AI in legal has shifted from speculation to implementation, with firms piloting tools like Copilot, CoCounsel and Harvey. There’s a budget behind the ambition. And yet – for all the momentum – actual engagement still feels patchy.

According to iManage’s ‘Generative AI in law firms: Trends, tensions, and transformation’ report, roughly eight in ten law firms report internal fears about generative AI. Those fears aren’t just about job loss. They reflect deeper concerns: ethical risk, skills erosion, confidentiality breaches, and change fatigue.  Many people – across roles – are still unsure how to use AI meaningfully, or even safely.

What we’re observing isn’t resistance so much as reticence. The legal sector is moving – but not in one direction, and certainly not at one pace.

The disconnect between adoption and engagement

In some firms, leadership is ready to move fast. Tools are procured, licences signed off, and policies drafted. But usage? That’s another matter.

In one case we heard about, a firm invested significantly in rolling out Copilot to more than a thousand users. The business case passed with little pushback. But when usage was reviewed a few months in, only a handful of users had engaged with the tool. The investment was there, the infrastructure was there, but the behaviour shift wasn’t.

This isn’t unique. Others tell us they’re running AI pilots that are quietly failing to gain traction – not because of flaws in the technology, but because teams simply default to doing the work manually. Not out of defiance, but out of caution, or habit. Or a belief that if they wait, it might all change again anyway.

A culture still catching up

There’s a striking contrast in many firms right now. At one level, there’s a narrative that generative AI will reshape the profession, transform workflows, and eventually reduce the need for large legal teams. That message is loud and constant. It’s in every boardroom slide deck and every industry keynote.

But at the same time, real people are still asking: What does this mean for my job? For my team? For the way I build experience?

And that anxiety isn’t just at junior levels. One insight we heard captured it well:

“You’ve got the people doing the work, worried about being replaced. Then the managers are thinking: if they’re gone, who – or what – am I managing? There’s a whole chain of people whose roles depend on things staying the same.”

It’s a natural human response to uncertainty – especially when change is rapid, and the outcomes are still unclear

Trying to move while standing still

We’re also seeing firms stuck between contradictory modes. Some are holding off on big change – wary of making the wrong move before AI’s role becomes clearer. 

Others are still managing foundational upgrades – decommissioning old macros, cleaning up document templates, rolling out cloud printing.

It creates a striking contrast: high-level conversations about AI transforming the legal profession, alongside everyday projects focused on getting Word ribbon buttons to work properly. It’s a surreal tension – the sublime to the ridiculous – and it reflects just how uneven the pace of change really is.

When waiting starts to cost

At some point, firms do have to move. Some already are – often out of necessity. We’re hearing of firms finally migrating to cloud-based systems because their peers have moved, and the cost of holding back has become too visible.

And despite the caution, most firms now agree that AI is starting to reshape legal workflows, even if only at the margins. Drafting, summarising, research – these are the first to shift. 

The challenge is no longer whether to adopt. It’s how to adopt in a way that brings people with you – without fuelling fear, or overpromising speed.

A strategic pause, not a standstill

What this moment requires isn’t acceleration for its own sake, it’s coordination. Adoption doesn’t fail because tools don’t work. It fails when people can’t see how those tools support their work, their team, or their career.

That’s why small steps matter: targeted use cases, practical training, shared stories. Not everyone needs to move at once – but everyone needs to see where they’re going.

AI may transform the profession. But right now, the firms doing it best are those making space for doubt, questions, and careful confidence-building.

From quiet resistance to contradictory priorities, the story of AI in legal is far from linear.

Take a look at the iManage report here: https://imanage.com/resources/resource-center/content-library/generative-ai-in-law-firms-trends-tensions-and-transformation/