At LegalTechTalk 2026, the closing panel titled “From AI Pilots to Firm-Wide Capability: What Comes Next?” brought together heads of law firms, , innovation executives and legal technology experts to examine one of the most important questions facing the legal profession today: now that most firms have begun experimenting with artificial intelligence, what does it take to move from isolated pilots to genuine organisational transformation?
The session was moderated by Shanin Lott, Law Firm Practice Leader at Russell Reynolds and featured Simon Ridpath, Managing Partner, Charles Russell Speechlys, LeeAnn Black, Chief Operating Officer, Latham & Watkins, Christian Lang, CEO & Founder at Lega and Christy Bentz, Chief Client Value and Innovation Officer, US at Norton Rose Fulbright.
The discussion served as a fitting conclusion to the conference. While much of LegalTechTalk 2026 focused on AI tools, automation and emerging technologies, this session explored the broader organisational questions underpinning successful transformation. Speakers highlighted leadership, law firm culture, business models, pricing structures, talent development and the future of legal services in an increasingly AI-enabled world.
AI transformation is fundamentally a leadership challenge
Opening the discussion, Shanin referred to research conducted by Russell Reynolds Associates, which surveys business leaders globally regarding the issues having the greatest impact on their organisations.
For the first time, technology change emerged as the most significant concern across industries worldwide. More importantly, organisations that felt most prepared to manage technological disruption were significantly more likely to report having strong leaders with a clear understanding of AI’s strategic role and the ability to mobilise resources around that vision.
Against this backdrop, the panel explored what leadership means in an era of rapid technological change.
Simon argued that the role of leaders extends far beyond approving technology investments.
According to him, leadership requires creating an environment where innovation can occur safely and consistently.
As he explained:
“Your job as the leader of an organisation, in a law firm in particular, is to make sure that you’re offering encouragement, you’re challenging, you’re removing the fear that definitely exists.”
He observed that many lawyers remain apprehensive about AI because it introduces uncertainty into a profession traditionally built around risk management and predictability. Leaders therefore have a responsibility to create conditions in which experimentation is encouraged rather than punished.
Ridpath also stressed the importance of individuals capable of bridging the gap between lawyers and technologists.
As he noted:
“The superpower that you really need in an organisation are people who can explain it on both sides.”
For LeeAnn , transformational change similarly begins with leadership. She emphasised that leaders must communicate a clear vision while remaining transparent about both opportunities and uncertainties.
She emphasised that:
“You really need to set the tone from the top.”
She explained that every organisation contains a spectrum of personalities. Some individuals actively embrace disruption, while others naturally feel anxious about change. Transparency therefore becomes critical in helping firms move forward together.
AI adoption is not the same as AI transformation
Although AI adoption has accelerated dramatically across the legal sector, speakers repeatedly distinguished between using AI tools and genuinely transforming the way legal services are delivered.
Christy Bentz argued that many firms continue to treat AI as an innovation initiative rather than an enterprise-wide business priority.
As she explained:
“AI transformation does have to be a firm priority. It cannot be an innovation initiative.”
According to her, successful firms are those where senior leadership consistently reinforces the importance of transformation, demonstrates curiosity about new technologies and provides the resources necessary to support change.
She noted that transformation requires more than software procurement. It requires firms to rethink workflows, encourage experimentation and empower lawyers to reimagine how they create value for clients.
Importantly, leadership must back those ambitions with meaningful investment.
As she observed, firms cannot claim that AI is strategically important while simultaneously refusing to allocate resources toward implementation.
The most successful leaders are getting their hands dirty
Drawing on his experience working with law firms across multiple jurisdictions, Christian suggested that the leaders making the most progress are not merely curious about AI but actively engaging with it themselves.
He highlighted that:
“The behaviours we see from the leaders that are making the most change, they are not only curious, they are literally getting hands on and figuring this stuff out.”
He described workshops where managing partners personally participated in building applications and experimenting with AI systems. Such involvement helps demystify technology while signalling to the wider organisation that innovation is everyone’s responsibility.
Christian also stressed the importance of courage in periods of uncertainty. Law firms, by their nature, tend to be highly risk-averse. However, transformation requires leaders who can continue making decisions despite incomplete information.
“False starts and backtracks, that’s all part of the progress.”
In his view, firms that wait for complete certainty before acting are likely to find themselves falling behind.
Law firms are still focused on protecting the past
One of the most thought-provoking moments of the discussion came when Christian reflected on how many firms approach AI investment.
According to him, a significant proportion of the legal industry remains focused on protecting existing business models rather than creating future ones.
As he observed:
“So many law firms are fundamentally focused on protecting the past.”
He explained that many technology investments are driven by client concerns regarding efficiency, write-offs and cost reductions. While understandable, this often leads firms to focus on preserving work that may ultimately become less valuable. Instead, he argued that firms should identify where future value will be created and invest accordingly.
The challenge is not simply doing existing work more efficiently. It is determining what legal services clients will value most in the future.
Reimagining legal service delivery
The panel also explored whether law firms are being ambitious enough when it comes to rethinking legal service delivery.
