A practical guide for partners and practice leaders navigating the AI transformation

The legal profession is navigating significant technological change. Within just two years, AI adoption among legal professionals has surged from 19% to 79%¹, creating tremendous opportunity and significant confusion for mid-sized law firms trying to separate genuine value from vendor hype.

For decision-makers in firms, the challenge isn’t whether to adopt AI, but which solutions deliver measurable returns versus those that drain resources and create compliance headaches.

The Current State: Explosive Growth, Uneven Results

The numbers tell a striking story. 93% of surveyed legal professionals in mid-sized law firms are now using AI in some capacity, while over half have adopted AI widely or universally². Yet beneath these impressive adoption rates lies a more complex reality.

Only 10% of law firms have a policy guiding AI use at work³. This governance gap has created a shadow IT problem: approximately 50% of lawyers have used unauthorized AI tools for work purposes, with another 23% indicating they would³. Meanwhile, 73% of law firm professionals report that their current technology isn’t set up to support how they work, and 83% lack confidence that client information is accurate when accessed².

What’s Actually Working: The High-ROI Applications

In practice, specific AI applications consistently deliver measurable value:

Document Drafting and Review: The clearest success stories center on routine document creation and initial review processes. Advanced tools that leverage firm precedent and templates are particularly effective, helping minimize errors while maintaining consistency with established practices. Firms report 40-60% time savings on standard contracts, correspondence, and discovery responses⁴. The key distinction: AI excels at generating drafts and suggestions (as well as identifying issues), but still requires attorney oversight for final review and strategic decisions.

Research and Case Analysis: Legal research acceleration has proven valuable, particularly for complex regulatory environments. Mid-law firms report that AI-powered research tools help junior associates perform initial case analysis more efficiently, though partners consistently emphasize that AI outputs require verification and strategic interpretation.

Practice Management: Administrative AI applications—scheduling, client intake, and routine correspondence—show consistent ROI with lower risk profiles. These applications don’t touch substantive legal work but free up significant attorney time for high-value activities.

The Overhype Categories: Proceed with Caution

Several AI categories consistently underperform vendor promises:

“End-to-End” Legal AI Platforms: Vendors promoting comprehensive solutions that handle everything from intake to brief writing typically oversell current capabilities. While these platforms may excel in specific areas, the integrated approach often means mediocre performance across multiple functions.

Predictive Analytics: While predictive legal analytics shows genuine promise in demonstrations, mid-law practices should approach implementation carefully. The technology requires substantial, high-quality data sets to generate reliable predictions, and legal outcomes involve complex variables that can be difficult to quantify. Firms with limited historical data may find initial accuracy more variable than expected, making success dependent on sufficient case volume in specific practice areas and proper data preparation.

AI-Powered Client Advice: Tools claiming to provide direct client-facing legal advice remain legally and ethically problematic. 83% consider using AI to provide legal advice an inappropriate use case².

Implementation Reality Check: Common Pitfalls

Mid-law firms face unique implementation challenges. Common failure patterns include inadequate technology infrastructure, lack of governance frameworks, and insufficient training programs. The assumption that attorneys will naturally adapt to AI tools has proven false; successful implementations require structured training and ongoing support.

The Vendor Evaluation Framework

When evaluating AI vendors, focus on these critical questions:

Data Security and Compliance: Where is client data processed? What certifications does the vendor maintain? How is data used for training, and can you opt out? What happens to your data if you terminate the service?

Integration and Workflow: How does the tool integrate with existing systems? What training resources are provided? Can it scale with your firm’s growth?

Measurable Performance: What specific efficiency gains can the vendor demonstrate with similar firms? Can they provide verified references from comparable mid-law firms?

Total Cost: Beyond licensing fees, what implementation, training, and support costs should you expect? How does pricing scale with adoption?

Strategic Recommendations

Start with Governance: Before implementing any AI tools, establish clear policies governing usage, data handling, and ethical compliance. This prevents compliance headaches and security risks that plague firms adopting technology without proper frameworks.

Focus on Specific Use Cases: Identify 2-3 workflows where AI delivers immediate value rather than pursuing comprehensive transformation. Document drafting, legal research, and administrative tasks offer the most straightforward paths to positive ROI.

Pilot Before Committing: Insist on meaningful pilot programs with defined success metrics. Confident vendors will support limited trials that validate performance claims with your actual workflows.

Invest in Training: Budget significantly for training and change management. Sophisticated AI tools fail without proper user adoption and ongoing support.

The Strategic Imperative: Choosing the Right AI Tools for Your Practice

The AI transformation in legal services is no longer “if” but “when” and “how.” Mid-law firms that approach adoption strategically—focusing on proven applications, robust governance, and measured implementation—are positioned to gain competitive advantages in efficiency, client service, and profitability.

However, firms that chase every new solution or adopt tools without proper governance risk creating more problems than they solve. The key is focusing on genuine business value while building foundational capabilities for long-term AI integration.

About Will Seaton

Will Seaton is the Chief Customer Officer at DraftWise, an AI platform that helps lawyers draft, review, and negotiate contracts more efficiently using their firm’s legal expertise. Will focuses on customer-driven innovation, helping mid-sized firms successfully implement AI tools that lawyers adopt and use. Connect with him on LinkedIn or download his implementation guide: A Lawyer’s Guide to Legal AI for Mid-Sized Firms.

References

1. Clio Legal Trends Report 2024. “AI Adoption By Legal Professionals Jumps from 19% to 79% In One Year.” LawSites, October 2024.
2. Clio Legal Trends for Mid-Sized Law Firms Report 2025. “Highlights From the 2025 Legal Trends for Mid-Sized Law Firms Report.” Clio Blog, May 2025.
3. Actionstep. “2025 US Midsize Law Firm Priorities Report.” March 2025.
4. Various industry surveys cited in Thomson Reuters Legal AI adoption studies, 2024-2025.