For companies’ compliance professionals, addressing these requirements promptly is imperative, particularly given the unpredictable nature of enforcement timelines. To navigate this landscape effectively, strategic and efficient action is essential.

In this rapidly changing regulatory environment, organizations must implement a comprehensive approach to compliance. A variety of corporate functions are essential to ensure proper compliance management, including on-boarding, auditing, investigations, and several other activities. Additionally, companies’ technology departments play a crucial role in maintaining institutional operations by ensuring that coding and software effectively address relevant issues.

For compliance professionals, this involves incorporating AI into your toolkit at appropriate stages in the compliance process.

Leveraging AI for compliance

To fully leverage the advantages of AI, it is essential for compliance professionals to seek out customizable platforms or tools that meets their departments’ specific requirements and provides the necessary infrastructure for future applications. AI compliance tools are engineered to assist organizations in adhering to regulations and best practices when deploying AI. These tools can automate tasks, analyze data to identify potential risks, and offer real-time alerts for regulatory changes. Common applications of these tools include risk management, compliance monitoring, reporting, and more commonly, aligning with best practices.

Indeed, some key reasons for using AI in regulatory compliance include:

Efficiency, speed & accuracy through automation — AI can efficiently process extensive data sets, crucial for meeting regulatory demands that require comprehensive documentation and timely analysis. AI tools can improve precision by adhering to established rules more consistently, ensuring accurate and dependable compliance. By automating routine tasks, AI frees up time for compliance professionals to concentrate on complex decision-making and strategic planning, which is particularly advantageous in sectors with intricate regulatory frameworks.

Data analysis & predictive analytics — AI excels in identifying data patterns and trends, aiding organizations in detecting compliance risks and areas for improvement. Through the analysis of historical and current trends, AI can forecast future compliance issues, enabling organizations to manage potential risks proactively.

Cost-effectiveness — The integration of AI for automating compliance procedures substantially lowers costs associated with manual inspections and audits by increasing individual productivity. The initial investment in review, setup, and training can be justified because employees will be eventually empowered to deliver output of a higher-quality and a greater quantity.

Adaptability — AI systems possess the capability to be updated in accordance with evolving regulations, ensuring ongoing compliance as laws and standards change. Modern AI systems specifically designed for regulatory compliance can be rapidly modified to incorporate new regulations, even lowering overall personnel training costs and time needed to get up to speed on new rules.

Enhanced monitoring — AI also facilitates continuous monitoring of activities and transactions, delivering real-time alerts and insights to maintain compliance. One of the most effective tools for regulatory compliance is real-time tracking and alert systems which can consistently monitor regulatory sources for updates and interpret changes immediately within the context of existing regulations. AI utilization in this process allows for the identification and notification of the most pertinent changes. Further, with advanced AI coding, the system can recommend policy updates in response to regulatory changes, thus providing additional support for compliance efforts.

Regardless of the reasons for investing in AI, it is crucial to allow corporate risk & compliance functions to allocate resources during these developmental stages. Going forward, AI will become increasingly complex and costly; yet to neglect with current technology undermines organizations’ future prospects for success.

Conclusion

As the regulatory landscape continues to evolve, it is imperative for organizations to adopt a proactive and comprehensive approach to AI-driven compliance management. By using AI to automate routine tasks, enhance data analysis, and provide real-time alerts, compliance professionals can better anticipate and mitigate their organizations’ potential compliance risks. And as institutions aim to align with best practices, integrating AI into their compliance processes ensures agility and responsiveness to regulatory changes, thereby safeguarding operations and preserving their competitive edge.

There is no indication that the rapid pace of executive orders and regulatory changes will decelerate. It is imperative that regulatory compliance is viewed by corporate management as a cost-saving measure rather than an expense. Candidly, this means that AI-driven regulatory compliance tools need to be a real investment for organizations to undertake.

You can find out more about how some companies are managing their compliance and risk here

With GenAI becoming an integrated part of regular work so quickly, it’s understandable if some organizations feel like they are building the plane while flying it. In fact, only about one-third (36%) said they knew their organization had policies governing GenAI usage, and only 20% said they believe their organizations are collecting metrics around the return-on-investment (ROI) of GenAI tools. Still less than three years removed from GenAI’s public introduction, there remains work to be done surrounding how GenAI will be governed within wider business and operating practices.

There remains one major task, however, that many professional services organizations should be tackling sooner rather than later: training and education. In fact, according to the report, more professionals reported using publicly available GenAI tools like ChatGPT (41%) than have received organizational training on proper GenAI use (31%). The result means that without changes, the potential for both technical misuse and ethical misconduct with GenAI usage remains high.

