Corporate legal and compliance leaders are increasingly finding that AI initiatives stall when governance frameworks are absent. The push to adopt artificial intelligence across business units has accelerated, but without clear rules, the risks - regulatory, ethical, and operational - are piling up faster than many organizations can manage.
The potential risks associated with using AI are now the most pressing concern for clients of law and advisory firms: general counsel and chief compliance officers who must balance transformation efforts with risk management. These executives are seeing firsthand that an AI strategy without governance is not a strategy at all.
The governance gap in AI adoption
Many companies launched AI pilots and tools in 2025 and early 2026. Few built the internal frameworks to oversee them. Legal and compliance teams, often brought in late, are now scrambling to retrofit controls onto systems already in production. The result is a patchwork of unapproved AI use, shadow IT, and exposure to liability that no one tracked until an incident occurred.
Regulators are moving too. The EU AI Act's phased implementation is forcing global firms to classify AI systems by risk level. In the U.S., agencies like the FTC and EEOC have signaled they will enforce existing consumer protection and anti-discrimination laws against AI-driven harms. Companies without a governance structure cannot demonstrate compliance or accountability.
Why legal and compliance must lead
IT and data science teams typically drive AI adoption. They focus on model performance, not on legal obligations around data privacy, intellectual property, or algorithmic bias. Legal and compliance professionals bring the lens of liability, contract terms, and regulatory requirements. When they are not at the table from the start, the organization builds AI systems that are fast but fragile.
An effective AI governance model assigns ownership for risk decisions. Legal teams can draft acceptable use policies, define data handling requirements, and set vendor contract standards. Compliance officers can map AI tools to regulatory obligations and monitor for drift. Without these functions, AI projects become ticking time bombs of undisclosed risk.
Practical steps for legal teams
First, inventory every AI system in use. Many legal departments are surprised by how many tools marketing, HR, or sales have adopted on their own. A formal inventory, tied to risk classification, is the foundation of governance.
Second, create a cross-functional AI review committee. Legal, compliance, IT, and business leads should meet regularly to evaluate new AI use cases before deployment. This shifts the conversation from reactive damage control to proactive risk management.
Third, invest in training. Legal professionals who understand how AI models are built and deployed can ask better questions and spot red flags earlier. Resources like AI for Legal and specialized learning paths such as AI for Regulatory Affairs Specialists help teams build the technical fluency needed to govern effectively.
Why this matters for legal professionals
Legal and compliance leaders who treat AI governance as a strategic priority, not a support function, will define their organizations' risk posture for the next decade. Those who stay on the sidelines will watch the same mistakes repeat - and may find themselves explaining to a board or a regulator why no one was watching. The time to build governance structures is before the next AI tool goes live, not after.
Your membership also unlocks:
