P2P

Fall25-2

Peer to Peer: ILTA's Quarterly Magazine

Issue link: https://epubs.iltanet.org/i/1540097

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 55 of 80

56 challenge lies in triaging incoming work, accelerating review cycles, and converting regulatory ambiguity into actionable decisions. The signals are undeniable. The American Bar Association adopted Resolution 604, formally recognizing AI's impact on legal services (American Bar Association, Resolution 604, 2023). The Harvard Center on the Legal Profession documents mounting pressure on firms and departments to modernize, not as an option, but as an imperative (Harvard Law School Center on the Legal Profession, Generative AI and the Future of Law, 2024). Clients already integrate AI into procurement, operations, and contracts. Lawyers unable to speak fluently about it risk exclusion from strategic conversations. BUILDING BELIEF THROUGH RELEVANCE Skepticism does not dissolve with vision statements. However, it can shift into confidence through exposure to real-world use cases. Litigators summarize depositions. Transactional lawyers highlight indemnification risk in lengthy agreements. Regulatory counsel translates foreign directives for executive briefings. When lawyers see a tool reflect their daily reality, their resistance shifts. Participation is active; rooted in workflows that matter now. Consider a litigator who used generative AI to outline a motion. The draft required refinement, but the hours saved were undeniable. Her supervising partner, once skeptical, acknowledged its value in accelerating strategy. Or a transactional attorney under a deadline, who leveraged AI to isolate key risks in a 90-page contract, then redirected energy to negotiation. Confidence grows when they see limitations, calibrate results, and recognize the tool's value. RETURNING POWER TO THE PRACTITIONER The fear of losing control remains a stubborn barrier. Legal professionals must see AI as reinforcing, not undermining, their standards. Prompts should align with familiar reasoning, such as issue spotting, clause comparison, and regulatory interpretation. Templates should reflect recognizable language and logic. Risks, including hallucinations or jurisdictional nuance, must be made explicit. Empowerment comes from transparency. Ongoing learning sustains adoption. Small learning pods of four to six legal professionals convene in secure sandboxes, experimenting with real tasks. Each pod designates a champion, often the least confident, whose voice carries significant weight when the group is successful. Feedback fuels a living Prompt Playbook, a practical guide continuously refined by actual use, not theory. The fear of losing control remains a stubborn barrier. Legal professionals must see AI as reinforcing, not undermining, their standards.

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of P2P - Fall25-2