The first is Ropes & Gray<\/a>, headquartered in Boston. Ropes has over 1,500 attorneys with 16 offices worldwide and is an Am Law 50 firm.\u00a0 Definitely qualifies as Biglaw. Ropes has decided to make a sizeable investment in AI: starting immediately, first-year associates can spend up to 400 hours of their annual 1,900-hour billable hour requirement for AI training and experimentation. This can include time experimenting and working in groups. That\u2019s up to 20% of the total requirement. The time, of course, can\u2019t be billed to clients.<\/p>\n According to Amy Ross, Chief of Attorney Talent, and Jane Rogers, Partner & Co-head of the Finance Practice, the associates will work in mentoring circles to discuss how they have used AI, what success they have found and importantly what opportunities they have identified. The associates will also receive hands on training. \u201cAssociates are expected to co-create solutions, act as thought partners, and help establish repeatable, defensible approaches for applying AI in practice.\u201d The associates will use Ropes\u2019 15+ approved AI tools. The firm also plans to \u201ccollect analyze and disseminate use cases to enhance learning,\u201d say Ross and Rogers.<\/p>\n It\u2019s a good investment with little downside. On the face of it, it looks like Ropes is giving up a chunk of revenue from the 400 hours that the first-year associates could perhaps bill. I say perhaps because that\u2019s not necessarily true. Let\u2019s face it, first-years are not terribly profitable. They lack the experience to do a whole lot substantially.<\/p>\n In Biglaw, they are highly paid but often don\u2019t produce a lot of revenue. Nor are they expected to. It\u2019s a training period. Add to this the fact that lots of clients are simply unwilling to pay for work by beginning associates. So Ropes\u2019 loss or revenue may not be that significant<\/p>\n But the revenue analysis is not the whole story. Retaining associates these days is an arms race. Keeping associates happy is important:\u00a0 a firm may spend a year training a first-year associate and not getting much return only to see them leave and lose the investment. My guess is Ropes\u2019 first-year associates will embrace this program, encouraging their long-term and short-term loyalty.<\/p>\n So, all in all, it\u2019s a smart move that will result in AI-first lawyers that are more productive and happier in the long run. And that will inure to the firms\u2019 benefit long term.<\/p>\n The Grace to Dabble<\/strong><\/p>\n As I recently discussed, mastering GenAI simply requires taking the time work with it, to try and fail. It requires on the job training more than classroom instruction.<\/p>\n I recently did a podcast interview of \u00a0Thomas Suh<\/a>, a former practicing lawyer and founder of LegalMation,<\/a> an AI litigation tools provider. In his former life as a lawyer, he helped build what he called a tech-first law firm. He and his partners did that by giving themselves the grace to \u201cdabble\u201d as he put it. To master tech by doing what I just said: experimenting, trying different things. Yes, it takes time. Yes, much of that time can\u2019t be billed. But the returns can be significant. Ropes has just given its first years the power to dabble and learn how to leverage AI tools. I\u2019m guessing the return will be significant.<\/p>\n The Latham Program<\/strong><\/p>\n While Ropes focused on individual experimentation, another Am Law behemoth took a slightly different approach.<\/p>\n A second AI training initiative that will pay off long term is that of Latham & Watkins<\/a>. Latham is a Los Angeles-based firm and even bigger than Ropes. It has over 3,500 attorneys and over 25 offices worldwide. It consistently ranks near the top of the American Lawyer Am Law revenue rankings. Definitely big, Biglaw.<\/p>\n According to a recent article<\/a> in Business Insider, Latham took the unusual step in 2024 \u00a0of\u00a0 bringing all 400 of its first-year associates to Washington, D.C., for a mandatory two-day AI Academy. The program focused on the use of Harvey and Microsoft Copilot and included outside speakers. Latham repeated the program this year.<\/p>\n In addition to the two-day inaugural program, Latham says there are also multiple events and training programs throughout the year aimed at different groups. The program is \u201cdesigned to equip lawyers to navigate the significant changes that artificial intelligence (AI) will bring to businesses across industries and around the globe,\u201d according to a Latham announcement<\/a>.<\/p>\n Like Ropes, Latham views AI as a \u201cgenerational opportunity\u201d according to one of the Latham partners interviewed for the article. And like Ropes, rather than wringing its hands about what the future will be like, it\u2019s leaning in and making an investment in the future. No doubt those 400 associates left the Academy emboldened to use the AI tools and begin their experimentation as well.<\/p>\n Where Does That Leave Others?<\/strong><\/p>\n Two Biglaw firms. Two similar approaches. I like the Ropes approach since it encourages experimentation and innovation on an ongoing basis. I like the Latham approach because it sets up the guardrails and expectations.