How Should a Law Firm Choose and Implement AI Tools Responsibly?

A five-step framework for evaluating AI tools, managing professional responsibility, pilot testing, and firmwide adoption.

There’s a lot of buzz around the pros and cons of AI adoption in the legal sector. Attorneys in Ohio and across the country are weighing ethics guidance, news of sanctions rulings involving misuse, and bold promises of efficiency. While large firms build proprietary AI software and individual attorneys experiment with commercial LLMs, small firms and solo practitioners face a practical question: how should a law firm choose legal technology that fits its needs while meeting professional responsibility obligations?

OBLIC does not endorse any specific AI product. This article offers practical steps when deciding whether, and how, new technology belongs in your law practice.

The best legal technology is not necessarily the tool with the most features.
It is the tool that solves a defined problem, fits the firm’s existing operations, and can be used responsibly by the people expected to adopt it.

1. Assess Current Law Firm Operations

Before adding AI capabilities, a firm should assess its current operations. The review should include not only applications, but also the workflows and people surrounding them. A firm may have an adequate product but an inefficient process, incomplete training, or duplicative systems.

• What is the firm already using?
  Review all existing technology applications, their functions, and their limitations.
• How are we performing?
  Identify how current resources and processes are performing, including strengths, existing assets, and opportunities to improve workflows, outputs, or performance.

2. Identify Strategic Goals and Use Cases

Firm owners, solo practitioners, and managing partners understand that private practice means practicing law and running a business. Smart businesses set strategic goals and map out tactics to accomplish them. Knowing what needs to be done, such as streamlining intake, improving quality and consistency of communications, or increasing marketing content, informs a decision on the resources your team needs.

Document the functionality the firm needs before evaluating products.

3. Research, Categorize, and Compare AI Tools

There are myriad ways to integrate AI technology into your practice. A firm may add AI functionality to technology it already uses, such as Microsoft 365 Copilot, Lexis+ with Protégé, or Clio Work, or introduce a standalone application like Paxton, Harvey, Eve Legal, or Spellbook.

Adding AI functionality to the firm’s existing platforms (like Lexis or Clio) may reduce implementation barriers. Users may already be familiar with the underlying platform, and the firm may be able to preserve existing workflows, vendor relationships, security controls, and data-management practices. These advantages may ease adoption, but the added functionality still must address the firm’s identified needs.

A standalone product may offer specialized or more advanced capabilities that are not available within the existing technology stack. Adding a new platform, however, may require the firm to address additional integrations, accounts, data-storage practices, vendor terms, training, and workflow changes.

Research both types of options and evaluate feasibility, compatibility, functionality, security, and cost. Consider which tools meet the firm’s needs, fill genuine gaps, and work within the budget. The firm should also compare terms of use and privacy settings, including what information the product can access, how data and outputs are stored or retained, and whether firm information may be used to train or improve the product.

4. Pilot the AI Tool Responsibly

Once the firm selects the tool to test, define both the professional responsibility guardrails and the pilot design. Published ethics guidance, including ABA Formal Opinion 512 and the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct’s Ethics Guide: Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers and Judicial Officers, can help inform parameters addressing:

1. What information may be entered into the software;
2. Client communication and informed consent;
3. Storage and retention of inputs, uses, and outputs, both during and after the trial period;
4. Account security and access controls (e.g. multi-factor authentication);
5. Billing considerations; and
6. Human verification and oversight of outputs.

If a firm has an AI Use Policy, review and revise before and following the pilot. OBLIC’s guidance for creating an AI use policy  and overview of the AI Ethics Guide provide additional resources.

At this stage, the firm should also define the parameters of the pilot. In addition to the professional responsibility parameters above, the pilot plan should identify:

• which firm members will participate and who will oversee the pilot;
• how participants will be trained and supported;
• which use cases are approved for testing;
• how long the pilot will run;
• how results will be evaluated against the firm’s stated goals.

5. Build a Firmwide AI Adoption Plan

The real measure of a legal technology purchase is not whether the firm acquires the tool, but whether the tool becomes part of a thoughtful, secure, and repeatable workflow. This requires an implementation and training plan for all members of the team.

Assign ongoing responsibility for the technology, document approved workflows and review requirements, provide role-based training, establish a process for questions and incident reporting, and periodically review user access, security settings, vendor terms, product changes, and performance.

A successful implementation plan does more than teach people how to operate a tool.
It defines where the tool fits, how its work will be supervised, and how the firm will determine whether it is actually improving the practice.

For more on adopting legal technology, The Lawyerist offers several resources, including the Complete Guide to Legal Tech, and its chapter on selecting products and solutions to build a tech stack.

Wrap Up: The Questions that Matter When Choosing Legal Technology

When considering the adoption of legal tech tools, start with the questions, “How should we decide whether a new technology belongs in our practice?” and “What problems are we trying to solve?”

By assessing current operations, defining a use case, comparing tools carefully, piloting within clear guardrails, and planning for adoption, a firm can build a technology stack that serves its practice rather than adding another underused subscription.

With questions or for additional resources, contact your OBLIC Loss Prevention team. We’re here to help.

Gretchen K. Mote, Esq. Director of Loss Prevention Ohio Bar Liability Insurance Co. Direct:  614.572.0620 gmote@oblic.com

Merisa K. Bowers, Esq. Director of Marketing and Loss Prevention Counsel Ohio Bar Liability Insurance Co. Direct:  614.859.2978 mbowers@oblic.com

For more resources, see the Artificial Intelligence Library from the Ohio Supreme Court and be sure to review applicable local rules and standing orders in your jurisdiction.

This information is made available solely for loss prevention purposes, which may include claim prevention techniques designed to minimize the likelihood of incurring a claim for legal malpractice. This information does not establish, report, or create the standard of care for attorneys. The material is not a complete analysis of the topic and should not be construed as providing legal advice. Please conduct your own appropriate legal research in this area. If you have questions about this email’s content and are an OBLIC policyholder, please contact us using the information above.