Law Firms Pursuing New Lines of Business Due to Emergence of Gen AI
A recent survey found that 53% of Am Law 200 firms have already purchased "Legal AI" tools (Gen AI tools developed specifically for the legal industry) and that 45% of Am Law 200 firms are using Gen AI now for legal matters.
March 25, 2024 at 03:13 PM
3 minute read
Nearly one-half of law firms are exploring new billable opportunities and developing potential new lines of business made possible by Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) technologies, according to our newly released 2024 Investing in Legal Innovation Survey: The Rise of Gen AI at Top Firms & Corporations.
In January of 2024, LexisNexis surveyed 216 managing partners and other senior leaders at large law firms, as well as 50 executives in corporate legal departments at Fortune 1000 companies, to better understand the business impact of Gen AI technology on the legal industry.
We discovered that 47% of law firms with 50 or more attorneys — and a decisive 54% of respondents from Am Law 200 firms — are currently exploring new business opportunities made possible by Gen AI technology. This suggests that a fast-growing number of law firms see the new business potential of Gen AI and are taking a pro-active approach to exploring AI's power to drive their revenue growth.
Those firms that are exploring new business lines reported that they are evaluating new practice areas and client offerings focused on AI legal issues and implementation. For example, they envision opportunities such as the following:
- Advising clients on AI strategy and compliance;
- Using AI for new services and products;
- Exploring ways that AI can complement the professional work of their lawyers; and
- Transforming their billing models with the assistance of Gen AI tools.
Interestingly, some law firm leaders reported they are looking into using AI to provide new services or pursue work that was previously seen as unprofitable. They are curious if there is a way to innovate their service delivery model by smoothly integrating Gen AI to improve workflows and enhance productivity.
As for law firm business models, survey respondents told us they view AI as a way to automate lower-level tasks, speed up document review and drafting, reduce billing errors and overhead, and generally make firms more efficient. As a result, some firm leaders believe that Gen AI could enable value-based pricing and are considering how they might offer flat fees or alternative fee arrangements that contract legal work based on outputs, rather than hours.
The firms that are not currently exploring new lines of business related to Gen AI cited concerns about the accuracy, reliability and maturity of Gen AI technologies. Many of them expressed a desire for more testing and vetting of Gen AI tools before fully embracing these new technologies, while others expressed caution about client perceptions and potential regulatory restrictions.
The survey results regarding perceived new business opportunities mirror the responses we received from law firms regarding their own projected investments in Gen AI technologies and their perceptions about future revenue growth fueled by the emergence of Gen AI.
Our survey found that 53% of Am Law 200 firms have already purchased "Legal AI" tools (Gen AI tools developed specifically for the legal industry) and that 45% of Am Law 200 firms are using Gen AI now for legal matters. Perhaps this rapid adoption pace explains why seven in 10 (70%) of law firm respondents told us they believe that Gen AI will enable new value-added work for their firms, with about a third (30%) expecting this to result in a direct impact on firm revenue.
Download a free report of our 2024 Investing in Legal Innovation Survey: The Rise of Gen AI at Top Firms and Corporations.
To read more insights and thought leadership from Lexis+ Ai, click here.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute readRemembering Am Law 100 Firm Founder and 'Force of Nature' Stephen Cozen
5 minute read'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 2Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 3'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 4Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
- 5As a New Year Dawns, the Value of Florida’s Revised Mediation Laws Comes Into Greater Focus
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250