Carlo Cotrone

Given the recent proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) patent drafting technology, some in the legal services industry are asking whether AI is the patent profession’s “ultimate bad day,”on par with the dinosaurs’ ultimate bad day posited by Nobel Prize-winning physicist Luis Alvarez in 1980. Like the asteroid thought to cause a mass extinction of the dinosaurs, will AI be a formidable impactor that renders patent prosecution an unprofitable practice area in law firms and alternative legal service providers (ALSPs)? Will AI decimate patent prosecution as a viable career?

Back in 2016, I wrote an article for IPWatchdog describing invention harvesting, impediments in its way and best practices for overcoming them. Based on colleagues’ feedback, the article remains relevant for intellectual property professionals and innovators, including those starting their harvesting journey and others seeking to optimize strategies. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and related software tools can be leveraged by companies, universities, law firms and IP service providers to overcome common impediments to invention harvesting.

As discussed in my previous IPWatchdog article, C-suite executives in organizations should look beyond tactical excellence to ensure that managerial positions in IP and legal teams are held by highly effective managers and leaders… To help assess the effectiveness of an individual as a manager and leader, executives can determine if, and to what extent, the individual operates with a scarcity mindset or an abundance mindset. In short, a person with a scarcity mindset operates from a place of defensiveness, self-protection, and pessimism, while an abundance-inclined person operates from a place of courage, rootedness, focus on others’ needs, and optimism.

Everybody loves an attorney or legal professional who delivers great legal or legal-related results, such as on-point advice or deliverables, favorable dispute or transaction outcomes, or high revenue growth. This is true in corporations, law firms, and solutions providers, where success largely depends upon the deft navigation of challenging situations, generation of revenue and profits, and the like. A common scenario occurs in many organizations: A colleague known for consistently delivering excellent tactical results is asked to begin managing other colleagues…. Such executives may assume that a colleague with legal or business proficiency naturally is an effective manager and leader. Alternatively, they may be uncertain how the colleague actually will perform, but think it’s worth a try in light of departmental needs. Unfortunately, meaningful vetting of individuals’ suitability and performance as managers and leaders sometimes is virtually nonexistent.

The longer I’ve been an IP and corporate lawyer, the more I’ve witnessed how substantive expertise, though indispensable, often is insufficient to enable one’s success in an organization, such as a corporation, law firm, or other legal or IP service provider. Success means different things to different people. For some, it equates to the attainment of a high position and corresponding compensation. For others, it encompasses making a positive impact and earning the respect of colleagues, clients, and peers. Indeed, most of us aspire to achieve success both in the moment and over time.