Sign in

Support us

News Opinion Sport Culture Lifestyle

Education Schools Teachers Universities Students

Technology
Robot doctors, online lawyers and automated
architects: the future of the professions?
Advances in technology have long been recognised as a threat
to manual labour. Now highly skilled, knowledge based jobs
that were once regarded as safe could be at risk. How will they
adapt to the digital age?

Tom Meltzer
Sun 15 Jun 2014 19.00 BST

2,128 303
L
ast year, reporters for the Associated Press attempted to figure out which jobs
were being lost to new technology. They analysed employment data from 20
countries and interviewed experts, software developers and CEOs. They found
that almost all the jobs that had disappeared in the past four years were not low-
skilled, low-paid roles, but fairly well-paid positions in traditionally middle-class careers.
Software was replacing administrators and travel agents, bookkeepers and secretaries, and
at alarming rates.

Economists and futurists know it's not all doom and gloom, but it is all change. Oxford
academics Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A Osborne have predicted computerisation
could make nearly half of jobs redundant within 10 to 20 years. Office work and service
roles, they wrote, were particularly at risk. But almost nothing is impervious to
automation. It has swept through shop floors and factories, transformed businesses big
and small, and is beginning to revolutionise the professions.

Advertisement

Knowledge-based jobs were supposed to be safe career choices, the years of study it takes
to become a lawyer, say, or an architect or accountant, in theory guaranteeing a lifetime of
lucrative employment. That is no longer the case. Now even doctors face the looming
threat of possible obsolescence. Expert radiologists are routinely outperformed by pattern-
recognition software, diagnosticians by simple computer questionnaires. In 2012, Silicon
Valley investor Vinod Khosla predicted that algorithms and machines would replace 80%
of doctors within a generation.

In their much-debated book The Second Machine Age, Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew
McAfee argued that we now face an intense period of creative destruction. "Technological
progress," they warned, "is going to leave behind some people, perhaps even a lot of
people, as it races ahead … there's never been a worse time to be a worker with only
'ordinary' skills and abilities to offer, because computers, robots and other digital
technologies are acquiring these skills and abilities at an extraordinary rate."
So where does that leave the professions, whose hard-won expertise is beginning to fall
within the power of computers and artificial intelligence to emulate? The efficiency of
computerisation seems likely to spell the end of the job security past generations sought in
such careers. For many, what were once extraordinary skillsets will soon be rendered
ordinary by the advance of the machines. What will it mean to be a professional then?

"We'll see what I call decomposition, the breaking down of professional work into its
component parts," says leading legal futurist professor Richard Susskind. Susskind's
forthcoming book Beyond the Professions, co-authored with his son Daniel Susskind,
examines the transformations already underway across the sectors that once offered jobs
for life. He predicts a process not unlike the division of labour that wiped out skilled
artisans and craftsmen in the past: the dissolution of expertise into a dozen or more
streamlined processes.

"Some of these parts will still require expert trusted advisers acting in traditional ways," he
says. "But many other parts will be standardised or systematised or made available with
online service." In a previous book Tomorrow's Lawyers, he predicts the creation of eight
new legal roles at the intersection of software and law. Many of the job titles sound at
home in IT companies: legal knowledge engineer, legal technologist, project manager, risk
manager, process analyst.

"Many traditional lawyers will look at that and think: 'Yes, they might be jobs, but that's
not what I went to law school for. And that's not what my parents' generation did as
lawyers.'" That, says Susskind, is not his concern: whether we call these new positions
lawyers or not, the legal sector will survive.

"What I often say is that the future of law is not Rumpole of the Bailey, and it's not John
Grisham," explains Susskind. "It's not a version of what we have today slightly tweaked. It
will be people working in the legal sector but offering legal services and legal help in new
ways." It may be the end of the profession as immortalised in courtroom dramas, but as
software eats the old jobs it will have to create new ones too.

