AI adoption in in-house legal teams starts with a clearly defined task, approved tools and lawyers who remain responsible for reviewing the results. By combining privacy safeguards, practical training and measured trials, teams can build confidence and assess the value of AI before introducing it more widely.
Start AI adoption with a useful task
The first step is choosing a problem worth solving. For example, could your team spend less time preparing routine correspondence, structuring a first draft or summarising publicly available guidance?
Choose a task with a clear purpose and an output that a lawyer can readily check. The joint statement from legal profession regulators in NSW, Victoria and Western Australia recommends limiting AI use to lower-risk tasks that are easier to verify. [1] lawsociety.com.au
However, consider whether a simpler process change or existing automation would solve the problem. AI adoption should support your priorities.
Build safeguards into AI adoption
Before testing a tool, agree what information your team can enter, who can access it and how outputs will be checked.
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner recommends that organisations avoid entering personal information, particularly sensitive information, into publicly available generative AI tools. It also advises reviewing product terms, data flows and privacy risks. [2] OAIC
For lawyers, confidentiality and professional obligations also matter. The joint regulatory statement makes clear that lawyers must verify AI-generated content and exercise their own professional judgement. [1] lawsociety.com.au
Therefore, involve IT, privacy and procurement colleagues early. Confirm that the proposed use is permitted under your organisation’s policies and the tool’s configuration.
Give your team time to learn
Access to software is only the beginning. Set aside time for a small group to test one workflow, practise prompts and discuss where results need improvement.
Australia’s Guidance for AI Adoption provides a framework covering accountability, risk management, testing and human control. [3] Use it to structure your trial. ai.gov.au
Meanwhile, nominate someone to coordinate feedback. Record useful prompts, common errors and review requirements so colleagues can learn from the same experience.
Measure results before expanding AI use
Compare the trial with your existing approach.
Consider:
- Time spent completing and checking the work.
- Accuracy, omissions and the amount of rework.
- Ease of use and feedback from the team.
Importantly, include checking time when assessing any efficiency gains. If the workflow needs substantial correction, refine it before expanding.
At Aclaria, we connect in-house legal teams with legal, technology and operations specialists who work alongside them to make AI useful in everyday practice. This includes identifying use cases, redesigning workflows, implementing tools, establishing governance and supporting training and adoption.
Our expanded capability builds on our legal secondment services, giving teams flexible access to people who understand legal work, technology and change.
Ready to take the next step with AI adoption? Explore our AI implementation support to see how specialists can work within your team to build capability and put practical changes into action.
References
1. Law Society of NSW, Legal Practice Board of Western Australia and Victorian Legal Services Board + Commissioner. Statement on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Australian Legal Practice. Publication date not stated in the document.
2. Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. Guidance on privacy and the use of commercially available AI products. Updated 21 October 2024.
3. National Artificial Intelligence Centre. Guidance for AI adoption: foundations. October 2025.Aclaria. Implement AI. Undated.
4. Aclaria. Legal Tech Navigator. Undated; linked in the article.
