Legal's AI Identity Crisis: Why We're Solving the Wrong Problem
Legal's AI Identity Crisis: Why We're Solving the Wrong Problem
Most legal teams are debating whether AI can draft a contract accurately enough. Meanwhile, the real question is whether we're even asking AI to do the right work.
A recent piece in Above the Law challenges the prevailing wisdom that AI should be relegated to "glorified admin" tasks like research and summarization. The author argues we're missing the bigger opportunity: using AI as a creative partner, not just an efficiency engine.
This strikes at something deeper than tool selection—it's about how legal teams define value creation. When we frame AI primarily through the lens of accuracy and reliability, we naturally default to transactional, repeatable tasks. But creativity in legal work—strategy development, argument construction, scenario planning—has always involved iterating through imperfect ideas.
The fascinating insight? AI hallucinations aren't bugs in creative workflows—they're features. Just like human brainstorming produces ideas we'll ultimately reject, AI's "wrong" outputs can spark breakthrough thinking we wouldn't have reached alone.
Here's the strategic shift: Stop asking "Is this AI output perfect?" and start asking "Does this AI interaction make my thinking better?" 🧠
The legal teams that will thrive aren't the ones who use AI to automate yesterday's processes faster. They're the ones who use AI to reimagine what legal counsel can create, contribute, and solve.
What would change if your legal team approached AI as a creative amplifier rather than just a productivity tool? 💭
Comment, connect and follow for more commentary on product counseling and emerging technologies. 👇