"Those professions that do not change will render themselves obsolete," says Dr Frank
Shaw, foresight director at the Centre for Future Studies. "Those that are able to transform
themselves – and I mean 'transform' – will thrive and prosper."

No one knows for sure what the careers of the future will look like. But the people at the
cutting edge are already watching old jobs disappear – and experimenting with the
technology that has begun to create new ones. Here's how three of the professions –
medicine, architecture and the law – could be transformed, according to the people
helping to reinvent them.

THE LAW

'The future of the legal profession is not Rumpole of the Bailey and it’s not John Grisham.’ Photograph: Alexander Kozachok/Getty
Images
Five years ago, entrepreneur Charley Moore founded online legal services provider Rocket
Lawyer. It now boasts 30 million users. Subscribers pay a monthly fee for instant access to
pre‑prepared documents and tutorials, as well as online legal advice from experts at
participating firms. The work lawyers on the network do has already begun to resemble
the streamlined, one-to-many roles Susskind predicted.

Moore is optimistic about the revolution computerisation has unleashed in his sector. "I
don't think of [software] as consuming the industry, as much as I think of it as supporting
the industry. So with software, certainly there are mundane, routine tasks that will
become more efficient, but by making those tasks more efficient, lawyers will be able to
move up in the food chain and serve millions more legal transactions than they currently
can."

Even judges, he says, will need to move online. "I think we have to have virtual courts.
Australia has been experimenting with them. New York has been experimenting with
online parking ticket adjudication. I mean, give me a break, who the heck thinks you
should have to go to some government building when you get a traffic ticket? It's
incredibly inefficient."

Such changes would mean fewer lawyers were needed to meet existing clients' needs. But
there is an upside: as costs fall and lawyers serve more clients, small businesses and
private individuals will suddenly be able to afford legal advice. This is the "latent legal
market", a disenfranchised horde of potential customers estimated to be worth as much as
£27bn. "There's really an unmet demand for legal services," says Moore. "We need more
lawyers, not fewer."

ARCHITECTURE
 ‘The cloud means a one-man designer can access the same computing power as big multinationals.’ Photograph: Alamy

Software firm Autodesk, founded in 1982, creates virtual design tools used by millions of
architects and designers every day. Last year alone, the company produced revenues of
$2.3bn. British vice president Pete Baxter is responsible for its architecture, engineering
and construction operations in Europe, Asia and the Middle East.

He believes architects have little to fear from artificial intelligence. "Yes, you can automate.
But what does a design look like that's fully automated and fully rationalised by a
computer program? Probably not the most exciting piece of architecture you've ever seen."

Technology won't destroy the profession, but it will, he says, democratise it. "There's a
paradigm shift now: the one-man architect working from home with a bright idea now has
access to an infinite amount of computing power in the cloud. That means a one-man
designer, a graduate designer, can get access to the same amount of computing power as
these big multinational companies. So suddenly there's a different competitive landscape."

Baxter is keen to highlight the many new opportunities software creates for the savvy
architect. Collaboration across continents is growing ever easier, opening up projects all
over the world. This, in turn, has paved the way for greater specialisation: the expert in the
most minute aspect of design can apply their insight in several countries in the space of a
single working day.

"The architectural profession absolutely will still exist," he says. "I think what's happening
is we're getting a more collaborative approach. But ultimately somebody still makes the
decision."

MEDICINE

'Where this is going is that, eventually, robots will end up doing surgeries on their own.’ Photograph: Alamy
Dr Pete Diamandis is the chairman and CEO of XPRIZE, a series of competitions that offer
$10m awards for inventors who manage to solve some of technology's most vexing
challenges. One such prize will be awarded to the first team to produce a working
"tricorder" – the handheld device used by the medical officers in Star Trek – capable of
diagnosing a set of 15 diseases without the presence of a medical professional.

