Are Law Firms Really Ready for AI?

Sam Luxford-Watts – June 18, 2025  – 6 mins read

The Hype is Loud—But the Foundations Are Weak

There’s no denying the noise around artificial intelligence in the legal sector. From product demos to panel discussions, the message is clear: AI will revolutionise how legal services are delivered. Tools like Lexis+ AI, Harvey, and Microsoft Copilot promise dramatic gains in efficiency—automating research, summarising documents, and drafting content faster than ever.

But amid the excitement, a sobering question emerges: are law firms actually ready to capitalise on this revolution?

As someone responsible for bringing legal technology into a functioning operational reality, I can say with confidence that many firms are not. In fact, the gap between what AI can do and what firms are prepared to receive is growing. The technology is advancing faster than the environment it needs to thrive in. Unless firms start addressing core issues—legacy infrastructure, inconsistent data, fragmented processes—the AI opportunity may well become just another missed transformation moment.

On-Premise Infrastructure Is a Bottleneck

Many law firms still operate on a predominantly on-premise IT model. This isn’t just about where data lives—it’s about what kind of firm you’re running. On-prem environments are typically slower to adapt, more difficult to integrate, and often locked down in ways that actively hinder the use of modern cloud-based tools.

AI solutions—especially those based on large language models (LLMs)—thrive in dynamic, connected environments. They rely on real-time access to firm-wide content, APIs, and third-party platforms. Deploying AI into an on-premise setup is like putting a Formula 1 car on a gravel track—it might technically work, but it’s never going to perform at its best.

What’s more, compliance and data governance add an extra layer of complexity. Firms hesitant to move to the cloud often cite risk and regulation. That’s understandable. But many of the leading AI vendors are already offering secure, enterprise-grade deployments with audit trails, data privacy controls, and regulatory certifications. The risk now is falling behind competitors who are unlocking AI’s potential while others are still debating the basics.

Non-Standardised Workflows Limit Automation

A major barrier to AI adoption that doesn’t get enough attention is the inconsistency of legal workflows and documents. Most firms pride themselves on bespoke legal services. While that may be good for client relationships, it’s not great for machine learning. AI is most effective when it can identify patterns and work within structured environments.

In many firms, no two matters follow exactly the same process. Contract templates vary by office. Precedent banks are incomplete or out of date. Matter types aren’t consistently coded. Email remains the dominant workflow tool. The result? An environment where even simple automation struggles, let alone sophisticated AI applications.

Before AI can draft a contract or summarise a case, it needs to understand what a “standard” contract or matter looks like. Without that foundation, we risk poor-quality outputs, unpredictable results, and ultimately a lack of trust in the tool. Worse, firms may blame the AI when in fact the real issue is their own inconsistency.

Cultural Readiness Is as Important as Tech Readiness

AI readiness isn’t just a technical challenge—it’s a cultural one. Many lawyers are still sceptical of automation, and understandably so. Their professional identity is tied to analytical thinking, precision, and discretion. A tool that promises to replicate those traits in seconds can feel more threatening than empowering.

That’s why any AI implementation must come with a clear change management strategy. Lawyers need to be shown how AI will support—not replace—their work. Training programs must go beyond button-clicking and instead focus on how to ask the right questions of AI tools, how to validate outputs, and how to integrate AI into legal judgment.

Firms also need to rethink how they structure teams. New roles will emerge—AI facilitators, legal technologists, data stewards—and these professionals must be embedded, not bolted on. Cross-functional collaboration between IT, legal, knowledge, and innovation teams will be essential.

Why AI Success Will Take 3–5 Years—Minimum

Even in firms that have begun their digital transformation journey, true AI readiness is still three to five years away. That timeframe isn’t pessimistic—it’s realistic.

Here’s what needs to happen during that time:

• Cloud migration: Moving from on-prem to secure, scalable cloud infrastructure to enable integration and flexibility.
• Data rationalisation: Cleaning, tagging, and structuring firm data so it can be queried and used by AI tools.
• Process mapping: Standardising workflows across departments and geographies to create predictable environments for automation.
• Governance frameworks: Establishing ethical, regulatory, and operational guardrails to ensure responsible AI use.
• Cultural adoption: Building internal trust in AI through education, transparency, and continuous improvement.

Without these steps, firms may trial AI tools but fail to achieve meaningful, repeatable outcomes. Worse, they may get stuck in pilot mode—testing, evaluating, but never fully integrating.

The Payoff Is Massive—But You Have to Earn It

The benefits of legal AI are real. We’re talking about:

• Dramatically reduced time spent on first drafts and research.
• Improved accuracy and consistency in outputs.
• Greater accessibility to legal knowledge across teams.
• Enhanced service delivery to clients who are increasingly tech-aware.

But these benefits are only available to firms with the operational maturity to capture them. AI will not make a disorganised firm more efficient—it will simply expose that disorganisation faster and more visibly.

Final Thoughts: Build the Foundation Before You Scale the Vision

AI is not just another tool. It’s a generational shift in how knowledge work is done. But it demands more from firms than previous technologies. It exposes flaws in process, structure, and culture. And it rewards those who prepare, not just those who experiment.

So, are law firms really ready for AI? A handful might be. Most are not. But readiness isn’t static—it’s something we can build. And we must, if we want to remain competitive, credible, and relevant in the next era of legal service.

The technology is here. The opportunity is clear. The real question is: will law firms do the work to meet it?