Legal Technology Trends

Hot take: the #legalengineer is now the most critical role in the in-house legal department. Not the GC. Not the deputy. Not the head of legal ops. The person who sits at the intersection of legal process expertise, technology fluency, and change management and who can re-engineer how legal work gets done as AI reshapes what's possible is what separates the teams that will come out of this period ahead from the ones that will have a lot of expensive technology and not much to show for it. In-house legal is redesigning itself right now. What goes to outside counsel? What does AI handle? How do we staff? You can't answer those questions or execute on the answers without someone who can architect the new model. I've been in this space for over two decades. This is the role I'd prioritize above almost anything else right now. https://lnkd.in/gCy6tQr5

What I’ve learned from teaching lawyers how to use AI. For over two years, I’ve been teaching legal teams how to use AI. AI adoption isn’t like past legal tech waves. Lawyers are more engaged, excited, and optimistic about AI than past legal tech solutions. Here are nine trends I'm seeing in AI adoption in legal teams: 1️⃣ Early adopters are driving change. Lawyers that already use AI in their daily lives are advocating for AI use, teaching and pushing their legal teams forward. 2️⃣ Hesitant lawyers tend fall into two camps. (1) Skeptics (rightly questioning the results) and (2) Cautious users (worried about how data is used, and/or inputting confidential information or personal data). 3️⃣ Most teams recognize they need training to use AI effectively. Adoption happens when lawyers find their own use case(s). That requires access to tools, training, and freedom to experiment. Until then, AI remains a novelty. 4️⃣ Keeping up is hard. Everyone feels the intensity of the pace of change. Even Ethan Mollick and Allie K. Miller acknowledge it's hard to keep up. Although I've been impressed with Kyle Bahr's articles and posts! 5️⃣ AI champions are emerging. More legal teams are designating AI champions, lawyers, legal ops pros, legal engineers, governance leads, or internal AI advocates to drive adoption within their teams and also across the company. You have a unique opportunity to become an AI expert and make an impact across entire organizations. (For example, I taught a CTO how to improve the instructions for a company GPT!) 6️⃣ Broad-purpose AI tools are hitting limitations. Legal teams who started with in-house OpenAI ChatGPT solutions and similar tools, like Copilot, are running into walls. They are beginning to see they need legal-specific AI solutions. One major challenge is articulating this need to their organization to justify additional budget for legal specific tools. 7️⃣ Understanding AI is a tool, not magic. More legal professionals now understand that AI won’t replace them. It’s here to make their work more efficient, not take over entirely. 8️⃣ Integration is the key to long-term adoption. The legal teams making the most progress are the ones experimenting and exploring how they can embed AI into daily workflows. These teams are moving beyond prompting, and building assistants and embedding AI tools into workflows. 9️⃣ Adoption isn’t fast. Discovering how AI can work for you and actually building solutions are two different exercises. Both require investment to see real returns. I'd love to know whether you are seeing the same trends? Or have you experienced some of these observations play out?

Most people still think law firms drive litigation. They’re wrong. A quiet revolution is underway in-house, and it's changing who drafts, drives, and defines litigation strategy. Here’s what we’re seeing: the future of litigation is being built internally. Not just managed. Not just overseen. Actually architected. This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is an emerging trend and rapidly increasing practice across industries. And it’s not just big companies. Not just former litigators. Not just cost control. It’s about leverage. Speed. Control. And in the age of AI, it’s about owning the first draft and setting the tone from the start. Across dozens of interviews, one surprise stood out: Litigation is becoming a design discipline inside companies. What that looks like: In-house teams systematizing protocols, dispute workflows, and negotiation frameworks Legal professionals operating more like product managers than passive reviewers Modular playbooks powering scalable, strategic litigation execution We are seeing this trend grow. AI and automation aren't just saving hours. They're reshaping how litigation begins and who leads it. This raises the bar for everyone: If you're in-house, are you ready to lead, not just manage? If you're outside counsel, can you collaborate as a second draft, not a first? If you're building legal tech, are you designing for internal command centers? This shift is not hypothetical. It is happening. Not everywhere yet, but fast enough to demand attention. Grateful to my brilliant co-authors, Adam Rouse, Tamra Tyree Moore, Renee Meisel, and Kassi Burns, for collaboration to surface this shift in our new piece for CodeX, The Stanford Center for Legal Informatics. What are you seeing on the ground? -------- Olga V. Mack Building trust and creating new categories at the intersection of contract intelligence, commerce, and AI. Let’s shape the future together.

