The trust economy
In the AI age, credibility is everything.
Trust is currency for in-house lawyers. It gives them influence within the business, shapes the partners they choose and underpins the advice they provide.
Yet as AI takes on more legal work, that trust faces a new test. Without the right tools and safeguards, legal teams risk undermining the reputations they've worked so hard to build.
We explore how in-house counsel can protect their reputation, preserve their judgement and strengthen their influence in an increasingly AI-driven business environment.
1. In-house teams are carrying the pressures of innovation
Legal departments have jumped at the chance to integrate AI technology into their legal processes. But as new AI tools and capabilities emerge, legal teams face growing pressure to keep pace with technological change.
The challenge is no longer simply adopting AI, but finding ways to manage the pace of change without compromising the quality of legal advice.
Almost all in-house lawyers use AI
An overwhelming 99% of in-house legal respondents included in our July 2026 survey told us they use AI.
Half (50%) say they use AI daily, while a third (34%) use the technology multiple times a week.
Document summarisation is the most common use case for in-house lawyers at 79%, followed by legal research (76%), document review (68%) and drafting (66%).
A general counsel at an InfoSec firm told us:
"The advantages of AI are speed and increased access to information."
An in-house lawyer from a compliance testing business said AI makes them "quicker to respond to requests."
Yet there's also increased pressure for corporate lawyers to adopt these tools. More than half (56%) of in-house lawyers say clients or stakeholders expect them to use AI, compared with 32% in private practice.
Is AI innovation increasing workloads?
AI has led to widespread innovation and disruption. New tools, features and use cases are coming to market regularly, and the technology has also sparked a wave of legal and compliance changes.
This can be seen in the top three challenges facing in-house legal teams.
Keeping up to date with new technology (60%) was listed as the top challenge, followed by changes in the law (54%), and the continuing demands of compliance regulations (54%).
Legal teams have worked hard to earn a spot at the boardroom table, or at least have considerable influence over it.
Our January 2026 survey found 76% of in-house leaders have considerable or some influence on a range of board-level decisions.
This is a result of legal leaders essentially reshaping their own roles to meet the needs of modern businesses.
Yet we also learnt 47% of in-house lawyers described their team as "overstretched", "cautious", "siloed" or "hard-to-access", hinting that many are still held back by process and routine work.
These findings highlight what is at stake. In-house lawyers have worked hard to become influential business advisers, but their credibility depends on continuing to deliver reliable advice while managing increasingly complex demands.
2. Managing misinformation
AI can make mistakes. It says it on the tin. For in-house lawyers, the consequences of getting something wrong can extend well beyond the legal department.
Could AI put legal teams' reputations at risk?
When asked about the biggest concern in-house lawyers have when using AI, 86% said relying on inaccurate information or hallucinations.
"If clients trust an organisation, and that organisation uses AI irresponsibly, its reputation may never recover. They might actually be more at risk."
Against this backdrop, 88% of in-house lawyers say they feel more comfortable using AI grounded in legal sources.
For legal teams, being able to verify an answer is just as important as receiving it quickly.
One general counsel told us AI increases exposure to claims and litigation.
"No one wants to be a seminal case that is taught in law schools."
They told us good AI governance will save far more time in the long run than any quick wins.
"By failing to tackle something that is known to be an issue with a risk profile attached to it, you are creating a debt for yourself which will lead to a far harder and challenging situation when your issue becomes "a problem"."
A general counsel at a large beverage company says a "lack of risk management puts brands' reputation in jeopardy due to a potential lack of compliance of law and regulations."
Trust extends beyond the legal department
A quick glance at what in-house counsel believe most important when choosing a new technology provider shows risk mitigation sits well above cost or commercial gain.
Two-thirds say strong data privacy and security standards are their top consideration when choosing a new tech partner
Nearly two-thirds (64%) selected strong data privacy and security standards among their top considerations when choosing a technology provider, followed by transparency about AI use (41%) and cost or commercial value (40%).
The same scrutiny increasingly extends to external law firms. As AI becomes part of legal service delivery, in-house teams need confidence in how their advisers use the technology, verify their work and protect confidential information.
"Trust is key to building reputation and remain relevant in business. AI must help on that."
AI governance requires shared responsibility and clear accountability
IT and technology teams are the most likely to manage AI governance at 56%, although 48% of in-house counsel say they look after governance, too.
An ineffective legal governance strategy can create compounding risks across compliance, client trust and operational resilience. Over time, this may lead to regulatory scrutiny, inconsistent decision-making, data misuse and reputational damage that is far harder to repair than the original governance gap."
Organisations that fail to govern AI and legal processes well may also lose commercial ground to competitors that can offer more reliable and defensible services.
The department head of a large in-house legal team in the energy sector says trust is a defining advantage.
"It will be an advantage as the trust is already there but of course trust can be easily lost hence governance and a human in the loop is essential for use of AI."
Trust is no longer determined solely by the quality of a legal team's own work. It increasingly depends on the technology providers and external advisers supporting it.
3. Retaining authenticity in the age of AI
LIn-house lawyers have spent years building their influence within businesses. AI could help them extend that influence, but excessive reliance on automation risks weakening the judgement and personal relationships that make their advice valuable.
AI poses a risk to legal judgement
AI is enabling junior lawyers to take on increasingly complex legal work. But could they be missing out on the essential learning experiences that develop sound legal judgement?
Three-quarters (76%) of in-house lawyers fear that heavy reliance on AI could undermine the development of junior lawyers’ legal judgement.
Routine legal work has traditionally helped junior lawyers develop their reasoning, recognise problems and learn when to question an answer.
As AI takes on more of these tasks, legal leaders will need to find new ways to develop those skills.
AI should not take away your own judgement, says a general counsel at a finance business.
"It should not take away your voice or your authenticity. This is how in-house lawyers will lose influence."
The solution is to use AI as a knowledge partner, or as the same general counsel said, a sparring partner.
"AI can help develop your thinking and act as a sparring partner."
The greatest opportunity for AI may be giving lawyers more time to build relationships, exercise judgement and contribute to the business. But that only works if technology supports their expertise rather than replaces it.
76%
of in-house lawyers fear that heavy reliance on AI could undermine the development of junior lawyers’ legal judgement.
When legal advice becomes a product, what happens to trust?
There's also chatter about firms moving towards a more productised legal service offering.
More than half (55%) of legal professionals expect AI to change how law firms bill, up from 40% in early 2025. Among in-house lawyers, that figure rises to 62%.
Two-thirds of in-house lawyers think AI will impact billing structures at law firms
Many of the general counsel we spoke with said there will be an element of the legal services industry that standardised products will work for, but not all.
"I can certainly see that certain legal products could be standardised for the legal market."
As routine legal work becomes easier to standardise, the value of bespoke advice may increasingly lie in specialist judgement, commercial understanding and trusted relationships. For in-house teams choosing external advisers, those qualities could become even more important.
The future of influence depends on trust
AI could make in-house legal teams more influential than ever. Faster access to information and greater capacity could give lawyers more opportunities to contribute to the decisions shaping their organisations.
But influence depends on more than speed. It comes from sound judgement, commercial understanding and the confidence of the people relying on legal advice.
As AI takes on more legal work, in-house counsel will need to be increasingly deliberate about the tools they trust, the partners they choose and the expertise they preserve.
The most influential in-house lawyers won't simply be those who embrace AI fastest. They'll be those who use it without compromising the trust that makes their advice valuable.