Leveraging Legal Technology

The biggest and most important trend I’ve seen in the legal ecosystem since I graduated from law school 15 years ago is the disaggregation of legal work. It’s a trend that shows no signs of stopping. Which I happen to view as a good thing. It used to be that the lawyers were responsible for doing 100% of the work, no matter what the task was. That’s why attention to detail came to be viewed as such an important virtue. The idea was that if your lawyer could do a good job on low value tasks, they could be trusted with higher value tasks. But then both firms & their clients realized that they could break off certain types of lower value work and delegate it to others effectively. Like providers who handled document hosting or first level doc review. Then we all discovered that software (first on premise, then private/public cloud) could effectively automate document, contract, or e-discovery workflows. It probably didn’t hurt that the economics of all this disaggregation were highly attractive. These developments also showed that highly pedigreed (and expensive) lawyers didn’t need to do all the work themselves. Instead, the work could be assigned to the appropriate provider. Division of labor had always been common at law firms—but with internal staff, like paralegals or law librarians. Now it became clear that the work could be further divided & delegated to outside providers. Things are poised to move even faster. Right now, in 2025, investors are waiting in the wings, ready to deploy large sums of capital into legal AI startups, AI-enabled services companies, or occasionally, law firms themselves. New structures, like Arizona ABS or MSOs, will likely lead to the creation of large providers, focused on even higher value tasks that drive operational efficiency to firms & clients. I don’t know what this all means for the ecosystem or the profession for that matter. Surely there will be growing pains, and things could go wrong. It’s still an open question about how all this will interact with the patchwork of draconian regulations surrounding the practice of law. But personally, I think all this change is welcome. The status quo had its own problems. So to me, it doesn’t matter if it’s traditional tech, services, or some new flavor of AI—all this disaggregation of work is a move in the right direction. 

A few days ago, a law firm partner told me something that perfectly captures what's broken in legal tech. Her firm recently rolled out a new AI contract review system. Big investment, months of training, the works. The promise? Associates would breeze through due diligence, catching key issues in minutes instead of hours. Three months later, she's noticing something weird. "The associates are using the AI," she said. "They generate the summary, highlight the key terms, get all the data points. Then they sit there and read the entire contract word-by-word anyway." "Why?" "Because they don't trust it. And honestly? Neither do I. So now instead of spending two hours reviewing a contract, they spend two hours reviewing a contract 𝘱𝘭𝘶𝘴 thirty minutes playing with AI tools that didn't actually save them any time." Here's the thing nobody wants to admit: Legal tech companies are creating technology that increase workloads while claiming to reduce it. The AI produces a beautiful summary. The associate still reads everything because their name goes on the work. The partner still reviews everything because their license (and livelihood) is on the line. And in the end, the client still gets billed for all of it. Associates don't want to review contracts faster - they want to review them with confidence that they didn't miss anything catastrophic. But apparently "confidence" doesn't demo well in sales presentations. What's one tool your team uses that officially saves time but secretly creates more work? #LegalTech #Leadership  