AI Won’t Replace Lawyers—But It Will Make In-House Counsels Unstoppable The legal industry is evolving—not because lawyers are being replaced, but because the power dynamics are shifting. While many debates focus on whether AI will replace lawyers (spoiler: it won’t), the real question is: Who benefits the most from AI in the legal ecosystem? In my view, the answer is clear: In-house Counsels. Here’s why: 1. AI as the Great Enabler AI automates routine tasks like contract reviews and legal research, freeing legal teams to focus on complex, strategic work. AI doesn’t replace lawyers; it amplifies their impact. 2. In-House Counsels as Strategic Leaders With AI-driven insights, General Counsels (GCs) influence corporate strategy, M&A decisions, ESG governance, and risk management.  Legal is no longer support—it’s a business driver at the boardroom level. 3. Less Dependency on Law Firms Routine legal work like due diligence, compliance checks, and contract analysis can now be handled more efficiently in-house with AI tools. Result? Law firms focus on specialized advisory, while in-house teams manage a broader scope independently. 4. Cost Efficiency Drives Change  AI reduces reliance on external counsel, enabling predictable legal budgets and cost optimization.  Legal shifts from a cost center to a value driver aligned with business growth. 5. The Growth of “AI-Augmented” Legal Teams  In-house teams are expanding with AI tools for contract management, compliance automation, and risk forecasting.  AI-powered teams: Smarter, not just bigger. 6. Law Firms Will Adapt, Not Disappear  This isn’t a doomsday scenario for law firms—it’s a wake-up call. Firms will pivot toward specialized advisory, complex litigation, cross-border matters, and areas where human expertise is irreplaceable. Law firms that embrace AI will thrive in this new landscape. The billable hour isn’t disappearing—it’s being redefined. 7. Data-Driven Decision Making  AI transforms legal data into insights, enabling GCs to make proactive decisions on compliance, governance, and risk.  From legal advisors to strategic enablers. 8. Ethical AI & Data Security In-house teams will lead on AI governance, data privacy, and ethical compliance, navigating frameworks like the EU AI Act. Not just using AI—regulating it. 9. Human Judgment Still Reigns AI handles data, but critical decisions rely on human judgment—ethics, negotiation, and strategic thinking.  The “what” can be automated—but the “why” still needs lawyers. 10. The Future is Hybrid: Tech + Talent The most successful legal teams will blend AI efficiency with human expertise.  It’s not AI vs. lawyers—it’s AI + lawyers. What’s Your Take? What’s the biggest AI-driven transformation you’ve experienced—or anticipate—in your legal team?  Let’s discuss in the comments! #LegalTech #InHouseCounsel #AIinLaw #LegalInnovation #CorporateGovernance #FutureOfWork #AIandLaw #DigitalTransformation #LegalStrategy #ArtificialIntelligence

