rating of a lawyer using a mathematical model looking at the lawyer’s qualifications, and experience in years of practise and in fields of law. The third tier is a client rating. This could potentially be very upsetting for a lawyer since it is human nature that complaints will find its way to the profile much faster than compliments.

 

A savvy lawyer should actively have to manage this system, since a complaint on a profile can be quite damaging to his reputation. One wonders however to what extent lawyers will embrace this technology, especially as spurious complaints to the law society (a favourite threat by many a debtor or opponent, especially the general public who manage their own cases) are very frequent occurrences. Whilst practising as attorney I myself have experienced this first hand, leading to quite a number of hours lost to answering these complaints. (Fortunately in my case not one of the complaints has ever been found by the law society to have merit).

 

On the other hand the general public has the perception that the law society is just covering up on behalf of lawyers. In the long run, the transparency generated by this system can address the perceived “untouchable” image of lawyers. Such a system also would be the benefit of society as a whole and such modern rating systems can open up a gap for young and more techno-savvy lawyers to outdo old-fashioned lawyers who aren’t aware of such system.

  • Share/Bookmark