Just 10% of law firms have a GenAI policy, new Thomson Reuters report shows — from legaltechnology.com by Caroline Hill

Just 10% of law firms and 21% of corporate legal teams have now implemented policies to guide their organisation’s use of generative AI, according to a report out today (2 December) from Thomson Reuters.

While Thomson Reuters 2024 Generative AI in Professional Services report shows AI views among legal professionals are rapidly shifting (85% of law firms and corporate legal teams now think AI can be applied to their work) the report shows that legal organisations have a way to go in terms of setting the ground rules for the use of AI. Just 8% said that GenAI is covered under their existing technology policy, while 75% of firms said they don’t have a policy and 7% said they don’t know.

Artificial Lawyer’s 2025 Predictions – Part One — from artificiallawyer.com

I expect to see a lot more agentic AI systems in law: services that break complex tasks into component parts or checklists, complete them with a mix of software, lawyers, and allied legal professionals, then reassemble them into complex first drafts of legal work.

Ed Walters

Integrated Legal Ecosystems
The silos that have historically divided in-house legal teams, external counsel, and other stakeholders will evolve, thanks to the rise of integrated legal ecosystems. End-to-end platforms will provide seamless collaboration, real-time updates, and shared knowledge, enabling all parties to work more effectively toward common goals. Legal departments will turn to these unified solutions to streamline legal requests, offer self-service options, and improve service delivery.

Sacha Kirk

2025 will be the year of agentic AI. It will be the year that end users of legal services finally get legal work resolved for them autonomously.

Richard Mabey

AI Enhances the Human Art of In-House Counsel Leadership — from news.bloomberglaw.com by Eric Dodson Greenberg (behind a paywall)

Transactional lawyers stored prized forms in file drawers or consulted the law library’s bound volumes of forms. The arrival of databases revolutionized access to precedent, enabling faster and broader access to legal resources.

There is little nostalgia for the labor-intensive methods of the past and no argument that some arcane legal skill was lost in the transition. What we gained was increased capacity to focus on higher-order skills and more sophisticated, value-driven legal work. AI offers a similar leap, automating repetitive or foundational tasks to free lawyers for more sophisticated work.