<\/p>\n But either way, approaches like these will position these firms for greater success and help them define what Suh would no doubt call an AI-first approach. Both firms seem to get it: AI is going to fundamentally change the practice of law<\/p>\n Too many firms are doing the opposite: wringing their hands about the future while doing little. Trying to drive forward by looking in the rear-view mirror.<\/p>\n What these two firms are doing is a bit unusual. Investing substantial time and energy in non-billable programs that will aid the firms long term, not just this year. In an industry where partners obsess over utilization rates and billable hour quotas, these firms are making a counterintuitive bet that the short-term sacrifice will yield long-term competitive advantage.<\/p>\n Deal With It<\/strong><\/p>\n And you don\u2019t have to be an Am Law 50 firm to take the reins. It requires a commitment by firm leadership no matter what the firm size to see and plan for a potentially different future. It requires a senior management that itself is willing to learn. A 50-lawyer firm can\u2019t bring 400 associates to Washington, but it can dedicate Friday afternoons to AI experimentation or partner junior associates with tech-savvy partners. Assuming of course that there are partners willing to become tech savvy.<\/p>\n Moreover, in a world where competition and retention of quality associates becomes more difficult every day, firms that treat AI training as optional professional development are setting themselves up to lose talent to competitors who embrace it as core competency.<\/p>\n Want to compete with Ropes and Latham in years to come? \u00a0Stop wondering if AI will disrupt the practice of law and start developing the talent to deal with it.<\/p>\n Stephen Embry is a lawyer, speaker, blogger, and writer. He publishes\u00a0TechLaw Crossroads<\/a>, a blog devoted to the examination of the tension between technology, the law, and the practice of law<\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n The post The Grace To Dabble: Two Biglaw Firms Look To An AI-First Future<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n Lots of questions swirl around the use of AI by lawyers in general and young lawyers in particular. The questions all center around how do we train young lawyers to use AI tools safely and proficiently while ensuring they develop the skills firms want them to have?<\/p>\n At least two leading firms have recently taken affirmative steps to do just that and prepare for a future where proficiency in the use of AI tools will be critical. Both firms have elected to make an investment in the future that we often don\u2019t see in the legal community. Both firms have elected to forgo some billable hours and perhaps revenue for future returns. Both firms aren\u2019t just talking professional development for young lawyers, they\u2019re investing real resources and forgoing billable hours. They are walking the walk.<\/p>\n The Ropes & Gray Initiative<\/strong><\/p>\n The first is Ropes & Gray<\/a>, headquartered in Boston. Ropes has over 1,500 attorneys with 16 offices worldwide and is an Am Law 50 firm.\u00a0 Definitely qualifies as Biglaw. Ropes has decided to make a sizeable investment in AI: starting immediately, first-year associates can spend up to 400 hours of their annual 1,900-hour billable hour requirement for AI training and experimentation. This can include time experimenting and working in groups. That\u2019s up to 20% of the total requirement. The time, of course, can\u2019t be billed to clients.<\/p>\n According to Amy Ross, Chief of Attorney Talent, and Jane Rogers, Partner & Co-head of the Finance Practice, the associates will work in mentoring circles to discuss how they have used AI, what success they have found and importantly what opportunities they have identified. The associates will also receive hands on training. \u201cAssociates are expected to co-create solutions, act as thought partners, and help establish repeatable, defensible approaches for applying AI in practice.\u201d The associates will use Ropes\u2019 15+ approved AI tools. The firm also plans to \u201ccollect analyze and disseminate use cases to enhance learning,\u201d say Ross and Rogers.<\/p>\n It\u2019s a good investment with little downside. On the face of it, it looks like Ropes is giving up a chunk of revenue from the 400 hours that the first-year associates could perhaps bill. I say perhaps because that\u2019s not necessarily true. Let\u2019s face it, first-years are not terribly profitable. They lack the experience to do a whole lot substantially.<\/p>\n In Biglaw, they are highly paid but often don\u2019t produce a lot of revenue. Nor are they expected to. It\u2019s a training period. Add to this the fact that lots of clients are simply unwilling to pay for work by beginning associates. So Ropes\u2019 loss or revenue may not be that significant<\/p>\n But the revenue analysis is not the whole story. Retaining associates these days is an arms race. Keeping associates happy is important:\u00a0 a firm may spend a year training a first-year associate and not getting much return only to see them leave and lose the investment. My guess is Ropes\u2019 first-year associates will embrace this program, encouraging their long-term and short-term loyalty.