Dorothee Schramm is a Swiss-qualified lawyer and independent arbitrator with over 20 years of experience. In this SCC Spotlight Talk, she discusses the role of administrative secretaries in arbitration, how AI is changing the role, and why transparency, proper boundaries and professionalization matter.

How would you describe the value a well-functioning administrative secretary brings to an arbitration?

A good administrative secretary saves time. They allow arbitrators to focus on what needs to be decided – whether on procedure or the merits – rather than on tasks with a less favourable time-value ratio, such as drafting procedural histories or completing footnotes.

They also help ensure nothing falls through the cracks – for example, noticing that something has not been filed when it should have been, or not in the required form.

Finally, a good administrative secretary provides an additional layer of quality assurance: a second pair of eyes from someone who knows the case intimately.

What are, in your view, the appropriate boundaries for the tasks an administrative secretary should and should not take on?

An administrative secretary should never be used to outsource the arbitrators’ decision-making or to weaken the direct connection between the parties and the arbitrators. Beyond these red lines, we should recognise that arbitrators have different ways of working. Some develop their reasoning by drafting in detail themselves; others work from structured bullet points and may ask a secretary to turn these into prose. Both approaches can be legitimate, provided the arbitrators remain the decision-makers.

Hence, beyond the red lines, transparency is key: arbitrators should make clear from the outset how they intend to work with an administrative secretary, and the parties should feel comfortable with the arrangement.

As AI tools become more capable of drafting, summarising, and legal research, how do you see the administrative secretary’s role evolving – and what does the future hold?

The use of AI raises particular sensitivities for arbitrators, but administrative secretaries may often be better placed to master these tools – understanding how to use them effectively and how to mitigate their weaknesses. In practice, it may be the secretary who operates the tools and then critically reviews the output to verify its accuracy.

Much will depend on the development of AI capabilities and individual working preferences of arbitrators. Even if AI becomes capable of performing many tasks currently undertaken by secretaries, many arbitrators will still prefer a human who knows their preferences, understands the case, and can manage the AI. The best way for administrative secretaries to secure their future is not to compete with AI, but to become AI-superpowered administrative secretaries.

How can institutions like the SCC contribute to legitimising and professionalising the use of administrative secretaries?

Institutions such as the SCC are well positioned to significantly contribute to legitimising and professionalising the role by discouraging the use of “shadow” administrative secretaries who work without the parties’ knowledge.

There is also an economic dimension. Where the chairperson receives less than half of the tribunal’s total fees, pays the secretary out of their own fee, and receives no fee advances, there can be an incentive to rely on young lawyers from the chair’s firm behind the scenes. Separate compensation for the secretary, or a modest increase in the chair’s share, together with advance payments at appropriate stages, would encourage transparent use and recognise the value of secretaries.

The SCC already supports the Global Tribunal Secretary Platform, which helps arbitrators identify external secretaries and boosts their visibility. In today’s increasingly professionalised practice, administrative secretary work need not be merely a stepping stone but can be a legitimate career choice – provided secretaries are not financially treated as if they did not exist.

What advice would you give to young practitioners who are considering taking on the role of administrative secretary, particularly as a stepping stone in their career?

I would give them five pieces of advice:

1. Receive proper training by taking a specialised course, such as those offered by the Swiss Arbitration Association or HKIAC.
2. Become proficient in legal AI tools and learn how to mitigate their weaknesses.
3. Join a firm or team that does arbitrator work and actively seek appointments as an administrative secretary.
4. If your firm does not do arbitrator work, seek permission to accept appointments from external arbitrators, for example through the Global Tribunal Secretary Platform.
5. Be appropriately proactive. These steps are an investment in your own future, so do not expect partners to take the initiative for you.