Public sector lawyers face an AI culture clash
AI adoption has now outpaced the slow-moving corporate culture of UK law
More than four in five public sector lawyers are already using, or planning to use, AI tools.
But have public sector teams successfully embedded AI into their workflow and operations? Apparently not.
Our latest generative AI survey found public sector lawyers are still struggling to balance speed with accuracy, increase outputs without extra workload, and deliver greater value without undermining legal expertise.
AI is now commonplace among public sector legal professionals
The latest LexisNexis survey of UK lawyers, which took place in August 2025 and included 700+ legal professionals, found:
Almost half (43%) of public sector lawyers use generative AI for work purposes
This is an increase from the 34% we saw in our January 2025 survey.
Again, a quarter expressed plans to adopt AI in the near future, while 15% revealed no plans to use AI.
One respondent from the public sector said:
"It is making simpler research tasks take significantly less time, and it's easier to focus on the important elements of the more complex tasks."
While AI adoption is growing rapidly in the public sector, our research found progress is being stalled by rigid corporate cultures.
Public sector lawyers say AI culture is slow-moving
A top challenge facing public sector lawyers is keeping pace with new technology. Half (50%) listed this as a challenge.
While AI adoption is rising fast, public sector lawyers are being held back by slow-moving organisational cultures.
Only 8% of public sector respondents said AI is "embedded in their strategy and operations".
The most common response was “we’re experimenting but progress is slow” at 35%.
Meanwhile, 20% reported interest but little investment, 13% cited resistance or fear, and another 18% said AI isn’t discussed at all.
One respondent told us they have access to generative AI but "hardly use it".
"I wish we did. It makes research quicker and responses to legal queries more efficient."
Another said they have not yet embraced AI because they don't really understand how it works.
Candice Donnelly, recently the Director of Legal, Corporate at Skyscanner, believes the most effective AI implementations are not the flashiest, but those designed and executed with clear intent.
"Without a well-defined use case, AI outputs risk becoming a source of digital noise – producing process maps, reference materials, and documentation that look visually impressive but add little strategic value beyond swelling our reading lists."
Resistance to amending one’s way of working is inevitable, says Deputy General Counsel at Colt, Alessandro Galtieri.
"The noise about 'hallucinations', even in mainstream media, and the 'black box' nature of some solutions, renders lawyers quite understandably suspicious."
Finding a way for AI tools to integrate into existing workflows and processes will be essential, he says.
This mix of enthusiasm, caution, and cultural resistance shows that while AI adoption is advancing, the profession is still far from unlocking its full potential.
What AI tools are public sector lawyers using?
Our survey revealed almost half (47%) of public sector lawyers using AI have a preference for tools built specifically for legal work, such as Lexis+ AI. Just over half (53%) use general AI tools exclusively.
Almost half of public sector lawyers using AI have invested in purpose-built legal tools
Trust in both law and AI relies on credibility and transparency, says Donnelly.
"As practitioners, we rely on sources that we know from experience to be reputable. With AI tools still at a relatively early stage of development, that trust still needs to be earned, not assumed, and AI needs to respect the fact that the source still matters as much as the substance."
One of AI’s biggest time-saving benefits for public sector lawyers is in legal research. According to 85% of public sector lawyers, the matters demanding the most research are in unfamiliar or highly specialised areas of law, which can be rapidly accelerated when using legal AI tools like Lexis+ AI.
While AI adoption is rapidly growing, 75% of public sector lawyers harbour concerns over relying on inaccurate information.
A public sector lawyer said the most important factor when using AI is being confident in the security of the system.
For the risk-averse legal profession, confidence in AI use is closely tied to the quality of its sources.
Overall, 71% of public sector lawyers said they would or do feel more confident using AI when it's grounded in trusted legal sources.
Get instant answers grounded in the UK’s most trusted legal sources
When an AI tool can demonstrate that its output is grounded in quality resources, it shifts from being a clever search assistant to a credible aide, Donnelly notes.
The forces shaping AI adoption are shifting fast and differ across organisations. So what’s the reality for lawyers using these tools day to day?
How public sector lawyers will spend the time saved using AI
With AI speeding up legal research, drafting and administrative tasks, public sector lawyers are using the free time saved to enjoy a better work-life balance.
More than half (53%) of public sector lawyers are using AI to invest in their personal development
Meet deadlines, manage risk, and deliver stronger outcomes under pressure.
Those using AI are far more likely to use the time saved to invest in their personal development (53%) over other potential benefits such as investing in team development (35%) or enjoying a better work life balance (29%). Interestingly, those with plans to use AI are far more likely to prioritise work-life balance.
This hints that the time-saved by those using AI is going to more strategic work relating to personal development.
As regulatory risk heightens, the law becomes increasingly complex, and as organisations lean in on legal departments to drive greater change, workloads have skyrocketed.
Donnelly says producing reports and standard documentation can take up a lot of time for in-house counsel.
"Over the past 12 months, we have seen a real increase in AI tools that can handle these tasks with speed and consistency."
This has enabled teams to focus on more strategic advisory work and complex problem-solving, says Donnelly.
AI has the potential to rebalance how we use our time by helping us work a little smarter, she notes.
"It’s not about saving time. It’s helping us redefine how we spend it best individually and as a team."