LeeAnn explained that much of the early focus of AI adoption involved infrastructure, training and technology procurement. However, firms are increasingly shifting their attention toward integrating AI into actual legal workflows. According to her, practice group leaders now play a critical role in designing how AI fits into service delivery. Rather than viewing AI as a separate initiative, firms must integrate it into playbooks, workflows and client-facing processes.
As she explained:
“It is less about AI and more about how do we deliver client service in the most impactful way.”
This shift represents a move away from technology-centred thinking toward client-centred transformation.
The billable hour is facing growing pressure
The future of the billable hour emerged as a recurring theme throughout the discussion.
Ms. Bentz acknowledged that law firms are currently operating in two realities simultaneously. On one hand, firms continue to rely on traditional economic structures. On the other, they are preparing for a future in which legal work may be delivered and priced differently.
As she observed:
“We are actually going to be running in two models.”
This creates natural tension for law firm leaders. Firms must continue generating revenue today while investing in capabilities that may define future business models.
Ms. Black emphasised the importance of maintaining transparent conversations with clients throughout this transition.
She noted that clients increasingly want to understand how law firms are using AI and how those investments affect service delivery. She emphasised that the firms are discussing openly what technologies they are using, how they are deploying them and what outcomes they hope to achieve.
Mr. Ridpath offered perhaps the strongest critique of existing structures.
As he stated:
“Our organisational principle around chargeable time is the one that has to be busted.”
For him, AI is forcing law firms to confront fundamental questions about how legal value is created and measured.
Data may become a firm’s most valuable asset
Another major theme emerging from the session was the strategic importance of data.
Mr. Ridpath argued that law firms need to fundamentally rethink how they describe themselves.
As he put it:
“We need to stop talking about knowledge and talk about data.”
He emphasised that the data represents one of the legal profession’s most valuable assets. Law firms possess decades of information generated through transactions, disputes, advisory work and client relationships. The challenge is determining how that information can be deployed more effectively. Rather than viewing data as a by-product of legal work, firms should treat it as a strategic asset capable of informing decision-making, pricing strategies and client service delivery.
The next generation of lawyers will need different skills
The panel also examined how AI is reshaping expectations regarding legal talent.
Mr. Ridpath identified adaptability as one of the most important qualities for future lawyers.
He observed that:
“You want people who are not frightened of change.”
As legal services continue evolving, lawyers will increasingly need to navigate uncertainty, think laterally and make decisions in unfamiliar situations. At the same time, technical competence alone will not be sufficient.
Ms. Black argued that communication and collaboration skills remain essential.
She warned against a future where technology unintentionally weakens interpersonal abilities that clients continue to value.
As she explained:
“We need to make sure the young folks coming up are not in this age of just constantly looking down and can have the conversations with clients and speak well and collaborate with teams because that integration is so critically important.”
The ability to communicate clearly, collaborate effectively and build trust will remain central to legal practice even as technology becomes more sophisticated.
The unresolved challenge of training future lawyers
One of the most important concerns raised during the session related to lawyer training.
Historically, junior lawyers developed judgment through repetitive exposure to legal work, document review, due diligence exercises and practical problem-solving. AI increasingly automates many of those tasks.
This raises an important question: how will future lawyers develop judgment?
Mr. Lang argued that judgment emerges from uncertainty.
As he explained:
“Judgement facility comes from making decisions in the face of uncertainty.”
He expressed concern that generative AI often provides immediate answers, potentially reducing opportunities for lawyers to think independently.
According to him:
“One of the most pernicious parts of Gen AI is because you can always have an answer to start from.”
To address this challenge, he expressed optimism about simulation-based training environments that force lawyers to make decisions, encounter uncertainty and develop judgment through experience.
The issue attracted significant attention because, as several speakers noted, clients continue to pay premium fees for trusted advisors with sound judgment. Ensuring that future generations develop those capabilities remains one of the profession’s greatest challenges.
Firms should focus less on adoption and more on trailblazers
As the session drew to a close, Mr. Lang challenged a common assumption about AI adoption.
While many organisations focus heavily on driving adoption across the entire workforce, he argued that leadership attention should instead be directed toward identifying and empowering individuals capable of discovering new ways of working.
According to him:
“Stop worrying about empowering the masses. Activate your trailblazers that are going to help you navigate this uncertain path ahead.”
These individuals, he suggested, will play a critical role in helping firms navigate uncertainty, test new approaches and identify future opportunities. Rather than measuring success solely through adoption metrics, firms should focus on enabling those most capable of shaping future practice models.
Concluding reflections
Asked to offer one final piece of advice for leaders navigating AI-driven transformation, Mr. Ridpath provided perhaps the most memorable takeaway of the entire session.
As he stated:
“Don’t think of it as a technology problem.”
The closing panel reinforced one of the central themes emerging throughout LegalTechTalk 2026: while AI may be transforming legal work, technology itself is no longer the primary challenge.
The firms most likely to thrive will be those capable of creating cultures that reward experimentation, developing lawyers who can exercise judgment in complex situations and building leadership teams willing to make decisions despite uncertainty. AI pilots are now commonplace across the legal industry. The real challenge is turning those pilots into lasting organisational capability.
Achieving that transformation will require leadership, adaptability, transparency and a willingness to rethink assumptions that have shaped legal practice for generations.
