Peer to Peer: ILTA's Quarterly Magazine
Issue link: https://epubs.iltanet.org/i/1542659
66 Instead, teams should prioritize the safe adoption of legal-specific AI tools, many of which have advanced rapidly beyond generic public models. Leading platforms are well grounded in the legal context (e.g., using relevance ranking with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) or Legal Knowledge Graphs). Context grounds outputs in verified legal content, with citation layers and audit trails designed to reduce hallucinations and improve defensibility. STRONGER VENDOR STANDARDS DRIVE FASTER PROGRESS As AI adoption accelerates, the performance and quality gap between trusted vendors and unproven entrants is widening. Governance frameworks help legal teams shift from ad hoc vendor evaluations to evidence-driven assessments. Instead of uncertainty about which questions to ask or which areas to evaluate, governance helps define clear criteria. A mature AI governance rubric should evaluate vendors across several themes, including: • Data governance and privacy • Model transparency and auditability • Hallucination mitigation and validation methods • Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) oversight • Performance benchmarks and measurable ROI Many leading providers offer transparency into training data, safeguards, and evaluation practices. By formalizing vendor expectations, firms can accelerate procurement processes and build trust with stakeholders. HUMAN OVERSIGHT LEADS TO MORE DEFENSIBLE RESULTS Even as GenAI becomes more sophisticated, its role in legal practice should be to support human-led work. Today, GenAI can deliver speed, scale, and efficiency. Judgment, ethics, and accountability remain uniquely human responsibilities. HITL protocols mean that while AI may research, draft, summarize, or analyze, a qualified legal professional reviews, verifies, and remains accountable for the final work product. Some firms now require attorneys to include internal AI notes to document their review process, reinforcing transparency and defensibility. The risks of accepting outputs at face value without human oversight are already clear. Hallucinated case citations have appeared in court filings, resulting in sanctions, while consumer chatbots followed prompts to share privileged and sensitive information. These incidents underscore the stakes of over-relying on AI without human supervision. Transparent governance operationalizes HITL by defining where oversight is required, how it is documented, and how results are evaluated. It strengthens defensibility, preserves client trust, and mitigates risk. THE PATH FORWARD TO STRONGER AI GOVERNANCE Governance frameworks are only valuable when they are understood, adopted, and practiced over time. Firms that move from policy to practice will see compounding benefits: faster experimentation, more defensible outcomes, and higher ROI on technology investments. Legal leaders face a strategic choice: treat governance as a speed bump to adoption, or an engine that powers safe acceleration. AI without governance invites risk;