The rush to implement GenAI has left some law firms scrambling to integrate its use with pre-existing technology; but as a panel at ILTA Evolve revealed, a plan for evaluation, adoption, and iteration can go a long way
MYRTLE BEACH, S.C. 鈥� In the rush to adopt generative AI (GenAI) technologies, there is one simple fact that some eager attorneys and law firm leaders may forget: GenAI still won鈥檛 be the only technology in use. Indeed, any GenAI system not only needs to stand on its own, but it also needs to be integrated into pre-existing data systems, technology processes, and attorneys鈥� daily workflows.
Sound difficult? The reality of true integration may be even tougher. According to a panel, AI Made Practical: Enhancing Existing Tools and Driving Firm Adoption at the recent conference, any legal technologist entering the GenAI world with expectations of a perfect rollout will soon have those notions roundly distinguished.
However, that doesn鈥檛 mean that driving adoption of GenAI tools is impossible. It simply takes planning, from initial evaluation through implementation and feedback.
First, the evaluation
When the firm Frost Brown Todd began its GenAI journey, firm leaders started with urgency: They needed GenAI now, said panelist Masako Hashimoto, the firm鈥檚 Senior Legal Project Manager. 鈥淥ur thing was that GenAI was going to change the practice of law, and if we don鈥檛 figure this out, others will,鈥� she said.
This meant evaluating not only AI tools, but their applications to firm attorneys, all at the same time. Hashimoto noted that firm leadership understood that the GenAI implementation didn鈥檛 need to immediately be perfect, and it would be supplementing rather than replacing tasks. They simply required speed.
Many law firms have found themselves in the same conundrum, given the rapid pace of GenAI development since ChatGPT鈥檚 initial release less than 30 months ago. However, this need for rapid implementation means that many legal technologists have had to learn not only a new technology, but how lawyers would be implementing it in a practical way.
GenAI was going to change the practice of law, and if we don鈥檛 figure this out, others will.
Panelist Victor Chavez, Knowledge & Innovation Attorney at Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, said he has seen some firms fall into the trap of evaluating technology before knowing how it鈥檚 going to be used 鈥� a totally backwards mindset. 鈥淵ou can have the coolest, shiniest AI car that can drive you anywhere you want to go,鈥� Chavez said. 鈥淏ut if you don鈥檛 have a map 鈥� the problem you鈥檙e trying to solve 鈥� you鈥檙e not going to get anywhere effectively.鈥�
Yet, even if legal technologists don鈥檛 immediately know the use case for an AI tool, they should be working on ways to solicit that feedback quickly. Another panelist, Christopher Fryer, Chief Information Officer at Hanson Bridgett, explained that when his firm was testing Microsoft Copilot, he saw quick interest among the human resources team 鈥� both because of the use case potential, but perhaps more importantly, because of weekly meetings the team would have to share worthwhile prompts and tips.
It’s an idea he鈥檚 taking forward to fully roll-out Copilot and other tools, with a monthly session in which attorneys can highlight to one another what they鈥檝e learned. 鈥淥ne of the most important things you can do is gather those use cases and showcase them,鈥� Fryer said.
Encouraging adoption
Even after a GenAI tool is selected, however, the work is far from done. Frost Brown鈥檚 Hashimoto said she approaches GenAI adoption as 鈥渘ot a technology project, it鈥檚 a change management project.鈥� In one recent case, her firm鈥檚 attorneys were very excited about a new tool, and the firm was excited to provide training and licenses 鈥� until two months later, when Hashimoto noticed usage had dropped precipitously.
It was a case of mismatched expectations. 鈥淭hey thought that GenAI technology was something that would work like a washing machine. They would put the dirty clothes in, they would press the button, and they would get what they get,鈥� Hashimoto said.
Undeterred, she and the Frost Brown Todd team retooled. They relaunched the tool internally with a team of 24 specifically chosen lawyers across various practice areas. The attorneys dedicated between two and four hours a week to dive into the technology; and crucially, the firm would give them up to 30 billable hours credit for doing so. Hashimoto鈥檚 team was there for white glove help, but not to tell people how to do things because they wanted attorneys to adopt the tool in ways that would fit with their pre-existing work.
鈥淭hat vulnerability approach really worked,鈥� she explained, adding that the attorneys would 鈥渓earn from each other much better than the formal training sessions.鈥�
This can make encouraging adoption even more difficult for legal technologists, noted Chavez of Sheppard Mullin. 鈥淭he hardest part of this current period right now is that the technology is the easy side,鈥� he said. 鈥淭he harder part is making your knowledge and your mastery an approachable asset for the attorneys.鈥�
They thought that GenAI technology was something that would work like a washing machine. They would put the dirty clothes in, they would press the button, and they would get what they get.
For his part, Chavez said that he鈥檚 spent much of the past year simply trying to be available within the firm, even to the point of being 鈥渁nnoying.鈥� Even if attorneys learn best from one another, the technology function can still be a helpful ear in a time of need. Plus, simply by being available, firm technologists can more easily capture precious data.
鈥淲e created those spaces for the attorneys to come by and say, 鈥業 was thinking of doing 1, 2, and 3, how can AI help me?鈥欌�� Chavez said. 鈥淎nd that鈥檚 where you collect your use cases.鈥�
Supporting ongoing iteration
Indeed, law firm technologists may be operating with a dearth of data in the early days of the GenAI lifecycle. Hanson Bridgett鈥檚 Fryer acknowledged that not many have figured out the magic formula to measure GenAI鈥檚 ROI. For now, he鈥檚 focused on a path to building ROI in the future: Start small, build those wins, and have a story that people can rally around.
鈥淚 would not lead with this as an efficiency tool, because every time I do with a partner, they walk away,鈥� Fryer said. Instead, he鈥檚 approaching GenAI an idea-generation tool. 鈥淚n order to build ROI, you have to have a story, and you have to have something that people will listen to.鈥�
In these early GenAI days, the panel suggested that it鈥檚 important for firm leaders to know where to focus their efforts. Hashimoto said she sorts attorneys into four general buckets: i) those who are skeptical that AI can perform any type of legal work; ii) those who don鈥檛 care and will continue to use their old processes; iii) those who are far ahead and know everything about the technology already; and iv) those who may be skeptical but are also interested in seeing where AI can help.
It鈥檚 with that last category where Hashimoto has found the most success. To continue to nurture adoption, she鈥檒l make sure to schedule follow-up meetings with these attorneys to both see whether they鈥檙e using a tool effectively but also to ensure they know her team is available to help.
After all, her project management role 鈥� and the role of most legal technologists 鈥� is to respond directly to what their firm鈥檚 stakeholders need. And that maxim has not changed with GenAI, she said. 鈥淓very time you talk to an attorney interested in GenAI, really understand where they鈥檙e coming from and then speak from their standpoint of where GenAI can help them.鈥�
You can find more of our past coverage from ILTA events听here
