Integrating AI into legal workflows
Anything-goes AI use won't raise your standards. Legal teams need to restructure their workflows based on suitable AI.
Leaving your lawyers to find the right AI tool for their specific use case won't result in innovation.
An ad-hoc AI workflow strategy will lead to inconsistent quality, avoidable mistakes, blurred accountability and reduced client transparency.
Our latest survey of 848 UK legal professionals found lawyers are using different AI tools depending on the use case and risks involved.
65%
of lawyers use AI for legal research
Three-quarters of these lawyers rely on at least one legal AI platform.
53%
use AI for matter related document analysis
Two-thirds of these lawyers rely on at least one legal AI platform.
52%
use AI for knowledge management
Roughly three-quarters of these lawyers rely on at least one legal AI platform.
51%
use AI for client document drafting
Roughly three-quarters of these lawyers rely on at least one legal AI platform.
Despite high AI use rates, only a small number of lawyers say AI is embedded in their team's strategy and operations.
Only
17%
say AI is embedded in their strategy and operations
Without a clear strategy, legal teams risk inconsistent standards, unclear accountability, and reduced transparency in client-facing work.
How is AI transforming legal work?
Like electricity in the early 1900s, artificial intelligence is emerging as the general-purpose technology of the 21st century. It already has a proven capacity to reconfigure how legal work is researched, drafted, reviewed and delivered, with no signs of slowing down.
Legal leaders are directing AI towards time-intensive, repetitive tasks so lawyers can focus on more complex analysis, client relationships, and strategic advice.
Our research shows that the highest levels of AI use sit within core fee-earning activity including legal research (65%), matter-related document summarisation and analysis (53%), drafting or enhancing firm knowledge (52%), and client-related drafting (51%).
Beyond this, 21% to 39% of UK legal professionals plan to adopt AI for these purposes within the next year and over half (52%) are already comfortable using agentic tools for tasks aimed at promoting operational efficiency.
The industry-shaping question has moved from, 'are you using AI?' to 'what's the best AI tool for this specific use case?' and 'how does it fit into my existing workflow?'
|
How lawyers are currently using AI |
How lawyers are planning to use AI |
When the stakes are high, lawyers choose platforms they trust
When there are high technical risks, lawyers show a strong preference for legal-specific AI tools. This was evident across the most common use cases — legal research (28%), client drafting (22%), knowledge work (20%) and document analysis (19%) — consistently ahead of generic AI tools (17%, 14%, 15% and 18% respectively).
While mixed usage of legal and generic AI (15–20%) shows firms are experimenting, the figures indicate specialist legal platforms remain the dominant choice for core legal work.
General AI tools, which are backed by open-source data, tend to support lower-risk operational tasks, including internal drafting, communications, and marketing.
John Craske, Chief Innovation & Knowledge Officer at CMS, says good day-to-day AI use is pragmatic, well governed, and value focused.
"It’s about using the right tools and resources for the job, understanding what the tools can and can’t do well, and working with them.”
AI integration is patchy at best
AI use is rising quickly across the profession, but trust is still a residing factor.
According to our survey, 82% of legal professionals continue to express concern about inaccurate or fabricated AI outputs, alongside fears around confidentiality and over-reliance. Out of all respondents, 72% say they feel more confident using AI that’s grounded in legal sources. This rose to 79% for lawyers at large firms and 85% for in-house corporate lawyers.
The importance of getting these answers right is front-of-mind for decision-makers.
Bhavisa Patel, Director of Legal Technology and Business Services at Eversheds Sutherland, says AI provides a great starting point but:
“the human element is what ensures quality and mitigates risk”.
It also comes down to the credibility of the platform.
Legal AI tools are now everywhere, but not all AI is equal, and not all AI deserves your trust, says Stuart Greenhill, Senior Director of Segments at LexisNexis UK.
"In legal work, confidence is not enough. Authority matters. Validation matters. Security matters. If you cannot stand behind the output, it is not legal AI. It is just AI".
There is also the issue of AI integration. Only 17% of legal professionals say AI is embedded in their team's strategy and operations. Even within large firms and in-house teams, fewer than a third report structured integration.
In practice, this means AI is often being used across research, drafting and knowledge work without consistent guidance on when it should be deployed, which tools are approved, how outputs must be reviewed, or where accountability ultimately sits. Teams may adopt different platforms for similar tasks, apply varying standards of oversight, and rely on informal norms rather than agreed processes.