He expects someone to succeed in the next five years. After which, it will only be a matter
of time before diagnosis is something done primarily by machines. "It's a matter of
providing the computer with the data. Once it has the data, it's able to consider thousands
or millions of times more parameters than a human can hold in their head." We will still
need medical professionals to guide us and provide the human touch – but doctors will
have to accept that computers are better at parts of the job than they are.

It's not just software and diagnosis, either: surgeons will have to make way for smarter
machines. "I think we're going to see the role of the physician changing significantly
through the use of robotics," says Diamandis. He cites the work of Silicon Valley firm
Intuitive Surgical, which has created a "surgical system" named Da Vinci, which an expert
surgeon can control online from anywhere in the world. Just as in architecture, such
developments will allow specialists to reach wider markets – but unlike with architecture
there is no reason to assume they will stop there.

"Eventually, where this is going," says Diamandis, "is that the robot will end up doing the
surgeries on its own. I can imagine a day in the future where the patient walks into the
hospital and the patient needs, say, cardiac surgery, and the conversation goes something
like this: 'No, no, no, I do not want that human touching me. I want the robot that's done it
1,000 times perfectly.'"

Yet, despite the large parts of the role that technology will take from them, he does not
expect a collapse in our demand for doctors any time soon – largely because we already
need so many more than we have. In the US alone, for example, experts predict a shortage
of up to 91,500 physicians by 2020. "And that's low compared to the rest of the world," he
says. "Africa, which has 25% of the disease burden, has 1.3% of the health workers. There's
no way to ever build enough medical schools or teach enough physicians for the demand
that exists even today."

"It's about the economics," explains Diamandis. The software and robots are already here –
or well on their way – but this unmet demand will remain until the tech is not only more
effective but cheaper than the equivalent doctor. "I call this process the 'dematerialisation
of technology'. You used to buy a GPS, you used to buy a camera, you used to buy records.
These things which were physical have dematerialised on to your phone, and de-
monetised, becoming effectively free. And finally they democratise. Healthcare is
undergoing the same process: dematerialisation and democratisation."

News is under threat …

… just when we need it the most. Millions of readers around the world are flocking to the
Guardian in search of honest, authoritative, fact-based reporting that can help them
understand the biggest challenge we have faced in our lifetime. But at this crucial
moment, news organisations are facing a cruel financial double blow: with fewer people
able to leave their homes, and fewer news vendors in operation, we’re seeing a reduction
in newspaper sales across the UK. Advertising revenue continues to fall steeply
meanwhile as businesses feel the pinch. We need you to help fill the gap.
We believe every one of us deserves equal access to vital public service journalism. So,
unlike many others, we made a different choice: to keep Guardian journalism open for all,
regardless of where they live or what they can afford to pay. This would not be possible
without financial contributions from those who can afford to pay, who now support our
work from 180 countries around the world.
Reader financial support has meant we can keep investigating, disentangling and
interrogating. It has protected our independence, which has never been so critical. We are
so grateful.
We need your support so we can keep delivering quality journalism that’s open and
independent. And that is here for the long term. Every reader contribution, however big
or small, is so valuable. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a
minute. Thank you.

Support The Guardian Remind me in December

Topics
Technology
Architecture / Medicine / Health / Work & careers / Robots / features
 Subscribe

UK Daily in The Guardian Editions Premium access to The Guardian

app Live app
Each day's edition in one simple, Live news, as it happens
elegant app - Live
- A new way to read Follow a live feed of breaking news and sport,
as it happens

More on this story

Nestlé employs fleet of robots to sell coffee machines in Japan

1 Dec 2014 15

Turing test: this little Eugene Goostman was much brighter than I
imagined
Robert Llewellyn
10 Jun 2014 42

From teledildonics to interactive porn: the future of sex in a digital age

6 Jun 2014 288

Pepper the chatty robot makes friends on first day at work

6 Jun 2014 13

comments 303
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.

Sort by Per page Display threads

Oldest 100 Collapsed

thesnu in 16 Jun 2014 2:52 22

The future isn't robots or people, it's, people working with robots.