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗚𝗖 𝘀𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲 (it's not what you think) In almost every GC search I've run this year, AI has come up. Not as hype, but as a practical tool for doing more with less. The change is happening in two places: how companies buy legal services and how in-house teams deliver them. 𝗢𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗹 𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 More companies are testing providers that build AI into their delivery model. These AI-enabled firms can produce certain outputs in a fraction of the time, often at fixed or outcome-based prices. That gives GCs negotiating leverage if they can scope work precisely and define success in business terms. 𝗢𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗻-𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 AI is helping lean teams deliver high-value counsel without ballooning headcount. I'm seeing in-house teams use it to: • Speed up contract review and redlining while keeping judgment calls in human hands • Monitor regulatory changes in real time across multiple jurisdictions • Automate compliance reporting and board-level metrics • Capture and organize institutional knowledge so advice isn't lost in email archives The result is more time for GCs and senior lawyers to focus on strategic decisions, stakeholder relationships, and risk framing (the parts of the job no model can replace). 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 When technology reduces the cost and time of routine legal work, the GC's focus moves toward orchestration: • Designing the right mix of internal capability, outside expertise, and technology • Leading change management in the department (AI adoption still requires process and culture work) • Helping the business understand when speed creates advantage and when caution is still essential 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗵𝗶𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 The GCs thriving in this environment aren't waiting for a mandate. They test AI-enabled solutions in low-risk areas, measure the impact, and use early wins to build CEO and board confidence. They see AI as a tool to redeploy people toward highest-value work rather than replacing them. The inflection point is coming where GCs will need to balance technology adoption with sound risk management. That balance may prove more valuable than pure technical fluency. Change is gradual but inevitable. The GCs who experiment now will be ready when stakeholders start asking why things can't be done faster and cheaper. 𝘐𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘯𝘷𝘪𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘐 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘎𝘊𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘴.

In late 2024, I was speaking to one of Priori's investors, who is firmly embedded in the law firm, legal ops and legaltech ecosystem, about our 2025 sales and marketing strategy, and they said, "You know, Basha, I hear about outside counsel management a lot less frequently than I did a couple of years ago." That stopped me in my tracks since that's been one of Priori's key themes for quite a while now, and I decided to ask on all calls I had with in-house professionals -- from GCs to legal ops to practicing attorneys -- what their priorities are for 2025. What I heard both confirmed the observation that "outside counsel management" was not the # 1 issue on most priority lists, but "cost-savings" is (often) the top. It's an important distinction, and one I would urge outside counsel to take seriously, because while outside counsel management is part of the story, in-house teams are increasingly thinking about how to decrease their reliance on outside counsel in order to drive savings. Here are a few high-level notes from my conversations: ✒️ AI, AI, AI. In-house teams believe they can implement AI internally to insource workflows that are currently being sent out to outside counsel. They also want their outside counsel to be using best-in-class AI to drive value and cost-savings -- and think that law firms that aren't working furiously on their AI strategy are "delusional." ✒️ Training internal resources. As in-house teams believe they can use AI to drive efficiency, they also think that they can upskill their internal resources to do more. Forgive my rudimentary math, but given that the average in-house lawyer in the U.S. makes ~150k per year and the average Am Law 100 billing rate is ~$1k/hour, the value here is striking. (From my perch, this makes me extraordinarily bullish on flexible talent as a pillar of smart resourcing strategies, but that's a story for a different post.) ✒️ Fragmentation and geographic arbitrage. One downstream consequence of the first 2 points is that in-house leaders predict that they will be fragmenting legal transactions and litigation between firms, internal AI workflows, and ALSPs with a particular focus also on geographic arbitrage. They don't think firms will continue to own projects end-to-end in the same way they do today. Of course, many strategies do still revolve around outside counsel management -- RFPs, panel creation, convergence initiatives, bill review, data-driven rate review etc. -- and if the above trends do indeed come to fruition, these outside counsel management techniques will gain prevalence because in-house teams will have a stronger starting position because they are less reliant on outside counsel. 

