By 2026, the question isn’t “Are you using AI?”—it’s what evidence shows AI is improving outcomes without eroding trust, quality, or defensibility. This session brings together two General Counsels and two Am Law partners to define their objectives for AI-enabled legal work—and the shared OR dissimilar expectations that will shape GC–firm relationships over the next 12–24 months.
Instead of debating the merits of AI tools, panelists will unpack what legal leaders are actually asking for in 2026: faster matter movement (not just faster drafting), repeatable adoption across teams, quality controls that hold up under scrutiny, and transparency around how AI is used inside the work product. The discussion will also explore how firms reinvest efficiency gains into higher-value advisory support—turning AI from a technology story into a client-value story. Discussion topics include:

• The inherent tension of budget expectations: GCs want AI to reduce their outside counsel costs while law firms hope to see revenue increases.
• Metrics: aside from measuring hours, how GCs and firms assess the value of AI
• Quality and defensibility: where AI helps, where it still introduces risk, and what guardrails are table stakes
• Communication: expectations for transparency (disclosure, collaboration workflows, auditability) without creating bureaucracy
• Reinvestment: how firms apply efficiency gains to deliver more strategic counsel, earlier, and how GCs evaluate that value