One General Counsel said AI allows their department to get a rough idea of the answer before testing it with other sources.
"We don't 100% rely on AI but it helps make the interaction with external counsel quicker and cheaper."
Another General Counsel told us: "We have a service-driven culture, and using tech to lead would be a considerable change."
As a greater proportion of legal work becomes automated or streamlined, there will eventually be a shift from hours worked to value delivered. Pricing will, as many expected, become a topic of discussion.
Matching pricing models to value delivered
AI's influence on the legal sector can be seen clearly in law firm pricing models.
In our January 2025 survey, 40% of all respondents agreed that AI would change how firms bill. Just a few months later, that figure has jumped to 47%. This shift is particularly prevalent in general counsel (55%) and law firm leaders (49%), although only 40% of public sector lawyers agree.
One public sector lawyer expressed concern that other departments within their organisation might bypass legal.
"This could be a double-edged sword if stakeholders think they can rely on AI research rather than asking for assistance in applying it to specific circumstances."
Another said: "I expect AI to negatively impact clients perception of the value of legal work. Clients will perceive that they can "do it themselves" instead of instructing a lawyer."
Calculating how to charge for work will be a challenge for many firms working with clients in the public sector, a partner at a large law firm told us, especially when the billable hour no longer provides a sensible measure for work.
"Given lawyers' reliance on billing by the hour, clients will expect lower fees because AI delivers quicker results."
Another senior leader at a law firm noted this impending shift in expectations.
"Clients will have an increased expectation that high value professional services should provide advice that cannot be easily gleaned from readily available search tools, including those powered by AI."
There will also be an expectation of a better quality of service, he says, which will be driven by the combination of trained lawyers and trained AI.
New pricing models will emerge along with new or improved products and service offerings, says Tony Randle, a partner at Shoosmiths.
"Firms are also beginning to offer clients self-serve products and managed service solutions that combine tech solutions with related legal support."
"We expect more fixed, portfolio, and subscription pricing, reflecting both client demand for predictability and AI’s role in reshaping service delivery to improve outcomes and value."
The evolution of law firm pricing models, therefore, seems imminent rather than speculative.
The impact of AI on the workforce
The knock-on effects of failing to adequately invest in AI are becoming clear.
Overall, only 5% said they would consider leaving if their organisation failed to invest in AI. For comparison, this rose to 19% for in-house corporate and 18% for private practice respondents.
Only 5% of public sector lawyers would consider leaving if their organisation failed to invest in AI
Perceptions of a career risk were also less significant. Only 10% said that a failure to engage with AI would negatively affect their careers. Almost half (49%) of in-house legal counsel said this was the case.
In addition, organisational support around AI is also limited:
- Only 13% said their organisation had provided them with appropriate training to use AI safely
- Only 18% have an AI policy that is easy to understand and follow.
One public sector lawyer said the biggest operational shift that needs to happen is more practical training on AI use.
"Despite the AI training at work, I still have little knowledge of how it works or how to use it."
Donnelly says AI is no longer a future consideration but a present-day expectation.
"While a company may have seen AI as a novelty or a box-ticking exercise, now a legal function expects access to an AI tool that enables it to focus increasingly on high-value, judgment-driven work."
To attract and retain talent, Donnelly says legal teams need to streamline contract analysis, enhance regulatory tracking, and support decision-making with contextual intelligence to accelerate delivery.
Public sector lawyers using AI should be openly communicating the benefits. This will give lawyers the confidence to let AI do the heavy lifting and use these tools to their full potential.
Do your lawyers have "permission" to use AI?
Despite adoption escalating, only 3% of public sector lawyers rely heavily on AI for their day-to-day work.
Only 3% of public sector lawyers rely heavily on AI
This finding is a double-edged sword: while “heavy use” might suggest over-reliance or complacency, it can also highlight the opposite problem: they're afraid to use it or afraid to talk about using it. Many teams remain wary of depending too much on AI. In fact, one of the biggest concerns when using AI is becoming too reliant on it (48%).
The firms making the most headway are the ones with a senior leadership team that recognises AI adoption and integration are fundamental for future business success, Randle at Shoosmiths notes.
"The biggest strides come from organisations where the most senior people are leading by example, using AI on a daily basis and demonstrating to everyone how it can help them with their everyday workload."
The use of AI still comes with a stigma of cutting corners. Legal leaders need to have honest and open conversations about when their teams should be using AI, embedding confidence and encouraging its use.
AI is no longer a question of if, but how fast.
AI is no longer a distant prospect for public sector lawyers. It’s already reshaping research, drafting, and advisory work. Yet adoption remains uneven, with enthusiasm often tempered by cultural resistance, limited training, and concerns over accuracy.
The next step isn’t just wider use of AI tools, but embedding them into strategy, workflows, and decision-making so their value is felt across teams and clients alike.
Public sector departments that create space for experimentation, provide clear guidance, and ground AI in trusted legal sources will gain the greatest rewards.
Those that hesitate risk inefficiency, rising workloads, and missed opportunities to redefine legal services around value rather than volume.
The culture clash will not last forever: the leaders who act with confidence now will set the direction for the profession tomorrow.
Built with Shorthand
Insights
Popular Links
Help & Support
All rights reserved. RELX Group and the RE symbol are trade marks of the RELX Intellectual Properties SA, used
under license.
