According to Business Insider, the legal tech industry’s TLTF Summit revealed that law firms have completely flipped their position on AI in just two years, moving from “thou shalt not” to “thou must” use the technology. The investment firm-run conference focused on urgent questions about how firms should buy AI tools and who ultimately pays for them. Law firms face structural challenges as partnerships that distribute profits annually rather than retaining earnings for technology investments. The billable-hour model creates disincentives for efficiency tools unless firms shift to fixed fees, while strict confidentiality rules and fragmented procurement processes slow adoption. Private equity firms are actively scouting law firms through managed services organization structures that allow non-lawyer ownership of back-office operations.
The client pressure catalyst
Here’s the thing that really accelerated this shift: client demands completely reversed course. Initially, clients were telling their law firms “don’t use AI on our matters” due to confidentiality concerns. But within two years, those same clients started demanding to know what AI tools firms were using, how lawyers were trained, and where the cost savings would appear. That created what one employment lawyer called a “swim or sink” moment for firms. They’re horrible at treading water – they either move forward or they go under. So now you’ve got firms snapping up software licenses, creating AI task forces, and coaching partners on AI talking points for client meetings.
Who pays the bill?
The funding question got particularly spicy at the summit. Some lawyers argued firms should pass AI costs directly to clients. Others said firms should absorb the expense as a necessary investment. But there’s a third option gaining traction: outside capital through managed services organizations. Basically, investors own a separate entity that acts as a vendor handling all non-legal tasks for the law firm. One immigration lawyer said he’s already fielded two private equity inquiries this year alone. This workaround lets firms access serious cash while technically maintaining their partnership structure.
Restructuring the legal pyramid
This tech shift is fundamentally remaking the traditional law firm structure. One firm chair admitted they’ve stopped hiring junior lawyers, largely replacing them with AI. Another predicted a “law firm diamond” with slim layers of partners and juniors but a bulge of experienced midlevels doing most work. A rectangular model with one associate per partner also got floated. But here’s the billion-dollar question: where will those midlevel lawyers come from if entry-level hiring slows down? At least one major firm says their associate class is actually growing to meet increased client demand. It’s creating real tension between efficiency gains and developing future talent.
What remains human
Eventually, the conversation circled back to the most fundamental question. A law professor asked the room: “What will remain uniquely human in the practice of law?” The responses came fast and varied – “Happy hour,” “Juries,” “Judgement,” “Nothing.” That last answer probably made a few people uncomfortable. But it gets at the core issue facing not just law but every professional service industry right now. As firms navigate this transition, they’re dealing with everything from ethical considerations around AI-generated legal work to the practical reality that their entire business model might need overhauling. The days of slow, deliberate tech adoption in law are over – the AI wave is here, and firms are either riding it or getting washed away.
