Q&A: Exploring the Future of Legal Work with AI

In this special interview, we discuss our legal tech journey with three key members of our firm: IT Director Saara Vikholm, Managing Partner Gabrielle Dannberg, and Senior Attorney Tuomas Tiensuu, who is currently on secondment with Hengeler Mueller in Germany. They share their insights on our experiences, challenges, and the roadmap for legal tech in legal work.

Q: Over the past few years, what has really driven you to invest in legal tech for client work?

Gabrielle: Our goal has always been to improve the quality and efficiency of the legal services we provide. We’ve seen how AI can transform industries, and while the legal sector has traditionally been slow to adopt new technologies, we didn’t want to be left behind. AI has moved from a theoretical discussion to a tangible part of legal practice faster than most expected, including myself.

I have just returned from the IBA Annual Conference in Mexico City, and what struck me was how AI, which was a major topic of discussion in IBA Paris last year, has now become a common tool in the daily work of many firms. The change in just one year is remarkable! The legal community is quickly realizing that AI is not something of the future—it’s very much the present, and those who don’t embrace it risk being left behind. The pace of adoption has been faster than expected, and I believe it will continue to accelerate as firms become more comfortable with these tools and clients demand greater efficiencies.

Tuomas: I believe that legal tech and AI should be approached using the same principles as investing, and the first step for all law firms is obviously to start exploring. There is currently an abundance of new tools coming to the market, and finding the ones worth a closer look takes time. One size really does not fit all—client needs vary dramatically depending on the client and the mandate at hand, and so do the tools that can add value. Moreover, it is important to remember that there is always a learning curve with these tools. It can be anything between 30 seconds or several months of practice, but there is still one. Accordingly, creating general awareness and know-how about best practices and use cases inside our firm also takes resources and further underscores the importance of starting your own journey as early as possible.

Q: Could you share details about the tools and the pilots the firm is running and the technologies you’re testing?

Saara: Sure! Our project management and collaboration platform, MyD&I, forms the backbone of our current legal tech offering. In addition, we have been piloting and using various technologies such as document automation and neural machine translation to deliver efficient legal services. One of our most exciting pilots in 2024 has been with Leya. It’s an AI tool that we’ve used for assistive tasks, contract review, drafting, and, to the extent possible, for legal research. The system can use our own document base, search relevant case law and precedents, and also provide relevant references to legal commentary. We have also been testing Microsoft’s AI capabilities and investigating AI-based clause management. There’s a lot happening!

That said, even though we test several tools, each one is thoroughly evaluated against our high standards. While many systems show great promise, they sometimes struggle with the complexities of legal language and jurisdiction-specific nuances. This is why we have adopted a cautious approach, meticulously testing and iterating to ensure that quality and reliability remain paramount.

Gabrielle: I couldn’t agree more. The key for us is to know how to use AI tools in a way that ensures the best possible results without compromising on the quality of our work or customer service. And let’s not forget usability—having user-friendly tools is essential, not only for efficiency but also for employee satisfaction. Tools that are intuitive and easy to use naturally contribute to a positive working environment.

Q: How do clients influence the adoption of AI and other legal technologies?

Gabrielle: Client benefits and client expectations are absolutely central to us. We don’t adopt AI or any new tools for the sake of branding or even efficiencies alone. For us, it’s all about ensuring that our clients consistently receive the best legal advice, enhanced by the capabilities AI can bring to support our work. In fact, we’re increasingly having direct conversations with our clients about how we use AI to enhance our service delivery.

“The real value lies in how AI allows us to spend more time on meaningful collaboration.”

While clients may not always notice that AI was used in an assignment, the high quality of the final result often reflects its impact. Certain tasks may be completed more quickly, but that’s just one aspect of AI’s advantage. The real value lies in how AI allows us to spend more time on meaningful collaboration—both within our team and with our clients—focusing on the core issues of the case, applying insightful legal reasoning, and developing innovative strategies to benefit our clients.

That’s why, particularly in the high-stakes matters we typically handle for our clients, I wouldn’t claim that AI necessarily leads to direct cost savings. While AI streamlines certain processes, the nature of our work demands a level of human oversight and insight that technology can’t replicate.

In fact, as the world of technology develops, so do the definitions and expectations for quality. High-quality legal work is not just about efficiency and accuracy; it’s mostly about being a strategic speaking partner to our clients with an ability to combine our legal insight and expertise to solve their complex problems in collaboration with diverse teams —all areas where human expertise is irreplaceable.

Saara: We’ve been running some pilots together with our clients, testing how legal tech can be used in real-life scenarios. This has provided invaluable feedback that has helped us refine our approach to ensure that any legal tech tool we implement truly adds value to our clients. What we’ve found is that clients often have their own AI systems in place, and they want their legal partners to be as technologically savvy as they are. This mutual push for innovation is a global trend, and it’s driving the entire legal industry to evolve faster.

Tuomas: Clients do expect us to work efficiently, and legal tech plays a significant role in helping us meet those expectations. However, they don’t want to be involved in determining which tools are best suited to a given mandate—that’s our responsibility. This is why it’s so important for us to bring in technical expertise from our IT team and professionals like Saara to ensure we’re making informed decisions about which tools are the best fit for specific assignments.

