Ari Kaplan recently spoke with Greg Hong, the co-founder and CEO of Steno, a tech-enabled provider of legal support and court reporting services.

They discussed the industry trends driving the need for court reporting and litigation support, creating a competitive advantage in the current market, and the evolution of the legal support market.

Ari Kaplan: Tell us about your background and the genesis of Steno.

Greg Hong: I’ve participated in several two-sided marketplaces. Out of school, I traded stock for hedge funds and went pretty far down the finance path before realizing I’d rather be building businesses than valuing them. From there, I worked in ad tech and ran a restaurant technology company that directly competed with OpenTable. I ultimately sold that business to Resy and American Express. We had some litigation in that sale, and my co-founder at Steno, Dylan Ruga, represented us successfully. We won that case on summary judgment, but I had my deposition taken, so he and I became good friends. Afterward, he proposed starting a court reporting business with me and a third co-founder, Dan Anderson, now our chief technology officer, when we saw an opportunity to add unique technology to a legacy agency model and structure it more like a marketplace.

Ari Kaplan: What trends in the legal industry do you see driving the need for court reporting and litigation services?

Greg Hong: The volume of litigation continues to grow year over year, but the court reporting industry has become a commoditized service market, and our competitors use decades-old playbooks. We are focused on our customers’ needs and use their feedback to design technology and financial options that directly improve their experience and workflows. For law firms, this means that we do the basics very well. We reply to our customers with substantive responses in 10 minutes on average, while others respond in hours or days, and we hardly ever miss covering a job. We pair that with the benefits of unique technology, like Transcript Genius, our new AI offering, or Steno Connect for Zoom, our Zoom app, so we really make it easier for attorneys to take depositions or more thoughtfully consume the post-deposition content that gets delivered to them in their transcripts.

Ari Kaplan: What traditional court reporting and litigation services do you offer, and how do you tech-enable those activities to distinguish Steno’s approach?

Greg Hong: We offer court reporting, videography, interpreters and conference room sourcing. We are also starting to provide service-of-process and e-filing assistance. We want to become a one-stop shop for our clients. Today, court reporting is about staffing. Law firms are looking for a provider, and that is often the end of the transaction. In addition to services, we offer unique technology and a dashboard allowing our customers to search their entire repository of Steno transcripts. We also have unique integrations with case management providers, like Clio and Litify.

Ari Kaplan: How do you stay ahead of the market, given that even traditional court reporting firms are starting to offer broader services?

Greg Hong: We take the best-in-class technology from outside the legal world and bring it to bear within this industry. When we transitioned from in-person depositions being the de facto standard before the pandemic to remote depositions becoming the norm after mid-2020, we built remote deposition offerings to accommodate our clients. We continue quickly bringing new ideas to market because we maintain an in-house technology team. At the same time, our competitors often leverage third-party providers to build their technology solutions or use something off the shelf. We also package our tools, so that attorneys can easily consume them. My co-founder is a practicing attorney running a firm with 11 lawyers, so before we release anything, we pilot it in his office for feedback, rather than simply affixing a label and charging for it. That is not the way to build a long-term customer relationship.

Ari Kaplan: How much human stenography occurs in a typical matter, and how much technology is involved?

Greg Hong: We only offer human court reporters, the de facto gold standard. The technology is supplemental. When we talk about our AI offering, it is applied on a post-deposition basis. A firm expects a court reporting agency to deliver a transcript following a deposition, but we allow the reader to interact with that document more thoughtfully, using the power of a large language model to interrogate that record. For example, our technology can help a lawyer instantly summarize a deposition and highlight the areas that indicate liability, with citations to the supporting testimony. Or if a practitioner is taking a deposition on Zoom and needs to share documents, our proprietary app makes that process as seamless as sliding a file across a conference room table. We are trying to emulate the real-world deposition experience even when virtual.

Ari Kaplan: How do you leverage your success in court reporting into other areas of litigation services?

Greg Hong: We see NPS scores well into the ’80s, indicating that our customers like working with us. They often provide unsolicited positive feedback. Doing an excellent job is the easy starting point for expansion. Once you’ve built that relationship and rapport, customers will trust you with e-filing or service of process tasks. They give us that shot, and we exceed expectations. That is how we have been able to grow.

Ari Kaplan: How do you see the legal support market evolving?