<\/p>\n So, all in all, it\u2019s a smart move that will result in AI-first lawyers that are more productive and happier in the long run. And that will inure to the firms\u2019 benefit long term.<\/p>\n The Grace to Dabble<\/strong><\/p>\n As I recently discussed, mastering GenAI simply requires taking the time work with it, to try and fail. It requires on the job training more than classroom instruction.<\/p>\n I recently did a podcast interview of \u00a0Thomas Suh<\/a>, a former practicing lawyer and founder of LegalMation,<\/a> an AI litigation tools provider. In his former life as a lawyer, he helped build what he called a tech-first law firm. He and his partners did that by giving themselves the grace to \u201cdabble\u201d as he put it. To master tech by doing what I just said: experimenting, trying different things. Yes, it takes time. Yes, much of that time can\u2019t be billed. But the returns can be significant. Ropes has just given its first years the power to dabble and learn how to leverage AI tools. I\u2019m guessing the return will be significant.<\/p>\n The Latham Program<\/strong><\/p>\n While Ropes focused on individual experimentation, another Am Law behemoth took a slightly different approach.<\/p>\n A second AI training initiative that will pay off long term is that of Latham & Watkins<\/a>. Latham is a Los Angeles-based firm and even bigger than Ropes. It has over 3,500 attorneys and over 25 offices worldwide. It consistently ranks near the top of the American Lawyer Am Law revenue rankings. Definitely big, Biglaw.<\/p>\n According to a recent article<\/a> in Business Insider, Latham took the unusual step in 2024 \u00a0of\u00a0 bringing all 400 of its first-year associates to Washington, D.C., for a mandatory two-day AI Academy. The program focused on the use of Harvey and Microsoft Copilot and included outside speakers. Latham repeated the program this year.<\/p>\n In addition to the two-day inaugural program, Latham says there are also multiple events and training programs throughout the year aimed at different groups. The program is \u201cdesigned to equip lawyers to navigate the significant changes that artificial intelligence (AI) will bring to businesses across industries and around the globe,\u201d according to a Latham announcement<\/a>.<\/p>\n Like Ropes, Latham views AI as a \u201cgenerational opportunity\u201d according to one of the Latham partners interviewed for the article. And like Ropes, rather than wringing its hands about what the future will be like, it\u2019s leaning in and making an investment in the future. No doubt those 400 associates left the Academy emboldened to use the AI tools and begin their experimentation as well.<\/p>\n Where Does That Leave Others?<\/strong><\/p>\n Two Biglaw firms. Two similar approaches. I like the Ropes approach since it encourages experimentation and innovation on an ongoing basis. I like the Latham approach because it sets up the guardrails and expectations.<\/p>\n But either way, approaches like these will position these firms for greater success and help them define what Suh would no doubt call an AI-first approach. Both firms seem to get it: AI is going to fundamentally change the practice of law<\/p>\n Too many firms are doing the opposite: wringing their hands about the future while doing little. Trying to drive forward by looking in the rear-view mirror.<\/p>\n What these two firms are doing is a bit unusual. Investing substantial time and energy in non-billable programs that will aid the firms long term, not just this year. In an industry where partners obsess over utilization rates and billable hour quotas, these firms are making a counterintuitive bet that the short-term sacrifice will yield long-term competitive advantage.<\/p>\n Deal With It<\/strong><\/p>\n And you don\u2019t have to be an Am Law 50 firm to take the reins. It requires a commitment by firm leadership no matter what the firm size to see and plan for a potentially different future. It requires a senior management that itself is willing to learn. A 50-lawyer firm can\u2019t bring 400 associates to Washington, but it can dedicate Friday afternoons to AI experimentation or partner junior associates with tech-savvy partners. Assuming of course that there are partners willing to become tech savvy.<\/p>\n Moreover, in a world where competition and retention of quality associates becomes more difficult every day, firms that treat AI training as optional professional development are setting themselves up to lose talent to competitors who embrace it as core competency.<\/p>\n Want to compete with Ropes and Latham in years to come? \u00a0Stop wondering if AI will disrupt the practice of law and start developing the talent to deal with it.<\/p>\n
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2020\/11\/artificial-intelligence-4111582_1920-300x200.jpg?resize=300%2C200&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
<\/figure>\n
\n