In the evolving landscape of law and technology, the burning question has often been whether artificial intelligence (AI) would replace lawyers. However, Cherryn-Paige Bissett, a seasoned commercial counsel at LegalSifter, suggests a pivotal shift in perspective during her appearance on the podcast "Notes to My (Legal) Self." Bissett argues that the real value of AI in legal contexts isn't about replacing human roles but rather in enhancing the human capacity for judgment in complex decision-making.

Automate the Routine, Master the Critical

Bissett introduces a compelling approach: "Automate the 80%, own the 20%." This philosophy encapsulates the idea that while AI can handle a substantial portion of routine legal tasks such as drafting and reviewing contracts based on established guidelines, it falls short in areas requiring nuanced understanding and strategic foresight. These critical elements—understanding the subtleties of a deal and its importance to the business—are irreplaceable human skills that AI tools are currently unable to mimic.

The Shifting Role of Legal Professionals

The conversation with Bissett reveals an essential truth about the future of legal professions: the increasing irrelevance of mere document management and the rising importance of strategic business involvement. AI's role in legal work is to expedite routine processes, not to make pivotal business decisions. This shift suggests that lawyers need to focus less on the intricacies of legal language and more on the broader business implications of their work.

From Document Editors to Strategic Advisors

The legal industry is witnessing a transformation where the primary value of in-house lawyers is shifting from being expert drafters of contracts to being strategic advisors who understand business needs and risk appetites. Bissett emphasizes that understanding the business context of legal decisions is crucial. She discusses "contract noise" — unnecessary complexity in contracts that AI can help simplify, allowing lawyers to concentrate on negotiations that significantly impact business outcomes.

Judgment as a Premium Legal Skill

One of the standout points of Bissett's discussion is the distinction between possible risks and probable risks in contract negotiations. AI can suggest standard responses based on a playbook, but human judgment is essential when deviations arise, and decisions must be made considering the client's strategic interests and potential risks. This type of judgment, deeply intertwined with personal experience and contextual understanding, remains a uniquely human attribute.

Embracing AI in Legal Practices

Rather than viewing AI with apprehension, Bissett advocates for its integration into legal practices as a tool that refocuses legal professionals on high-value activities. By automating standardizable aspects of legal work, lawyers can dedicate more time and resources to areas where they add the most value—strategic decision-making and risk management.

Conclusion

As legal systems continue to intertwine with technological advancements, the role of the lawyer is being redefined. AI does not replace lawyers but instead changes what makes them valuable—shifting the focus from drafting precision to strategic acumen and judgment. The future of law lies not in who can draft the fastest but in who can decide the wisest.