The problem with less training

Early on in GenAI’s introduction to professional services, the main concern was around accuracy and hallucinations. The 2023 legal case Mata v. Avianca, in which a lawyer cited ChatGPT-generated fake cases within a court-submitted legal briefing, became shorthand for everything that can go wrong with using GenAI for professional work.

Two years later, more legal, tax, and corporate professionals are aware that hallucinations can occur and that GenAI needs to be used in concert with professionals’ expertise in order to produce accurate results. Now, however, experts believe there is a more hidden, but also costly, issue at hand within GenAI adoption — Improper use which can limit the value that GenAI tools can actually bring.

Speaking with the TRI last year, Northwestern law school professor Daniel Linna expressed fears that those slow-playing GenAI roll-out or waiting on engaging with the technology be left watching as a golden opportunity passes them by. “That’s like saying I’m not going to practice playing the game of golf, I’ll just figure out the best set of clubs to buy next year and then I’ll go out there and I’ll compete in the Tour,” Linna explained.

According to the research, many professional services organizations have not taken that advice to heart. Many have not yet begun training their professionals on GenAI tools, even as they have begun adopting GenAI throughout the enterprise.

This is an issue, because not only do 41% of professionals say they use publicly available GenAI tools such as ChatGPT, but 17% say they use industry-specific solutions that incorporate GenAI technology — and an additional 50% said they are planning to use or considering whether to use these industry-specific solutions.

Further, even if professionals are receiving training, that education may not keep up with GenAI’s rapid pace of adoption. More than half of respondents who have gotten GenAI training said that training occurs either annually or less than annually.

With this infrequency of training, professionals cannot truly keep up with new GenAI developments. After all, multiple new platforms have arisen just since ChatGPT became public in late-2022, and a host of pre-existing technologies have received GenAI-enabled upgrades. For many professional service organizations, it is clearly not enough to check the box of AI training. Given the rapid pace of technological change, any GenAI training needs to be a longitudinal program.

4 tips on training

GenAI technology is not simply something that professional services organizations can adopt and forever assume it will function correctly. In order to get the most out of GenAI tools, it takes an integrated plan of people, processes, and technology to extract the most value from these ever-changing tools.

Here are a few tips that can help those organizations that are looking to start — and continue to iterate — their own GenAI program.

1. 1. 1. Find the value above and beyond — GenAI technology’s use cases are very widespread, with everything from research, discovery and contracts in law, to generating returns in tax, and more. Because of this, it can be easy to become focused solely on how the technology functions and ignore the why. However, by connecting GenAI use cases to the bottom line — how it’s helping save money, gain efficiencies, or aid client service — GenAI trainers can more easily gain buy-in from users.
      2. Have power-users teach peers — Particularly with professionals such as lawyers, accountants, and others, technology newcomers love hearing from their peers. Establishing a training team that not only includes IT and HR staff, but also professionals’ own peers, can help create GenAI use case stories that truly hit home. “The best people to tell them what’s in it for me, is that other lawyer,” recently explained Don Sternfeld, Chief Innovation Officer at law firm Steptoe. “They won’t listen to my emails, but they’ll listen to their peers in that meeting who says, ‘Oh, this is something out there.’”
      3. Measure, measure, measure — Only 20% of all professionals said they know that their organizations are collecting data around GenAI’s ROI, according to the report, which from a business perspective raises issue of how best to serve clients. Yet, it also can cause issues internally around making sure AI-driven tools are used to the best of professionals’ ability. Even simple metrics such as employee usage rates and employee satisfaction can help guide how and in what areas GenAI can be best utilized, while business metrics such as client satisfaction and projected external revenue generation can help make the business case for continued investment in training on tools.
      4. Keep up with changes — GenAI technology changes rapidly. After all, the public version of ChatGPT, otherwise known as GPT-3.5, was released in November 2022, and already GPT-5.0 is expected to be released in Summer 2025. As a result, some skills such as prompting and hallucination-detection may decrease in importance as GenAI tools become more accurate, while other skills such as ensuring ethical use and proper data governance may increase in importance as GenAI becomes more pervasive. Constant training allows professionals to keep up with these changes and adapt their own usage trends to match their organizations’ changing technology stack.

