P2P

P E E R T O P E E R M A G A Z I N E · S U M M E R 2 0 2 5 25 So, why do we, three law firms and a vendor, treat AI as something more than just another technology tool? Because if we do not, we risk reaching a point, gradually, then suddenly, where our workflows have transformed beyond recognition and possibly beyond our control. Think of electric vehicles that are diagnosed and updated remotely and require specialist equipment to be fixed. No one knows what is happening under the hood, and even the traditional mechanic's role has become negligible. Our goal should be to transform legal workflows deliberately and consciously - to retain the human element where it matters most, to stay competitive, and to remain in control. To help explore what this balance might look like, it is helpful to consider two hypothetical extremes: Firm X and Firm Y. TYPE X FIRMS These firms are all in when it comes to AI. They strive to deliver high-quality work with maximum efficiency, using AI to generate work products autonomously. Their workflows are powered by specialized legal AI models, fine-tuned for specific areas of law or work types, and capable of operating within standard OCGs agreed upon with clients. Human involvement is minimal, typically limited to final approvals for compliance purposes. In effect, the legal workflows of Type X firms are not human. TYPE Y FIRMS On the other hand, Type Y firms compete based on human expertise. Their work products are crafted by experienced legal professionals, supported by deep in-house knowledge repositories, best practices, and top-tier templates and precedents. These firms embrace technology for general productivity and collaboration - summarising meetings, managing actions, and translating in real time - but avoid AI-generated legal outputs. Type Y firms proudly assert that their legal work is entirely human-made, with partners standing fully behind the results. Their workflows are, in effect, human through and through. The reality? Neither Type X nor Type Y is likely to thrive long-term. Type X firms may achieve efficiency but will drift toward commoditization. Drawing from the same knowledge pools and offering similar outputs, they risk falling into price-based competition that drives margins downward. Type Y firms, meanwhile, may face recruitment challenges. The next generation of attorneys may be unwilling to work in low-automation environments, and clients may question the value of traditional billing models that ignore technological progress. Instead, we believe a third model is more sustainable: the Type A Firm. TYPE A FIRMS These firms are intentionally designed to balance human expertise with technological advantage. They integrate AI to handle low-value, repetitive tasks, reduce friction in daily work, and augment professionals on complex matters. They recognize that the power of a legal expert lies in their ability to observe, learn, and solve complex problems creatively, with the support of cutting-edge tools and technology. Type A firms constantly evolve their strategy, aiming to stay ahead of the curve by responsibly adapting to new technologies while simultaneously attracting and retaining top talent. They design their workflows with human agency at the core - confident that no matter how advanced today's AI becomes, tomorrow's next technology breakthrough could render it obsolete. So, how do you act today to ensure that you design yourself, the human, into strategically aligned Gen AI- augmented legal workflows? First, we believe there are strategies that firms can employ now to balance the human vs AI equation. Start by assessing your firm's long- term AI vision and strategy. As per above, it will depend on the type of firm you are today and wish to be tomorrow. This will help us consider a future with AI, where we are unlikely to be the most informed or fastest- processing party. Instead, we must stay in control by

• Cover