Q: What are some of the most notable features of using AI that you’ve seen in your pilots?

Tuomas: One of AI’s most notable strengths is its ability to efficiently summarize and refine the source material we’ve prepared. It’s also very helpful for proofreading and performing final checks before sharing a work product with a colleague or client. However, AI often struggles with factual accuracy, so it’s crucial for lawyers to ensure that any advice rendered with AI’s assistance is reliable and well-founded. Personally, I’ve found AI most useful for enhancing existing work products that I’ve created with my colleagues. That said, I’m aware that this conclusion may quickly become outdated, as AI’s capabilities continue to evolve with each new version.

Saara: One of the most common praises I hear from those involved in our pilots is the ability to effectively summarize lengthy documents into more digestible content, providing valuable overviews—especially when dealing with complex cases involving large amounts of material. In addition, AI’s ability to quickly and accurately translate documents into different languages has become indispensable, particularly in cross-border cases where multilingual documents are a key component.

Q: What are the limitations and weaknesses of AI that you’ve experienced so far?

Tuomas: One of the primary weaknesses of AI lies in its ability to stylistically rewrite and clearly explain complex legal concepts. The human touch, particularly in client communications and court filings, offers a level of nuance, precision, and strategic framing that AI simply cannot—or has not yet been able to—replicate. At Dittmar & Indrenius, we have a long-standing tradition of ensuring that our legal writing is as clear and concise as possible. As AI becomes more prevalent, there is a risk of losing some of this originality. Additionally, AI still falls short in tasks that involve handling large, complex bodies of information. All legal tasks require critical thinking, and human oversight is essential whenever AI is used.

Gabrielle: There is a broad consensus within the global law firm community that while AI can assist the lawyers in many ways, it cannot replace the judgment and analytical depth of an experienced lawyer. However, the speed at which AI can, e.g., generate initial legal research on a given topic is a fraction of what even a team of talented lawyers could achieve.

“For our clients, though, it is rarely—if ever—just about speed. The real value lies in the depth of analysis and insight, and in providing actionable, value adding solutions to our clients.”

Q: What have you learned about the legal tech and AI space from your colleagues in international peer firms?

Tuomas: The key distinction between Finnish and the leading international law firms lies in the sheer scale of resources being dedicated to legal technology. Today, all major global firms have established specialized teams tasked with identifying tools that add value. For instance, the core team at Hengeler Mueller’s Legal Tech Centre consists of around 20 members focused solely on this area. And for good reason: a recent survey by German JUVE magazine reveals that many clients now expect the increasing use of legal technology, particularly AI, to become a key differentiator among law firms in the future. I find this view both compelling and easy to agree with.

While Finnish law firms may not have the same level of resources as our international counterparts, I believe we can still achieve strong results by investing wisely in both time and money. What’s particularly interesting is that the challenges we face seem to be quite similar to those of our peers abroad. This is why I also believe that there’s much to gain through collaboration and knowledge-sharing, learning from one another’s experiences about what works—and what doesn’t—in practice.

“Many clients now expect the increasing use of legal technology, particularly AI, to become a key differentiator among law firms in the future.”

Q: Can you elaborate on how the Working Smart with Legal Tech initiative is a firm-wide effort and not just an IT project?

Saara: One of the key principles behind Working Smart with Legal Tech is that this is a whole-firm transformation. It’s not something that the IT team is doing on its own. While IT obviously plays a critical role in vetting and implementing the technologies, the success of embedding AI into every corner of this firm depends on how well it is integrated into all the work done here. We’ve made a conscious effort to get buy-in from all levels of the firm, from trainees, associates, assistants, and administrative staff, not forgetting the crucial importance of partner involvement. We want as many people as possible from all parts of the firm to be involved and to test the chosen tools in their day-to-day work, so that we can get feedback from all users.

Gabrielle: Law firms that have successfully integrated AI have done so because they have fostered a culture of innovation across the firm, not just in their technology departments, and that’s the approach we’re taking here. I truly believe in a culture of collaborative teamwork where all departments are involved, and different views are really heard and valued. That’s the Dittmar way!

Q: Thinking ahead, where do you see the firm’s legal tech and AI strategy going in the next few years?

Gabrielle: I envision a future where these tools are seamlessly integrated into the way we deliver legal services. Given the rapid pace of technological advancement, we must remain agile as we move forward. Since we can’t predict the future, we have to prepare to pivot and embrace new opportunities as they arise, ready to adapt to whatever the future holds.

Saara: In the near future, we will continue to work closely with our clients and international partners to explore the full potential of AI. However, as we have done so far, our approach will remain pragmatic and measured. We won’t rush to adopt every new technology but will focus on piloting and implementing tools that will truly benefit our clients and enhance our services. This means engaging with our clients, and continually evaluating the best products on the market to ensure we’re using the most effective solutions available.

Tuomas: I believe the really big breakthrough of legal technology and AI is still ahead of us. It’s hard to predict when it will occur, but when it does, I believe none of us will want to go back. We are in the same boat with our clients, navigating this evolving landscape together.