You can download a full copy of the 2025 Generative AI in Professional Services Report here

In today’s environment, companies face significant hurdles in their ongoing operations due to tariffs imposed by the United States government and by other countries seeking countermeasures to the tariffs imposed by the US. These tariffs are impacting costs, disrupting supply chains, affecting market competitiveness, and creating regulatory and compliance issues for companies across a multitude of industries.

To study this issue further, the Thomson Reuters Institute has published its new 2025 Tariffs survey, which sought insight from almost 300 corporate global trade professionals to better understand the compelling issues around the current tariff environment and the impact on how they conduct their operations today.

Almost three-fourths of respondents said their companies are already changing or are considering changing sourcing patterns to better manage US-imposed tariffs.

Yet, even as we publish this critical survey, we also recognize that this ongoing situation is extremely volatile. Indeed, since our survey was conducted, President Donald J. Trump announced his Liberation Day tariffs on April 2, targeting dozens of countries with tariffs on a wide range of goods. However, even as these new tariffs sent shockwaves through global markets, President Trump paused implementation of a large portion of those tariffs for 90 days on April 9.

Key findings

Some of the key findings revealed in the survey report include:

• • • Survey respondents from US-based companies said they believe about a quarter of their imports are at risk because of US-imposed tariffs; and they also said a similar portion of their exports may be at risk because of potential countermeasure tariffs imposed by other countries.
    • Respondents from companies based outside the US said they believe an average of 20% of their goods coming from the US may be at risk because of countermeasures to US tariffs imposed by other countries; and they also said that a slightly larger portion of their exports into the US are at risk because of US-imposed tariffs.
    • As to ways to mitigate these challenges, almost three-fourths of respondents said their companies are already changing or are considering changing sourcing patterns to better manage US-imposed tariffs, such as renegotiating contracts with suppliers or frontloading inventory.
    • Almost two-thirds of respondents said their companies are using technology solutions that provide tools for analyzing trade lanes; and more than half said they are using technology solutions for identifying potential risk factors and strategies such as locating less costly trade routes and mapping supply chains.

Looking ahead on trade & tariffs

The current situation around global trade and tariffs are clearly an avalanche of serious challenges for any company engaged in international trade. And much of this upheaval is unavoidable because it affects all countries that conduct trade with the US, although some countries clearly will be hit harder than others.

During this time, companies involved in global trade need to remain focused on staying as flexible as possible, especially around their supply chains. It’s also a good time for companies engaged in trade to find quality partners — such as tech and software solution experts and managed service professionals — to help guide them through these choppy waters.

You can download a copy of the “2025 Tariff survey” here by filling out form below:

Midsize law firms have experienced a prolonged period of growth, particularly in terms of demand for legal services. Year-end results from 2024 show that midsize firms are near the forefront of demand growth among all segments of law firms tracked by the Thomson Reuters Institute, a showing of strength in law firm key performance indicators (KPIs).

Another positive KPI is the continued growth of law firm productivity, which has continued to grow despite a 2.7% increase in headcount for the average midsize law firm over 2024. This is a notable achievement, given the nearly 15-year trend of declining productivity in the overall legal market.

Balancing rate growth and cost advantage

Midsize law firms are in the somewhat precarious position of needing to balance increasing their hourly rates to optimize revenue potential while simultaneously maintaining a cost advantage over larger peers. While midsize firms have been more aggressive in growing their rates compared to historical standards, it is notable that they have not pushed as hard as their competitors. While the more cautious approach has allowed them to maintain a cost advantage, it also means they might be missing opportunities for even stronger rate growth. As the report suggests, midsize firms should become more comfortable advocating for their higher billing rates. In fact, many midsize law firms have even gone so far as to implement tiered-rate structures to capture more value from new clients or new work from existing clients.

Further, the report shows that midsize law firms face challenges related to rising expenses. These increased expenditures, coupled with slower-than-market-average growth in rates, have somewhat offset the benefits of strong demand growth for many midsize law firms and placed a bit of a damper on their overall profitability. The average midsize firm has seen an increase in overhead expenses, with technology and knowledge management being key cost drivers. While these investments are crucial for long-term success, they have cut into profit growth. However, as the report emphasizes, these kinds of investments are also critical for firms that want to avoid falling behind larger firms that are leveraging advanced AI-driven tools to enhance their service offerings.

Indeed, innovation is a recurring theme in the report. Larger law firms have dedicated teams driving innovation in both internal processes and client-facing functions. Midsize firms, on the other hand, need to explore emerging technologies and find ways to incorporate them into their operations. Relying on outdated ways of working could put midsize firms at a disadvantage, especially as larger firms use technology to create more appealing and affordable service offerings.

