Where Automation Meets Judgment: Artificial Intelligence and the New Lawyer
Many legal workplaces that are gaining great efficiencies through use of AI must now wrestle with a novel challenge: how to ensure junior lawyers retain the learning experience and exposure that shape solid professional instincts and sustain a strong profession.
With the proliferation of and emphasis on technology, particularly artificial intelligence (AI), in legal workplaces, there has been significant discussion about how AI tools impact the role of lawyers and the advice they provide. Increasingly, this dialogue has focused on those who are new or junior lawyers. Early on, the introduction of AI ushered in discussion within the profession about certain ‘watchouts’, such as the incorporation of bias or the preservation/waiver of privilege and confidentiality; however, of late, the practical benefits of AI use within the bar permeate professional development topics, cocktail party conversations and industry events.
Some suggest that AI will remove responsibilities from law students and more junior lawyers, for instance, by providing a ‘first cut’ review or analysis, that typically would then be assessed by a more senior lawyer, or by performing work characterized as lower risk and routine. In that same vein, certain legal professionals believe that, by automating tasks like document reviews, summarizing materials, and generating analyses based on good prompts and information, AI will result in significant cost-savings to organizations while allowing legal personnel to add more strategic value to higher-risk projects.
While the merits and accuracy of AI outputs are widely debated, there is no question that lawyers are using AI much more in the course of solving problems and completing day-to-day tasks, with these tools helping to inform work products like never before. Given this more common application of AI software, the differences in potential implications for senior lawyers and junior lawyers grow more noteworthy.
Generally, lawyers entering the profession have learned how to practice law by observing and by receiving feedback, mentorship and training from lawyers who are senior in tenure to them. In this sense, junior lawyers have developed their legal competence and proficiency from experience with other lawyers, colleagues and clients. This style of learning may be thought of as a ‘classic model’ that allows one to become a seasoned strategic advisor and advocate with refined judgment.
Ideally, new and junior lawyers would benefit from the enhanced efficiencies that AI tools provide, while still being required to develop the holistic skillset, including substantive and interpersonal abilities, that promotes a successful path as a lawyer. Indeed, lawyers need to deploy critical thinking and analysis skills, along with a good sense of judgment, in order to evaluate AI outputs – to have competence to assess whether those outputs are appropriate and accurate. It’s vital that junior lawyers possess the requisite substantive and analytical skillset to determine whether the AI results they are reading capture concepts recognized in law and address the relevant issues at play adequately, and to be able to modify the output so it’s useful for the scenario in question.
It is important to critically consider whether AI tools can teach new lawyers these skills, or whether there is still value in having learned through the classic model, or whether some combination of AI tool utilization and the classic model is the best course.
There is certainly a case for the value that lawyers add to the profession, not the least of which is the human element, including traditional ‘soft skills’ such as interpersonal abilities, consensus-building, persuasion, conflict-resolution, influence, agility, calm under pressure, as well as the strategic realigning of priorities and approaches in real-time. These features are not static and, as they develop, lawyers are able to consider context and multiple stakeholder interests and expectations, and exercise judgment that comes from dealing with a myriad of cases repeatedly.
The exercise of judgment, in particular, presumes one is capable of analyzing the facts, law and circumstances, to make critical assessments about a given situation. The junior lawyer must have the ability to apply these qualities effectively when evaluating AI outputs if they are to be used in helping to solve problems or facilitate productivity in the practice of law.
While AI tools may certainly be instrumental in creating efficiencies and other optimizations for organizations, the benefits gained by learning the practice of law through the human connection cannot be overstated. There is still very much an advantage to ensuring that those entering law and looking to grow within it have the opportunity for meaningful interactions with others in the legal profession to help them develop and refine their skills, competence and style of practice. Mentorship within the legal field, and more broadly, is one important facet that has afforded so many lawyers with opportunities to become excellent practitioners. Even with increasing AI utilization, this style of learning continues to be beneficial, meaningful, and arguably necessary, for newer lawyers.
**The views expressed in this article are my own and do not represent the views of BDO Canada LLP, its affiliate companies, or any member firms within the BDO network.