Inconsistent review practices can affect quality, unapproved tools can create confidentiality concerns, and unclear governance makes it harder to respond confidently if errors occur. At the same time, clients are becoming more aware of how AI is used in legal services and are starting to expect greater transparency around controls and verification.
High adoption, on its own, does not signal organisational maturity. What matters is whether AI use is supported by trusted tools, clear policies, defined workflows and leadership oversight. In many organisations, that shift from experimentation to structured integration is still underway.
AI integration leads to faster, smarter, & more strategic ways of working
Because AI is becoming better at handling complex tasks, more lawyers are using these tools on a daily basis. In turn, the pace of legal work delivery is accelerating.
Our survey revealed that 51% of UK legal professionals believe new technology is helping them produce work faster. A quarter say it's helping them produce higher quality work, and a further quarter report that it's promoting cross-team and cross-function collaboration.
One trainee at a small firm told us how they've reconsidered AI's most beneficial use case for their workflow,
"AI is most powerful when used as a thinking partner rather than a shortcut. It accelerates research and drafting, but the real value comes from critically engaging with its output".
However, many fear falling behind. Almost half (49%) of legal professionals report that keeping pace with new technology will be the top challenge this year.
Technological literacy is becoming an essential skill within the profession says Kennedys UK Managing Partner, Ben Aram.
"Technology literacy is becoming a newer skill for the lawyer leader toolbox, which wasn’t always the case in the past. Now, lawyers need to be able to think quickly, and commercially, and have great attention to detail when reviewing AI outputs".
Jagdip Panesar, Global Head of Learning and Development at Clifford Chance, reinforces how this shift is playing out in practice:
“Effective use of AI in legal practice means automating routine tasks such as document review, research, and contract analysis so lawyers can focus on higher-value work.”
But speed is only the starting point. Panesar also stresses that competitive advantage will increasingly depend on how firms translate efficiency into strategic contribution.
She says that “building trust and focusing on client outcomes will set firms apart. Ultimately, technology cannot replace the human element. Understanding client priorities, addressing concerns, and providing bespoke guidance remain central to effective legal practice".
From an in-house perspective, Candice Donnelly, former Director of Legal - Corporate at Skyscanner, emphasises that AI doesn't replace advisory strength, but creates space for it:
“As AI handles more of the ‘what’, leaders will be defined by their ability to shape the ‘why’ and the ‘how’”.
Similarly, Alessandro Galtieri, Deputy General Counsel at Colt, highlights the impacts of knowledge automation on organisation performance:
“If all our colleagues have ever done becomes immediately available to us, it is difficult to see how that could not result in enhanced performance”.
AI is not simply a research tool or drafting assistant. It's an amplifier of institutional knowledge generation and collaboration.
Can you build reliable legal workflows without reliable legal content?
Without the law, AI automation is just speed. With the law, it becomes legal intelligence.
Meet your next-generation legal AI assistant here
Your AI strategy could impact talent retention
In just twelve months, AI capability has moved from being a competitive advantage to a baseline retention requirement.
This year, 37% of lawyers now say that if their organisation fails to embrace AI, it would negatively affect their career progression, up from 28% in 2025.
Additionally, 18% say they would consider leaving their organisation if it does not invest in AI, compared to 13% in 2025. These are not marginal increases. They reflect a significant recalibration in how lawyers view the role of AI in their professional future.
The shift is even more pronounced amongst lawyers at large firms. Here, 46% of lawyers believe their career would suffer without AI investment, compared to 36% in January 2025. Meanwhile, 30% would actively consider leaving, a substantial rise from 19% the year before.
With this shift, some firms have begun implementing more formal AI policies. John Craske describes an AI policy model that goes beyond experimentation:
“At CMS we have a ‘Human + Machine’ approach that is really practical. Some tasks and work will have more tech and AI, others will have less, but at the core it’s about our people working with AI and tech to enhance what we do for our clients”.
What distinguishes this approach is that it treats AI as part of the organisation's operating philosophy. As Craske explains, it’s very important to identify the areas within workflows that humans must lead:
“Core human skills like emotional intelligence, critical thinking, balancing risks, getting the tone right, understanding what the client wants to achieve and why, negotiating, and getting deals done will be things that our people will play a central role in for years to come”.
Pairing the right AI tool with relevant human expertise will reshape what value looks like in the modern era.