International Bar Association: #AI and the #LegalProfession The public release of generative AI services, such as ChatGPT, has stirred intense public interest across all sectors of society, including the legal profession. The question of whether AI could replace lawyers, as well as how society should govern AI through the law, has ceased to be a concern belonging solely to science fiction movies. It is now front and centre for the legal profession and for governments around the world. In the midst of these recent developments and empowered by its mandate to assist members of the legal profession develop and improve their legal services, and protect and advance the rule of law globally, the IBA took on the challenge of providing guidance on the impact of AI on the legal profession and the law. From the perspective of the impact of AI on the legal profession, with a focus on law firms (including solo practitioners) as users of this technology, the IBA found: 📍 there is widespread AI adoption with regional and size disparities. The larger the law firm, the greater, better, and more sophisticated the integration of AI; 📍 AI is primarily used internally for back-office administration, business development, marketing and organisational management. Again, in larger law firms, there is a higher percentage of AI usage in client- facing applications such as legal research, document assembly, contract drafting and due diligence, driven by large language models (LLMs) and AI services. 📍data governance, security, intellectual property (IP) and privacy remain significant challenges in AI governance, regardless of the law firm’s size. Smaller law firms and solo practitioners are facing more challenges in terms of AI governance and often lack policies and resources; 📍 there is an expectation that AI will have a significant impact on law firm structure, hiring and business models. This could include shifts towards fixed or value-added fees, changes in hiring policies to prioritise AI-competent attorneys 📍 training is a key priority in the context of AI. Law firms need extensive training, primarily to overcome trust issues, mitigate risk and unlock AI’s full potential. Law firms also need to continue training younger associates on legal work that may be carried out by AI, which allows them to have well-rooted expertise when they reach senior roles. Key recommendations for the IBA and its members 📍 Promote widespread AI adoption with special support for smaller firms. 📍 Enhance AI governance and policy development 📍 Support structural and cultural changes in law firms 📍 Facilitate AI training 📍 Encourage comprehensive stakeholder consultation for AI regulation 📍 Promote consistency and coherence in AI regulation 📍 Update ethical guidelines to reflect AI use 📍 Foster global collaboration and knowledge sharing

15 weeks left before the first rules of the AI Act come into effect. Struggling with where to start on AI implementation and compliance? Start with a multidisciplinary team; conduct an AI inventory; carry out AI Impact Assessments; draft AI policies; amend contracts, policies, and data protection documents to reflect AI’s role in your organisation. Ensure your team is trained in AI literacy, as required under the AI Act. To navigate AI implementation and compliance under the EU AI Act, companies must begin by understanding its scope and risk-based approach. The Act categorises AI systems into prohibited, high-risk, or general-purpose. Prohibited AI systems (the first rules coming in) include those exploiting vulnerabilities or engaging in certain AI emotional recognition. High-risk systems, such as those used in management of critical infrastructure, require strict oversight, including documentation, risk assessments, and ongoing monitoring. General-purpose AI systems, widely used across industries, may also face regulatory scrutiny due to their broad impact. The first step for companies is conducting a comprehensive AI inventory. This involves cataloguing all AI systems in use or under development to determine their classification under the AI Act. Through this inventory, companies can assess their compliance obligations and identify any systems that may need modification or discontinuation to meet the Act’s standards. Data protection is a cornerstone of AI compliance. The AI Act mandates that data used in AI systems be high quality, representative, and free from bias. This is especially crucial for high-risk systems, which must undergo continuous risk assessments to protect fundamental rights. GDPR compliance is also essential for any AI system that processes personal data, and companies must ensure their data governance strategies focus on transparency, accountability, and safeguarding individual rights. Contracts are a critical component of AI implementation. Organisations must revisit and amend contracts to address how AI impacts their legal and operational frameworks. These amendments should explicitly cover liability for AI-generated decisions, intellectual property ownership of AI-generated outputs, and data protection compliance. Contracts must minimise legal exposure. Additionally, intellectual property issues around AI, such as ownership of outputs or the use of third-party data, should be clearly defined in these agreements. Following the AI inventory, companies must conduct an AI impact assessment. This assessment includes both a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) and a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA). The extraterritorial scope of the AI Act means that even non-EU companies must comply if their AI systems impact the EU market. Non-compliance can result in significant fines, making early compliance essential. 15 weeks left to comply.