A staggering 79% of all legal startup investments since 2024 have gone to companies betting big on AI. Why the AI obsession? For in-house legal teams, this isn’t just about flashy tech. It’s about escaping the never-ending cycle of contract reviews, compliance headaches, and document drudgery. Here’s how: 1/ AI is taking one for the team ↳Legal research that used to take hours? Done in minutes. NDAs clogging up your inbox? Automated. AI is tackling the soul-crushing, repetitive work, so legal teams can focus on strategy and negotiations. 2/ Compliance without the chaos ↳Regulations change constantly. AI tools now track updates in real-time, flagging risks before they become problems. No more “Oh no, did we miss a deadline?“. 3/ Contracts that practically write themselves ↳AI isn’t just reading contracts anymore, it’s drafting, analyzing, and even negotiating. Imagine an AI tool that highlights risk clauses, suggests edits, and ensures your contracts align with company policies. The result? Faster deals, fewer redlines, and no late-night panic edits. 4/ Legal strategy, powered by data ↳What if your legal team could predict contract disputes before they happen? AI-driven analytics help in-house teams spot trends, assess risks, and make smarter decisions, not just react to problems. 5/ Less firefighting, more business impact ↳Legal teams are no longer just approving deals, they’re driving them. With AI handling the grunt work, GCs and legal ops teams can move faster without being the “department of no.” Hold on. Before you panic. AI isn’t replacing lawyers, it’s just adding wheels to their shoes. For in-house teams already using AI: Be honest, would you ever go back? #legalindustry #inhouselawyers #inhouselegal #lawyerslife #legaltech

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐅𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐈𝐬 𝐚𝐭 𝐚 𝐁𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐏𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐄𝐱𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐓𝐞𝐚𝐦𝐬 𝐇𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐧’𝐭 𝐂𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐔𝐩 Across global markets, the in-house legal model is being stretched beyond recognition. The real disruption is not AI or regulation. It is the widening gap between what companies expect from legal and how legal time is actually deployed. High-cost talent is spending hours in meetings where no decisions are made, reacting to artificial urgency, and carrying administrative weight that adds activity but not judgment. Attention is the real currency of legal, and in many organizations, it is being consumed by noise. Three forces are now rewriting the mandate. 1. AI has exposed the difference between legal work and legal value If technology can handle scale and standardization, then legal’s strategic contribution must come from what cannot be automated: judgment, influence, and the ability to turn ambiguity into advantage. Many teams are operating at full capacity, but too much of that capacity is tied up in presence and process rather than impact. 2. Regulatory fragmentation has turned legal into a geopolitical early-warning system The divergence between the United States, Europe, and Asia is accelerating. Data, supply chains, workforce models, ESG. Nothing moves in sync anymore. Legal teams that can read global signals early and shape enterprise strategy before disruption lands are becoming indispensable to CEOs and boards. 3. CEOs now need legal leaders who build systems that scale The modern legal leader is expected to create clarity, accelerate decision-making, and design governance that works across markets. This is enterprise infrastructure, not support. Organizations that still treat legal as a gatekeeper will lose speed, talent, and strategic advantage. The question for any executive team is simple. 𝐈𝐬 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐟𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐚𝐲, 𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫? The companies that elevate legal into a true strategic engine will move faster and navigate complexity with greater confidence. The leaders who step into this expanded mandate with global fluency and commercial clarity will help define the next decade of enterprise leadership. How organizations choose to evolve their legal function over the next few years will say a great deal about how seriously they take strategy, governance, and long-term value creation. #GeneralCounsel #ChiefLegalOfficer #InHouseCounsel #ExecutiveLeadership #BoardGovernance #LegalStrategy #CorporateGovernance #GlobalBusiness #EnterpriseRisk #AIinBusiness #LeadershipDevelopment

