Is AI a differentiator, or just another buzzword?

Key talking points from the event: from ethics to efficiency:

Is AI going to take people’s jobs?

This has been a hot topic across all sectors since AI started to emerge. Interestingly, a Practice Manager from one firm that has already implemented AI confidently stated that, in their experience, this hasn’t been the case.

“We’ve introduced five bots in the firm, and they haven’t replaced any jobs. What they have done is increased our capacity to take on additional fee-earning work. Despite initial concerns, our teams have come to accept and appreciate the positive impact of AI.”

Yet will this continue to be the case as AI evolves? One partner likened the tasks that will be carried out by AI to Legal Secretaries previously needing to type all correspondence and contracts for their firm. “When this task was removed, was that employee’s time moved, absorbed elsewhere or simply lost?”

As more tasks become automated, many are concerned that it could reduce the need for staff – and while that’s good for efficiency, it doesn’t generate warm feelings towards AI and could cause some resistance amongst employees as AI solutions are rolled out.

Does AI risk disrupting human connections?

For some of the firms present, human connection is seen as vital to clients who are perhaps in a difficult personal situation and looking for the comfort of conversation. While AI won’t necessarily impede on these relationships while it is limited to administrative tasks, there is the fear that it could eventually start to encroach on these connections – with some questioning whether AI can remove much-needed empathy from the process.

Attendees made comparisons between automations in the legal process and the over-reliance of technology in society: for example, the impact of self-checkouts in supermarkets on older generations and vulnerable people.

“If you don’t use technology today, you step off the face of the planet. It’s a sad world when older people can’t manage their own affairs due to lack of digital literacy, or risk not having any human contact because of automations.” In the legal sector, the question was raised whether AI could spark a generational divide, affecting employees and, in some instances, clients.

The legal system as a whole isn’t ready for AI, even if firms are.

While some organisations have digital processes that allow AI functions to submit information, such as HMRC, others – including the Courts – rely on dated analogue practices that just aren’t compatible. Natural Language Processing also continues to be an issue, with some digital portals struggling to understand certain dialects or languages.

Yet do legal firms need to wait patiently for these systems to modernise, or is it up to the sector to start applying pressure? “We’re waiting for big companies to change the industry, but it’s up to us,” commented one Practice Manager. “We need to start banging on doors to drive change, or risk finding ourselves at a serious disadvantage.”

You need to know your client before you implement AI.

If people are expecting a bespoke service, AI might not be the solution, according to one firm who had met resistance from high-net-worth clients over automating even the smallest of tasks. However, if AI is being used to automate tasks that can only be seen by internal teams, can it really make a difference?

Paul Hobden, Director of Operations at Insight Legal, also raised the point that AI differs wildly from automation, and that it’s important not to confuse the two. “While we’ve all experienced frustrations with automation, AI is a different kettle of fish. AI’s ability to creatively respond means that you often won’t even know you are interacting with an AI.”

The jury is still out on whether AI can ever have a place in client-facing activity, or whether it needs to remain a purely administrative function well into the future.

“The biggest stumbling block to AI in law firms? Acceptance.”

Acceptance continues to be an obstacle to AI – and indeed other technologies. Reasons for resistance ranged from fear of losing control at a Partner level, to entrenched habits across every part of the firm, and attitudes in the legal system as a whole.

Practice Managers questioned whether the legal profession will ever let go of its “comfort blankets” – with a reliance on wet signatures, physical copies and literal paper trails having no real reason other than personal preference and a desire to continue with familiar habits.

“The old way was the new way once.”

As one Practice Manager said, change is inevitable, and it’s how people perceive that change that will differentiate those firms that thrive in an increasingly digital future, and those that lag behind the curve.

In short, everyone around the table agreed that the legal sector can’t stop the relentless march of change. Those firms that ultimately embrace AI – in whatever capacity suits their values, their desired business model and their clientele – will have a competitive advantage over those that fully resist change.