Clearly, AI and technology are transforming the legal market, and midsize firms must keep pace with these changes. Corporate general counsel are increasingly looking to be early adopters of AI, and law firms that fail to recognize this shift can risk losing client favorability. Midsize firms should start by targeting low-hanging fruit and gradually adopting advanced AI tools to streamline workflows and enhance service delivery.

Conclusion: No time for complacency

Despite their recent successes, midsize law firms cannot afford to rest on their laurels. While they have enjoyed a period of demand strength and heightened productivity, the legal market is evolving rapidly. Larger competitors are moving aggressively towards an AI-driven future, and midsize firms must follow suit to remain competitive. Investing in technology, understanding client needs, and adopting innovative service models will be key to sustaining growth and profitability.

You can download a copy of “Midsize law firms at the start of 2025” by filling out the form below:

A new report from the Thomson Reuters Institute, State of the UK Legal Market 2025, provides a comprehensive analysis of these changes and offers valuable insights for UK law firms and corporate legal departments alike. Many of the findings from the report underscore that law firm leaders should place a strong emphasis on adapting to these evolving dynamics.

Emphasis on value & efficiency

One of the most prominent themes in the report — compiled from a variety of primary research projects conducted by the Thomson Reuters Institute throughout 2024 and consisting of interviews with more than 450 UK-based corporate general counsel (GCs), corporate legal professionals, and UK law firm lawyers — is the shift towards value and efficiency.

The report shows that GCs at UK-based companies are increasingly focused on driving productivity and positioning themselves as strategic partners to the C-Suite. This means that their outside law firms must go beyond simply providing technically sound advice and start offering solutions that deliver meaningful value. As this focus on value sharpens, the traditional billable hour model is being scrutinized as clients seek more transparent and flexible pricing structures. Today’s GCs are expressing ever greater interest in value-based pricing and alternative fee arrangements.

The report also highlights the transformative impact of AI and technology on the legal industry. Corporate legal teams are optimistic about AI’s potential to simplify and streamline processes, prompting a reassessment of how and when they allocate work to outside legal service firms. Clearly, those law firms and alternative legal services providers (ALSPs) that embrace AI stand to gain a larger share of the market by offering cost-effective solutions to budget-conscious clients. The ability to leverage technology to boost productivity and drive efficiency is becoming a critical differentiator in the legal market.

Clients are under increasing budgetary pressures, which is driving a demand for cost certainty, further feeding the desire for value-based services. Clients are looking for law firms that can provide tailored guidance grounded in industry expertise and aligned with clients’ broader strategic goals. This means that law firms need to be proactive, communicative, and responsive, doubling down on efforts that many firms have been pushing for years.

The shift towards in-house work

Another significant trend identified in the report is the shift towards bringing more legal work in-house. More than half of respondents from UK corporate legal departments said their departments expect to increase the volume of work they handle internally over the next five years, driven by the need to meet tighter budgets, advances in AI and technology, and a focus on expanding internal capabilities. Outside law firms must adapt by offering innovative service models that align with the evolving expectations of today’s legal departments.

Not surprisingly, ALSPs are emerging as key players in the UK legal market. Their value proposition includes specialized expertise, tech-enabled cost efficiency, and the ability to manage high-volume tasks at scale. They can also leverage different areas of expertise than those demonstrated by traditional law firms. UK corporate legal departments are leading the way in ALSP adoption globally, the survey shows, with 65% of departments already working with firm-affiliated or independent ALSPs. This trend presents both a challenge and an opportunity for traditional law firms, which must find ways to collaborate with ALSPs to deliver integrated, cost-effective solutions.

Conclusion

UK-based Law firms that are willing to adapt their approach to the practice of law and client-service delivery by embracing flexible pricing, technology adoption, and client-aligned service-model innovation will be better positioned to capture the opportunities emerging in the UK legal market.

However, those law firms that do not respond to today’s increasing pressures may find themselves quickly at risk of losing market share to other law firms that are taking a more proactive approach, ALSPs that are finding new and innovative ways to compete, or even to the in-house legal teams of the very clients they are hoping to serve.

To read more about these insights and explore the full range of findings, download the “State of the UK Legal Market 2025” report by filling out the form below:

We sat down with Pat Walsh, CEO of tax advisory and audit firm Withum, to get his insights on these industry shifts and his firm’s stance going forward.