Law firms are sitting on a time bomb 💣 When I was in practice, the "billable hour" wasn't just a metric—it was the bedrock of the entire business model. The secret everyone knew but no one said out loud? Inefficiency was profitable. The longer a task took, the more the firm made. But according to our State of In-house 2026 report, the fuse has been lit, and it’s shorter than Big Law thinks. We surveyed 132 in-house lawyers with a hypothetical: "If you had to cut your external legal budget by 50% next year, how confident are you that you could still manage legal risk effectively?" The answer should keep law firm partners awake at night: 44% of respondents are confident they could handle it. Specifically: - 5% are very confident they could manage risk with half the budget. - 39% are somewhat confident. Nearly half of the market believes they can walk away from half of their external spend without compromising the business. That is a staggering shift in leverage. Why the sudden bravado? It isn’t just budget pressure; it’s the AI-enabled "In-house Reclamation." In-house teams are no longer waiting for law firms to innovate. They are doing it themselves: - 68% of respondents believe that at least 11% of work they currently send to firms could be handled in-house using AI over the next two years. - 11% believe they can reclaim 26-50% of that work. - 9% believe they can automate and bring back more than 50% of the work they currently outsource. Here is where it gets personal. Most in-house lawyers believe that if a law firm uses AI to finish a task faster, that efficiency should be reflected in a lower bill. Instead, the opposite is happening. Fees are generally going up, and there’s a massive trust deficit: - Most in-house lawyers don't even know if their firms are using AI. - Of those who suspect they are, 73% believe the firm is keeping all or most of the savings made by using the technology. As an ex-lawyer, I get the pressure to maintain PPP (profit per equity partner). But as a CEO, I see a "Kodak moment" unfolding. You cannot keep a "black box" around your efficiency while your customers are buying the same tech you use to replace your services. If you aren't passing on productivity gains, you aren't a partner—you're a legacy cost. And in 2026, legacy costs are the first thing GCs are cutting. The firms that survive this "time bomb" will be the ones that stop hiding their AI use and start billing for value, not for how long they can keep the lights on. The fuse is burning. Are you ready for the fallout? #LegalTech #GenerativeAI #InHouseLegal #FutureOfLaw #Juro

The Inverted Expert Pyramid: How Senior Lawyers Thrive in Lean Law Firms For as long as I’ve been a legal practitioner, the traditional law firm structure has been a "pyramid": a relatively small group of senior partners supported by junior partners, associates, and paralegals, who make up the majority of the firm’s population and HR spend. With the advent of new AI-enabled technologies however, this structure is on the verge of being flipped on its head. Are we ready? Imagine a seasoned litigator, formerly a senior or principal associate at a 500-person firm. She could go through the grind of making junior partner, then equity partner.  Instead, she quits, now choosing to lead a 5-person boutique practice.  Instead of a pool of junior associates, she leverages AI for drafting and research, legal analysis, and contract redlining. She doesn’t use an army of admin, but a suite of tools: Lawmatics for CRM, BillerAssist for billing, and Laurel AI for timesheets. Her lean team matches the results (and revenues) of larger firms, but with greater agility. Traditional law firms rely heavily on volume-driven, junior-heavy pyramids - expensive, labour-intensive, and inefficient. AI disrupts this model by automating tasks traditionally assigned to junior staff, enabling experienced lawyers to deliver higher-quality work with fewer resources. Are we clinging to outdated structures that may soon be obsolete? How can AI enhance, rather than replace, our expertise? How do we adapt? LexisNexis reports AI adoption by UK lawyers surged from 11% (July 2023) to 41% (Sept 2024), with firms like Clifford Chance and Bird & Bird as early adopters. Gartner predicts corporate in-house teams will double tech spending by 2027 to automate low-value tasks. Generative AI is reshaping legal workflows - document analysis, drafting, and more. General-purpose AI is automating admin from HR and accounting to billing and onboarding, tasks once handled by sizeable staff. Lawyers should intelligently integrate AI to automate routine tasks, freeing them for strategic thinking and nuanced client work. And embrace alternative fee arrangements reflecting these efficiencies. The future isn’t human versus machine - it’s human-machine synergy. Lawyers who adapt won't merely survive; they'll thrive. Share your thoughts - let’s navigate this transformation together.