Winning Legal Tech Clients in the AI Era: Speak Their Language, Build Real Value

The Legal Tech Executive Playbook for Value Creation in the AI Era

The biggest debate in legal tech right now centers on “Agentic AI.” The term gets tossed around a lot, but many tools labeled as “agentic” don’t match what other industries mean by it. Consumer AI hype often involves autonomous agents booking your dinner based on your horoscope. That buzz excites investors and tech enthusiasts, so legal tech companies feel pressured to adopt the same language.

But lawyers aren’t thrilled about AI making decisions behind a black box. In law, that’s malpractice territory. The reality is most “agentic” legal AI tools are actually carefully crafted workflows powered by expert prompts. This is good news. Providers invest heavily to ensure AI outputs are as accurate as possible.

While AI hallucinations exist, the biggest source of errors remains human—bad prompts lead to bad results. Lawyers, whether in-house or at firms, prefer tools described as “expert-curated workflows that maximize AI’s potential while minimizing errors” rather than “autonomous agents.” Legal tech vendors need to speak in terms lawyers understand and trust.

A Practical Guide for Legal Tech Providers

Plat4orm and Lumen Advisory Group recently released From Hours to Outcomes: The Legal Tech Executive Playbook for Value Creation in the AI Era. This report helps translate tech jargon into legal language. It serves as a strategic guide for legal tech providers, showing how to support clients adopting AI responsibly.

One clear difference is how time savings are presented. Silicon Valley often touts AI “taking over” decisions, aiming to replace humans. They throw around terms like “agentic” and “autonomous” without much nuance. By contrast, the playbook encourages emphasizing security, training AI on clients’ own contracts, and producing strong first drafts—not final answers.

Legal advice remains high-value and expert-driven, but AI can drastically reduce billable hours. The conversation should shift from “hours saved” to “strategic capacity unlocked.” This reframing respects lawyers’ expertise while highlighting real efficiency gains.

Why Many AI Pilots Fail

An MIT study found that 95% of generative AI pilots don’t deliver measurable business impact. One reason is confusion among lawyers about what AI tools really do. Without clear understanding, firms hesitate to invest or struggle to adopt new technology effectively.

This hesitation leads to inaction—like a middle school dance where everyone stands awkwardly while a few disrupt the room. Lawyers using ChatGPT casually for legal research are like those unruly kids. What the playbook offers is a responsible guide to help legal teams make informed AI decisions and avoid costly mistakes.

Key Takeaways for Legal Professionals

• Demand clarity: Choose AI solutions described as expert-designed workflows rather than autonomous agents.
• Focus on drafts: Use AI to generate strong first drafts, preserving lawyer oversight.
• Prioritize security: Ensure AI is trained on your own data and protects confidentiality.
• Reframe value: Talk about unlocking strategic capacity, not just saving hours.
• Commit to adoption: Understand AI’s role clearly before investing to avoid pilot failures.

Legal tech providers and teams ready to deepen their AI knowledge can explore targeted courses at Complete AI Training to build practical skills aligned with legal work.

AI won't replace lawyers, but it can make their work more efficient and focused—if approached with transparency and care.