AI’s Bigger Promise: Better Legal Work

AI is already changing how quickly legal work gets done. DLA Piper’s AI-assisted due diligence reportedly cut review time by 80%. Clients have noticed, and their expectations are rising accordingly. An ACC/Everlaw survey found that 64% of in-house respondents expected GenAI to reduce their reliance on law firms, and 82% saw contract drafting and negotiation as the greatest opportunity for outside-counsel savings. Yet nearly six in ten lacked visibility into how their firms use AI and saw no savings passed through. Only 24% were satisfied with outside counsel’s use of AI to deliver better value.

That frustration is now shaping buying decisions. The Financial Times reports that Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup expect firms to share AI savings, and its coverage of Revolut’s panel changes underscores that quality and value will determine who keeps client work. The pressure is structural, too. CLOC describes legal departments facing rising demand while budgets and headcount flatten, which means outside counsel is no longer the default release valve.

These expectations are real, and firms should take them seriously. But if the conversation stops there, AI’s promise narrows to the same work done faster and billed for less. That misses the bigger opportunity.

Speed is the starting point, not the destination. Ari Kaplan’s recent research found that 94% of surveyed law firm leaders said AI helped them respond faster to clients. The more important question is what lawyers can do better with the capacity that speed creates.

Return to due diligence. Instead of finishing the same review sooner, lawyers could use the time AI frees up to examine more evidence, connect findings across a transaction, assess risks in context, and give clients a clearer basis for decisions. The result is not just a faster review. It is a more complete analysis and a better-informed client.

Better work on existing matters is only part of the story. AI can also make entirely new service models possible. Falcon, an AI-native firm, pairs AI-assisted contract review with a client-specific legal playbook and lawyer sign-off. It offers same-day work through flat-fee monthly plans, built around the client’s workflow and its need for timely, predictable advice.

Established firms do not need to become AI-native to learn from that example. They can start by asking: What analysis or deliverable could we offer that was previously impractical? What workstreams could we connect? What risks could we identify earlier? How could added capacity create more time for client conversations and proactive advice?

The answers will often point toward different pricing. When clients receive integrated insight, ongoing monitoring, or a more complete result, hourly billing may no longer describe the value well. Fixed or phased fees, subscriptions, or portfolio arrangements may fit the service better.

These shifts also reach beyond the client relationship into talent and firm economics. If AI takes over work that once helped junior lawyers learn, firms will need new ways to build judgment. And partners need to see, concretely, how technology improves outcomes, strengthens relationships, and supports a sustainable business.

In the end, AI’s promise is not simply that lawyers can do things faster. It is that we can do things better, differently, and more proactively, and use that change to create greater value for clients.

Mark Medice, Principal, LawVision · mmedice@lawvision.com