Picture this. It’s 2027. No one manually reviews contracts anymore. AI contract review tools are the norm. Junior lawyers aren’t trained to sift through clauses, hunting for inconsistencies in numbering or undefined capitalised terms - AI catches them instantly. Instead, their onboarding includes prompt engineering, AI oversight, and strategic negotiation tactics. Legal teams don’t just review contracts; they orchestrate them. AI handles the granular details, while lawyers train, refine, and direct it to align with business objectives. The skillset has shifted - knowing how to structure a contract review workflow, optimise AI outputs, and drive deal efficiency is now more valuable than manually checking clauses. Workflows are seamless. Sales, procurement, and finance move faster, with legal as an integrated force, not a checkpoint. Lawyers spend their time solving problems, not searching for them. In this world, legal isn’t reactive - it’s proactive, strategic and AI-powered. Are we ready for it? Or are we still training lawyers for a world that no longer exists? #futurecontracts #legalinnovation #legalskills

A Recovering Lawyer's Guide to LegalTech As April arrives, my inbox fills with messages from attorneys exploring career pivots. "How do I break into LegalTech?" "Do I need coding skills?" These questions echo my own journey from practicing at one of India's largest firms to now leading Digital & Innovation team and building the Indian LegalTech Network (ILTN). Here are 5 Steps to Successfully Navigate Your Transition 1. Build your LegalTech network Attend LegalGeek, ILTA events, or local Legal Hackers chapters. While running The Blue Pencil in law school, I discovered the LegalTech community is refreshingly approachable—people genuinely enjoy what they do, making connections more authentic than traditional legal networking. 2. Find technology opportunities in your current role Don't wait for a formal transition. Speak to your IT or innovation teams about joining projects. Volunteer for internal committees focused on process improvement. These experiences develop relevant skills while testing your interest without commitment. 3. Develop adjacent skills beyond legal knowledge Abandon self-limiting beliefs like "I cannot do tech." Master advanced features in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Google Workspace. Learn design thinking, process mapping, and product management fundamentals—far more valuable in most LegalTech roles than coding. 4. Build something concrete Today's no-code tools enable anyone to create functional applications. Identify a problem in your practice, map the process, and build a prototype using Bubble, Bryter, or Microsoft Power Automate. Demonstrating this initiative speaks volumes to potential employers. 5. Choose hands-on experience over theoretical training While LegalTech programs proliferate, practical experience typically provides better value. If pursuing further education, prioritize programs offering real-world projects over purely academic approaches. Where Legal Expertise Creates Value! Most LegalTech roles don't require coding—they need people who identify the right problems and bring together solutions. Key positions include: -Legal Solutions Architect -Legal Project Manager -Practice Development -Legal Operations Manager Resources That Made the Difference 1. Richard Susskind's "Tomorrow's Lawyers" 2. Communities like Legal Hackers, International Legal Technology Association (ILTA), Indian LegalTech Network (ILTN) 3. Practical skills in design thinking and process mapping Start Today - Start Where You Are Become your team's tech power user. Volunteer with LegalTech startups. Approach this transition with genuine curiosity rather than career desperation—successful legal innovators see problems as opportunities, not obstacles. (and as always Projects/Solutions you built > > Certificate courses) The pictures from the amazing International Legal Technology Association (ILTA)'s ILTACON 2024!

The legal tech market just got a lot more crowded. And I want law firms and in-house teams to understand what is actually happening here. For the last few years the legal AI landscape has looked something like this. Harvey. Valued at $11 billion. Used by 100,000 lawyers across 1,300 firms. Legora. Built specifically for law firms and growing fast. CoCounsel. Thomson Reuters putting its full weight behind legal AI. Spellbook. Contract drafting and review. Clio. Practice management meets AI. iManage. Document management with AI built in. And then Anthropic launched Claude for Legal in May. Legal became the number one power user function on their entire platform. Microsoft followed with a Legal Agent built directly into Word. *Saving my thoughts on this for another day* Two weeks ago, OpenAI entered the room. Jason Boehmig, the founder of Ironclad, a contract management platform valued at $3.2 billion, has joined OpenAI to lead product for the legal vertical. This is important because firms are conservative and will go all in with one provider quietly giving up the freedom to move as the technology changes underneath them. For my junior lawyers watching all of this unfold. This is the most significant career opportunity your generation has ever been handed. Every one of these platforms needs lawyers who understand how to use them critically. Including lawyers who can interrogate an output rather than just generate one. It's worth the hours you're putting in now. 📸 The Lawyer (see its website for the full story)

