Firm leaders may say: “go buy AI”, but the authors here say you should ask why before your law firm buys another AI tool.

In Attorney at Work (Before Your Law Firm Buys Another AI Tool, Ask Why, written by Michael Maschke, Sharon Nelson and John Simek and available here), the authors note that a question they hear increasingly often is: “Which AI tool should our firm use?”

That sounds like the right starting question, but it often isn’t.

Law firms have a long history of solving tech problems by buying more tech. Sometimes that works. Often, firms buy sophisticated software only to discover a year later that relatively few people use it. AI makes that temptation even stronger because seemingly every legal technology product now includes some form of artificial intelligence.

Before evaluating another AI platform, your firm should first identify the problem you aim to solve. Are attorneys spending too much time summarizing lengthy documents? Is intake inefficient? Does administrative work take up too much attorney time? Is the firm trying to improve legal research, document production or knowledge management?

Once you clearly define the problem, evaluating technology becomes much easier. Starting with the product and then searching for ways to use it reverses that process.

Seems straightforward, but the AI “mania” seems to have caused law firms (and other organizations) to deviate from best practices.

As the authors also note: “AI tends to amplify what already exists. Good processes can become better. Inefficient processes can become faster versions of the same inefficiency. That’s an important lesson for law firms.”

This is why MIT found last year in its State of AI in Business 2025 study that 95% of GenAI pilots fail. Organizations are failing to consider the workflows when implementing AI.

Workflows matter most in legal AI software adoption. As the authors also note: “This is why firms should examine the underlying workflow before automating it. Ask the people performing the work where bottlenecks occur. Identify unnecessary steps. Determine which tasks require an attorney’s judgment and which do not. Then decide whether AI can improve the redesigned process. Sometimes the best AI implementation may begin without AI at all.”

I’ll leave it at that so as not to steal all the thunder of their article. Check it out here to learn their six guiding principles for successful legal AI software adoption!

So, what do you think? Are your organization leaders letting you ask why before your law firm buys another AI tool? They should. Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Image created using ChatGPT, using the term “robot Rodin’s ‘The Thinker’”.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.