AI for Legal: 5 Strategies to Seamlessly Integrate New Tools

As in-house legal teams explore generative AI (GenAI) software, they must navigate critical considerations around its benefits, leadership buy-in, data security, and the necessary cultural shifts. With the ever-present pressure to achieve more with fewer resources, corporate lawyers are finding a powerful ally in GenAI. The question is no longer if in-house counsel will encounter AI, but rather how soon and to what extent it will shape their work.

"You don’t want the transformation of your profession to happen to you; you need to be part of it", advises Heath Harris, digital transformation leader at Ernst & Young law.

As this transformation gains momentum, legal professionals with experience in GenAI will become increasingly valuable. A Thomson Reuters survey revealed that over 90% of in-house legal talent anticipates that basic AI training will become mandatory within five years, with more than a quarter expecting this requirement by the end of 2024.

Agaisnt this backdrop, Docusign and Ernst & Young recently co-hosted a webinar to discuss how AI can be harnessed for agreement management. Drawing insights from this discussion between Harris and Jennifer Nguyen, Docusign’s deputy general counsel, here are five key tips for AI adoption in legal departments:

Nearly every organization is assessing GenAI tools, with many prepared to invest substantial amounts to capitalize on their advantages. According to various industry surveys, 42% of general counsel believe GenAI will have a transformative impact on the legal profession, with an additional 32% predicting a significant impact, as highlighted in the 2024 State of the Corporate Law Department report by Thomson Reuters.

"The utility of AI is evident," Harris noted in an interview with Legal Dive. "The C-suite is now on board," with management increasingly shifting from optional exploration to mandatory implementation of AI solutions. However, it is crucial that chief legal officers and other legal department leaders share this enthusiasm for AI adoption and the forthcoming transition.

For many legal professionals, GenAI and future AI advancements will introduce a fundamentally different approach to routine tasks. Patience is essential; the initial stages of AI adoption will demand time from lawyers.

"How do we carve out time to integrate it, given the disruption it brings?" Harris questioned. "There's a change-management challenge because you’re asking people to pause their work to adopt a new workflow."

It’s also worth noting that many lawyers are open, if not eager, to embrace this evolution in their practice. Over time, experience with AI may become a critical factor in attracting and retaining top legal talent, Harris added.

AI tools tend to be most effective when they integrate seamlessly with existing software and platforms that legal professionals already use. For instance, many lawyers rely heavily on Microsoft Word as a central tool for document creation. Therefore, plug-ins tailored to these familiar platforms are essential to help lawyers experiment with AI and gradually expand its use in their work. This requires close collaboration between legal operations and technology teams to ensure that AI fits smoothly into current workflows.

"When I encounter a point of friction, I just shut down," Nguyen remarked, emphasizing the need for intuitive, non-disruptive tools.

The AI transition offers a unique opportunity to shape your work processes and those of your colleagues, Harris noted. "Start with a coalition of willing participants. Meet them where they are and give them back their time. You’re paving the way for a collective journey."

The significant investments companies are making in AI systems are driven by expected efficiency gains, including within legal departments. Increasingly, these returns are being measured in months rather than years, Harris observed.

A key consideration for senior managers is the speed at which teams can adapt and realize productivity improvements. Different use cases will yield different timelines. For instance, lawyers involved in contract drafting and redlining may experience quicker gains from GenAI than those working on intellectual property matters.

“How quickly can I go from having a tool in hand to understanding it and advising my clients or business?” Harris asked. Nguyen succinctly added, “What matters is whether AI is actually solving problems.”

Legal executives assessing AI vendors must scrutinize their approach to data handling. Large language models powering GenAI rely on vast datasets, raising significant concerns for legal departments. Key questions to pose to vendors include:

• How is my data consumed and processed?
• Does my data remain within your system to improve the AI model?
• Could my company’s data inform the platform and inadvertently surface in outputs for other clients?

Harris and Nguyen suggest that data should not persist within the platform after a task is completed. Lawyers also bear a "duty of understanding" to monitor how their AI tools function and ensure the integrity of outputs.

Author: Justin Bachman
Edited by: Legal Data AI

Let us know about this, we will study the possibility of preparing a digest on your topic. In any case we will respond to your request in a letter if you left your email.