Greg Hong: Over the next few years, there will be consolidation across all of these service offerings. Law firms engaging in litigation today use several different service providers, from medical records support and e-filing to service-of-process and depositions, which can be challenging to manage. Many attorneys would prefer to combine those services, especially when they offer thoughtful integrations into their case management platforms. If all their records could sit magically in a single application, it would offer a much more cohesive experience. Adding unique, best-in-class technologies also transforms legal support, allowing legal teams to more efficiently and thoughtfully litigate their cases.

---

Listen to the complete interview at Reinventing Professionals.

Ari Kaplan regularly interviews leaders in the legal industry and in the broader professional services community to share perspective, highlight transformative change and introduce new technology at his blog and on iTunes.

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

Ari Kaplan recently spoke with John Marshall, the CEO, and Dan Quintas, the head of legal solutions at Airia, a generative artificial intelligence platform for law firms and other organizations.

They discussed the hurdles that firms face in adopting AI, their progress, common mistakes that legal teams make when deploying generative AI, and how to keep up with rapid technological changes.

Ari Kaplan: Tell us about your background and the genesis of Airia.

John Marshall: I have been in enterprise software for 30 years, focusing on solutions that serve as the back-end infrastructure solutions to business problems. One example is AirWatch, a mobile device management company where we worked closely with Apple and helped companies roll out mobility at scale. At AirWatch, we enabled technology deployment across firms of all sizes, integrating systems like email, documents and certificates. After selling AirWatch to VMware, I co-founded OneTrust, which focused on enterprise privacy, GDPR compliance and consent management. When AI emerged into the mainstream, I created Airia because I anticipated similar challenges as we saw with mobility in that AI is powerful but needs infrastructure that is secure, integrated and easy for end users to adopt. Our experience uniquely positions us to provide the enabling technology that law firms need to optimally leverage AI.

Ari Kaplan: Tell us about your background and the unique aspects of legal that appeal to Airia.

Dan Quintas: I started my career at AirWatch and later moved to OneTrust. Like other sectors, legal services face a broad AI adoption spectrum driven by the complexity of the use cases. Currently, the focus is on document-driven applications, which is a sweet spot for AI adoption. Document-heavy workflows naturally benefit from AI-driven efficiencies, particularly in discovery and contracts.

Ari Kaplan: What hurdles must law firms and legal organizations overcome to fuel AI adoption?

John Marshall: The first hurdle is getting started. Many firms already use AI without realizing it through tools like Microsoft Copilot or integrated AI features in more extensive legal tech solutions. The following two obstacles are fear and uncertainty associated with security and governance. I recommend starting small with public information use cases, like document comparison or caselaw research. By beginning with low-risk tasks, firms can see the benefits of AI without overwhelming security concerns.

Ari Kaplan: How much progress have law firms made in leveraging generative AI?

Dan Quintas: We are seeing impressive progress, especially among early innovators in the legal space. While some firms are experimenting with AI to gain a competitive advantage, others use tools like Copilot for specific use cases. However, most firms are still in the early majority phase, looking for high-value applications they can confidently roll out to their professionals. This group needs the most guidance in identifying the best use cases and developing a robust AI strategy.

Ari Kaplan: What mistakes are legal teams making in their deployment of generative AI?

John Marshall: I would not call them mistakes. Rather, they are learning opportunities. Firms should avoid putting their heads in the sand and instead take small, calculated steps to experiment and learn. The worst error is inaction. Much like others, the legal industry will see rapid adoption as AI becomes a standard tool. As I often say, you will not lose your job to AI but to a colleague who uses AI.

Ari Kaplan: How can people keep up with the rapid changes in generative AI?

Dan Quintas: It is overwhelming to track all the developments in AI. With new models and updates arriving regularly, businesses must understand how these changes affect them. The key is partnering with the right tools and platforms focusing on AI, combined with a clear strategy from leadership. Our mission at Airia is to make AI accessible to everyone, helping firms stay ahead of these advancements.

Ari Kaplan: How do you see the future of AI evolving in legal?

John Marshall: The legal industry is competitive, and no firm wants to be left behind. AI adoption will increase because of its competitive advantage—from faster processes to more accurate outcomes. We will see the adoption of generative AI start with simple tasks, like discovery or caselaw research, but eventually, tasks will be combined in more complex workflows. Law firms will likely use a variety of domain-specific and regional AI models, tailoring them to their needs, which will lead to an exciting evolution in the ecosystem.

---

Listen to the complete interview at Reinventing Professionals.

Ari Kaplan regularly interviews leaders in the legal industry and in the broader professional services community to share perspective, highlight transformative change and introduce new technology at his blog and on iTunes.

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.