There was a chess tournament a few years ago open to both people and computers. It was won
by a person using three computers. That's the future.

Report

remarks      thesnu in 16 Jun 2014 3:01 0

Yes that sounds nearer the mark.

Report

Gelion      thesnu in 16 Jun 2014 3:15 4

@thesnu in

"The future isn't robots or people, it's, people working with robots.
There was a chess tournament a few years ago open to both people and computers. It was
won by a person using three computers. That's the future."

Kasparov was not beaten by a computer, but by a computer being helped by humans.
Report

thesnu in      Gelion 16 Jun 2014 4:38 1

Kasparov was beaten by a research team that modelled his play and devised a computer to
beat it.

The guy apparently just had three computers running simultaneously and made his moves
based on a combination of their suggestions.
Report

Show 12 more replies

remarks 16 Jun 2014 2:59 5

Use of the internet and software to provide a service is one thing. Real intelligent technology is
quite another. Robots do not ask questions or theorise or practically apply knowledge - they can
only do what they are programmed to do. A human brain which comes complete with much that a
computer cannot deal with.

Until that changes the old adage "Garbage in. garbage out" will remain.
Report

drStupid      remarks 16 Jun 2014 3:16 11

This isn't true anymore. Computers are perfectly capable of learning on their own, with no
human supervision. That's how Google's AI learned to recognize cats in youtube videos, for
instance.
 Report

remarks      drStupid 16 Jun 2014 3:29 0

In my opinion your example does render the old adage "Garbage in. garbage out" as
invalid.

For example. shall we ask google AI as to whether that old adage is valid or not? What do
you think the answer would be, how would it be asked and answered? (I am not referring
to an answer based on an internet search with content put there by other humans btw). I
believe that, for example, Frankenstein was a work of fiction - has that now changed?
Report

remarks      remarks 16 Jun 2014 3:30 0

oops - i should have said "does not" rather than "does"

Report

Show 14 more replies

View more comments

Most popular
Across The Guardian In Technology

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez ends truce by warning ‘incompetent’ Democratic party

Mary Trump on the end of Uncle Donald: all he has now is breaking things

Wrecking ball: the damage Trump could do while still president until January

Keep on digging: Trump team holds press conference at suburban garden centre

US election 2020 results: Biden wins presidency, defeating Trump

Live 'Let us be the nation we know we can be': Biden speaks after defeating
Trump US election 2020 live updates

Katharine the great white shark resurfaces off US east coast

Ding dong, the jerk is gone. But read this before you sing the Hallelujah Chorus

Donald Trump’s defeat is wonderful for the world and trouble for Boris Johnson
 Was Libertarian candidate Jo Jorgensen a 'spoiler' for Trump?

Most commented
Donald Trump’s defeat is wonderful for the world and trouble for Boris Johnson
Andrew Rawnsley

Most shared
Keep on digging: Trump team holds press conference at suburban garden centre

Advertisement

Ad

PMI pushes transparent,

fact-based approach
Promoted by Article

Read More

Subscribe

The Guardian Weekly Digital subscription

A weekly, global magazine from The Guardian, with delivery The Guardian Editions, Premium access to The Guardian Live
worldwide. See the world more clearly. app and ad-free reading on theguardian.com.
6 issues for $6 50% off for 3 months
Education Schools Teachers Universities Students

News Opinion Sport Culture Lifestyle

 Sign up for the Guardian Today email
All the day's headlines and highlights from the
Guardian, direct to you every morning

Email address Sign up

Contact us All topics

Complaints & corrections All writers

SecureDrop Digital newspaper archive

Work for us Facebook

Privacy settings Twitter

Privacy policy Newsletters

Cookie policy

Terms & conditions

Help

Advertise with us
Support The Guardian
Search UK jobs Available for everyone, funded by readers
Contribute Subscribe

Back to top

© 2020 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. (modern)