One challenge we're seeing more as enterprises adopt AI: navigating the legal diligence process. I'm curious if other enterprise AI vendors have encountered this. With AI evolving so fast, many enterprise legal departments are still figuring out how to evaluate risks — especially when it comes to data usage, bias, and model behavior. It’s not due to a lack of care. The reality is that the frameworks and language to assess these risks are still catching up. Some examples we’ve seen: We often receive detailed diligence questionnaires from prospective customers asking how we “train our models,” even though we don’t build foundational models — only a handful of companies do. That misunderstanding alone can lead to weeks of clarification. We’ve also been asked to prove our AI doesn't introduce bias — even though our use cases involve software deployment, not decisions like lending or hiring. Legal teams don’t always have the tools to differentiate those contexts, and understandably so — it's new territory for everyone. The core issue isn’t resistance — it’s a knowledge gap. Without clarity on the actual risks, many teams default to asking what they can, even if it’s not fully aligned with the use case. Getting the tech right is only half the battle. Educating customers and ensuring everyone is up to speed on the legal, security, and compliance landscape is just as critical.

>> Legal isn’t your bottleneck.    Your process is.   Most teams still run 2-week sprints with 12-week legal queues. That delay kills momentum, market windows, and morale. The fix isn’t “more lawyers” or “less risk”—it’s augmenting legal with AI so the right human reviews the right thing at the right time. Here’s what changes when GenAI does the first pass: 🔹 country-specific requirements mapped automatically 🔹a structured risk score per feature, and a prioritized list of actions for the Product Owner.  Legal shifts from blanket slowdowns to targeted interventions.   Result? Time-to-market drops dramatically and review costs collapse—precisely because expert attention concentrates on high-risk edge cases instead of drowning in the routine. If you believe velocity and compliance are a trade-off, you’re still playing last year’s game. The new playbook is “fast because compliant”—where AI clears the lane and counsel dunks the critical calls. This is exactly what the new Eraneos whitepaper breaks down—practical, enterprise-ready ways to turn LegalAI from bottleneck into accelerator. Download the full whitepaper here. 🔗 https://lnkd.in/edPDaCCg   ---- 👉 Love my content? ☑ Follow me on LinkedIn: https://lnkd.in/gjUQk7HF #AI #LegalTech #EnterpriseAI #Compliance #DigitalTransformation

When law meets AI, the goal isn’t to replace human judgment. It’s to amplify it. Across India’s legal ecosystem, professionals spend countless hours on research, repetitive drafting, and document-heavy processes. Every hour we can give back to lawyers is an hour they can invest in counsel, strategy, and better outcomes for clients and citizens. That’s why I’m encouraged by how India’s legal community is beginning to adopt AI in practical and responsible ways. Two powerful examples stand out: • SCC Online is piloting an AI‑powered conversational legal research assistant built on Azure OpenAI and Azure AI Search. This is enabling lawyers to ask complex questions in natural language and receive expert‑grade, citation-backed insights. • Trilegal is embedding AI into everyday workflows using Microsoft 365 Copilot and Azure OpenAI to streamline research, document review, and client collaboration, so teams can move faster without compromising quality or confidentiality. What I find most important is the “how”: using AI as a trusted assistant for high-volume, repetitive work, while accountability and judgment remain firmly with legal professionals. That balance is what improves accuracy, frees up capacity, and ultimately strengthens access to justice. It’s inspiring to see how technology is being applied with care and accountability in such a critical sector. If you’d like to see how this is taking shape across India’s legal ecosystem, you can read more here: https://lnkd.in/gufA3PJE #AI #LegalTech #AzureOpenAI #ResponsibleAI SCC Online Karan Malik Sumain Malik Trilegal Nishant Parikh Nikhil Narendran Dr. Avnish Kshatriya Kuruvila M Jacob