Bhavisa Patel highlights the wider cultural dimension of that shift:
“Leaders therefore need to focus on capability-building across all levels. This isn’t just about rolling out tools, it’s about embedding a mindset where people understand the strengths and limitations of AI, feel confident using it responsibly, and know how to review and refine outputs”.
Taken together, the year-on-year data and leadership testimony point to a profession in transition.
Lawyers are adapting quickly, and expectations are rising at pace. Yet organisations are only beginning to translate that momentum into formal strategic alignment.
Because AI promotes efficiency while introducing a need for scrutiny, the legal profession now sits between two forms of risk. Moving slowly carries competitive disadvantages, while moving at pace without the right governance in place comes with operational and reputational risks.
Agentic AI: From task support to intelligent systems
Go back a mere year in time and the idea of trusting AI to manage a legal workflow from start to finish seemed laughable. Yet agentic AI has advanced at such a rate that now 6% are using it regularly, and a further 37% are currently experimenting with the technology or have plans in motion.
Applying these 'agentic AI' functions prior to review may sound radical, even unsettling, but so did generative AI only a short time ago.
Decision-makers are putting powerful strategies in place to reform workflows. Emma Danks, Head of UK Corporate at Taylor Wessing, says:
“In a well-run environment, AI becomes part of the firm’s core infrastructure. It acts like a dependable digital colleague that handles the repetitive, low-context tasks, allowing lawyers to focus on higher-value work. But people remain at the heart of the process”.
Once decision-makers consider and strategise how agentic AI can support repetitive tasks, identifying which tasks should be led by humans is key.
Clients will set the standard
As with all major business transformations, client demand seems to be the driving force.
For example, John Craske explains how AI integration is connected to clients’ needs through his firm's Human + Machine approach:
“The best partners understand our clients deeply: their business objectives, how they like to work, what they need from their external lawyers. AI will just sharpen the need for these skills and in the future AI will be part of the team”.
So, what tasks will UK legal professionals likely hand over to agentic AI?
Lawyers are the most confident using agentic AI for operational efficiency (52%), such as scheduling and calendar management.
Interestingly, our survey revealed that 44% of UK legal professionals would feel comfortable relying on agentic AI tools for the first draft of non-binding documents, and 40% would use these tools to draft advice or summaries for review.
Finally, decision support and workflow guidance tasks are gaining popularity among agentic AI users. 46% would use these tools to generate research summaries and suggest next research steps, and 45% would trust them to identify future workflow steps and case progression trajectories. These are the most advanced use cases of agentic AI, and speak to future planning and predictive modelling.
This forward-looking approach is becoming increasingly appealing to clients, and organisations are taking note. Emma Danks says client expectations are evolving.
"As AI opens up new possibilities, clients will look to firms that can anticipate emerging needs rather than simply deliver efficiently. The future lies in outcome-focused, technology-enabled legal solutions, and firms that embrace this mindset will lead the market”.
Candice Donnelly agrees and adds to the case for strategic agentic AI integration in workflows:
“With AI levelling the playing field on technical inputs, performance will be judged less on who holds the most knowledge and more on the way legal teams add value. The differentiator becomes the ability to identify the real underlying problems, and to develop creative, business-ready solutions”.
Looking ahead, the challenge for legal leaders is building workflows where machines handle the mechanics and lawyers own the judgment.
Effective legal workflows, enabled by AI
AI is no longer an experimental tool sitting at the margins of legal practice. It is already embedded in research, drafting and knowledge work across the profession, and its capabilities are evolving quickly, particularly with the rise of agentic systems that can shape and guide workflows rather than simply assist with individual tasks.
The real question is not whether firms are using AI, but how deliberately they are integrating it. Where AI is supported by clear governance, agreed review standards and leadership oversight, it strengthens consistency, accelerates delivery and enhances the value lawyers provide to clients. Where it is adopted informally, without structured policies or defined accountability, it can introduce variability at precisely the moment firms are trying to raise standards.
The organisations that will stand out over the next few years will be those that treat AI as part of their operating model rather than an optional productivity layer, pairing trusted, authoritative tools with human judgment, and ensuring that efficiency gains never come at the expense of defensibility or client confidence.
AI will undoubtedly reshape legal workflows. The difference will lie in how intentionally that transformation is led.
Discover how trusted, cited legal AI can support judgment, verification, and confident legal decision-making.
Survey methodology
This survey took place in December 2025 to January 2026. It included 848 legal professionals from the UK and Ireland.