The legal tech strategy most firms are missing

Everyone is talking about the latest shiny tech tool. Law firms are investing heavily in innovation and legal AI. But is buying technology enough to actually future-proof a team?

Future-proofing isn’t about adding a new tool on top of existing processes. When workflows aren’t deliberately designed, responsibilities clearly defined, and skills actively developed, legal automation tends to create blind spots and capability gaps, making teams more fragile, not more resilient.

Buying the tool isn’t the strategy

The biggest risk of adopting new tools without a clear legal tech strategy is straightforward: they don’t get used. Many legal automation platforms end up sitting on the shelf. In our Document Automation Survey, we found that most firms automate only a small portion of their overall contract volume.

So, what explains the gap? In most cases, the causes aren’t technological, they’re structural.

Why most legal automation sits on the shelf

• Scattered workflows. When tools are introduced into processes that were never clearly defined, lawyers have to improvise how and when to use them. Friction quickly outweighs value. For instance, when approval responsibilities are unclear - for example, who must approve a contract that includes a budget commitment - a contract generated quickly through legal automation is then passed around by email in a slow, time-consuming back-and-forth.

• Poor knowledge management. Another barrier is messy precedents. Teams often maintain multiple versions of the same template with minor differences. Automating them as-is adds little real efficiency; templates need to be consolidated and standardised first. Strong knowledge management is a prerequisite.

• Skills and incentives. Teams are rarely given time to learn new systems. In our Drafting Automation Survey, respondents highlighted that one of the most common barriers to adoption is that legal automation is difficult to use or learn. When that happens, sticking with manual work often feels easier than investing time in the tool.

Fix the foundations first

The solution is structural, not technological. Like any tool, automation requires a clear legal tech strategy. Teams need to fix the foundations that make automation usable in practice:

• Define workflows end-to-end. Map how work enters the team, how it moves, and where decisions happen so automation has a clear path to follow. Consistent intake, routing, and approval points reduce friction.

• Strengthen knowledge management. Consolidate duplicate templates, standardise clauses, and define clear rules for when each version should be used. Automation works best when the underlying content is clean and trusted.

• Clarify ownership and governance. Make it explicit who maintains templates, who approves changes, and who is responsible for the automated process over time.

• Invest in skills and incentives. Give teams time to learn new tools, support practical training, and recognise process improvement as valuable work- not extra work. Identifying internal ambassadors is equally important: these are the professionals who are most enthusiastic about new technology that can take responsibility for sharing updates, supporting colleagues, and driving engagement across the team. 

When workflows are clear, knowledge is structured, and people are supported, legal automation becomes usable in everyday practice - and adoption follows.

Finally, resilient workflows require iteration. Processes should be reviewed and refined regularly to adapt to changing client expectations, regulatory developments, and market conditions. Future-proofing is not a one-off implementation - it is continuous adjustment.

Legal tech strategy checklist: questions to ask before you automate

 Before rolling out legal automation, ask yourself: 

• Do you have a legal tech strategy in place that covers workflows, knowledge management and training?

• Does the new tool integrate into existing workflows seamlessly?

• Does it integrate with other solutions – i.e. CRMs, databases, e-sign tools? 

• Does it improve decision-making, not just speed?

• Are documents properly prepared and organised before the new tool is implemented?

• Are teams trained to use it deliberately and critically? Alternatively, it’s the tool easy to use, and does the provider provide a clear training schedule? 

• Is there a plan to scale and evolve usage over time?

Your questions on legal automation, answered

 Q: What is legal automation?

A: Legal automation uses software to reduce repetitive tasks, standardise drafting, and improve efficiency in legal workflows.

Q: How can legal teams become future-proof?

A: By designing resilient processes that adapt to change, embedding human judgment alongside automation, and continually developing skills.

Q: What are common use cases of automation in law?

A: Contract drafting, clause libraries, document review, and workflow management are the most common applications.

Q: Can automation replace junior lawyers?

A: No. Automation frees juniors from repetitive work, but deliberate training and oversight are needed to develop judgment and expertise.

Where to start 

Future-proofing legal teams starts with the basics: clear workflows, solid knowledge management, and well-supported teams. Legal automation helps, but without clear processes, technology alone isn’t enough.