Most organisations are in an experimentation phase, where they’re trying to see where you can and can’t use AI. But as AI adoption ramps up, lawyers need to acquire key technology competencies to address digital literacy gaps and use AI responsibly and effectively.
The Missing Middle and Narrowing the Digital Literacy Gap
Lawyers don’t need to code, but they need to acquire more tech competencies to close a growing digital literacy gap.
A key reason why there is a digital literacy gap among lawyers, apart from the lack of legal technology training in university, is the ‘missing middle.’ On the extreme ends are small law firms (which can use basic consumer AI tools because they’re agile and not overburdened by large IT systems) and large enterprise law firms (who have the resources, capability, and funds to take advantage of AI tools).
In between is a missing middle, where medium and boutique-sized law firms can’t use consumer products and don’t have the resources for the enterprise scale. With rapid technology advancements, the gap has widened.
Data Governance and AI
Legal firms and organisations can narrow that gap by doing a legal health tech check on what their data is, where the data is stored, what technology they are using, getting educated with the new technology, and more importantly develop an AI framework.
AI deals with sensitive, confidential data, and organisations need to ensure none of these are leaked outside by implementing proper insurance policies for cybersecurity and internal policies governing the internal use of AI.
Watch the full panel discussion
In addition to the lack of a framework and digital literacy gaps in legal teams, there are other barriers preventing legal teams from effectively leveraging Generative AI. Consensus Engagement Manager Amanda Fajerman delves into them in a panel discussion at the LIV CPD, as well as:
Digital literacy gaps across your team and practice
Practical case studies of how firms are using AI tools
Click the button below to watch the full recording of the panel discussion.
Most organisations are in an experimentation phase, where they’re trying to see where you can and can’t use AI. But as AI adoption ramps up, lawyers need to acquire key technology competencies to address digital literacy gaps and use AI responsibly and effectively.
The Missing Middle and Narrowing the Digital Literacy Gap
Lawyers don’t need to code, but they need to acquire more tech competencies to close a growing digital literacy gap.
A key reason why there is a digital literacy gap among lawyers, apart from the lack of legal technology training in university, is the ‘missing middle.’ On the extreme ends are small law firms (which can use basic consumer AI tools because they’re agile and not overburdened by large IT systems) and large enterprise law firms (who have the resources, capability, and funds to take advantage of AI tools).
In between is a missing middle, where medium and boutique-sized law firms can’t use consumer products and don’t have the resources for the enterprise scale. With rapid technology advancements, the gap has widened.
Data Governance and AI
Legal firms and organisations can narrow that gap by doing a legal health tech check on what their data is, where the data is stored, what technology they are using, getting educated with the new technology, and more importantly develop an AI framework.
AI deals with sensitive, confidential data, and organisations need to ensure none of these are leaked outside by implementing proper insurance policies for cybersecurity and internal policies governing the internal use of AI.
Watch the full panel discussion
In addition to the lack of a framework and digital literacy gaps in legal teams, there are other barriers preventing legal teams from effectively leveraging Generative AI. Consensus Engagement Manager Amanda Fajerman delves into them in a panel discussion at the LIV CPD, as well as:
Digital literacy gaps across your team and practice
Practical case studies of how firms are using AI tools
Click the button below to watch the full recording of the panel discussion.