The rise of private equity

Private equity’s interest in accounting firms is not unprecedented. Private equity sees the industry as an attractive investment due to its steady profitability and high cash flow. Walsh recalls past attempts by American Express and HR Block to roll up independent accounting firms into larger conglomerates, which ultimately failed. However, today’s environment is different as firms are now more open to private equity because the liquidity it provides and the ability to grow rapidly through acquisitions.

Walsh acknowledges that while private equity can and will be successful for some firms, time will tell if it suits all.

Withum’s approach to independence

Withum’s philosophy is rooted in stewardship rather than ownership, Walsh says, adding that the firm sees itself as a custodian of its legacy, aiming to pass on a better firm to the next generation. This stewardship involves focusing on industry expertise and investing in people. Walsh likens Withum’s strategy to Warren Buffett’s buy-and-hold approach, prioritizing long-term benefits and control over short-term financial gains.

Walsh advises other firms to consider their firm philosophy and long-term goals. Are they stewards of their firm, or owners who can sell their interest to outside investors?  Will being a larger firm make the firm better? He encourages firms to evaluate whether a combination with another firm provides opportunities for the next generation or simply capitalizes on market disruptions. For Withum, the focus is on building a better firm through organic growth and strategic acquisitions.

Withum’s philosophy is rooted in stewardship rather than ownership, and the firm sees itself as a custodian of its legacy, aiming to pass on a better firm to the next generation.

While M&A are part of Withum’s strategy, Walsh stresses that organic growth is the ultimate arbiter of success. Organic growth reflects a firm’s ability to provide opportunities for the next generation, invest in technology, and support its communities. Withum’s scale allows it to prioritize such organic growth, ensuring it remains relevant and competitive in the market.

Client relationships and private equity

Walsh notes that clients rarely inquire about firm ownership. Instead, they prioritize the quality of service and expertise provided by their client service team. Whether a firm is owned by its partners or by financial investors, what matters most is the firm’s ability to deliver exceptional service at a fair price. Walsh acknowledges potential concerns around independence for those clients that are registrants with the Securities and Exchange Commission but adds that he believes the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) is effectively managing these complexities.

The primary competition with private equity-backed firms lies in M&A. Indeed, private equity’s financial incentives can be appealing to firms seeking a larger platform, Walsh says, but Withum’s focus on culture and long-term vision resonates with firms that prioritize stewardship over short-term gains. As for go-to-market activities, Walsh explains that he sees little impact from private equity, emphasizing the importance of being a better firm through efficient management and profitability.

Walsh notes that there are other key issues that Withum had to address (as would any firm that’s considering growth strategies or private equity investment), including:

Impact on pricing — The profession has experienced turbulent times, with growth rates soaring during the pandemic. Walsh observes that the current correction is a return to traditional growth patterns, with clients pushing back on pricing. Inflation has decreased, making rate increases more challenging.

Attracting and retaining talent — To attract and retain talent, Withum strives to be the employer of choice. Walsh highlights initiatives like covering 25% of childcare costs for working parents, which demonstrates the firm’s commitment to its team members. Withum’s culture emphasizes relationships, development, and connectivity, fostering an environment in which employees feel valued and engaged.

The role of culture — Walsh notes that culture is paramount in both client and team interactions. Withum invests heavily in its culture, hosting events like the State of the Firm, in which all team members gather to celebrate achievements. Walsh asserts that this investment distinguishes Withum from other firms, reinforcing its commitment to people-first values.

Future trends & challenges

Looking ahead, Walsh identifies technology as a key driver of industry transformation. He dismisses fears of AI replacing accountants, likening it to past disruptions like blockchain and QuickBooks. Instead, technology will enable firms to right-size their service offerings and maintain high-quality service with fewer people. Walsh also highlights the importance of leveraging global resources to meet client demands.

In an era of private equity and industry shifts, Walsh’s insights offer a compelling perspective on the future of accounting. Withum’s commitment to stewardship, organic growth, and a people-first culture positions it well as it strives to build a better future for its clients and team members.

As the advisory, tax, audit & accounting profession continues to evolve, Walsh’s emphasis on relevance, relationships, and technology will continue to guide Withum’s path forward.

You can find out more about the talent challenges facing tax, audit & accounting firms here

Now scale that up to an entire company. Take pharmaceutical company Organon, for instance. In 2021, Organon was spun off from pharma giant Merck, and suddenly its much smaller legal department had to learn how to handle contracts — and lots of them. Organon had pre-existing agreements in 37 different countries, all in different formats, and needed to figure out how to simplify and consolidate this hoard of contracts.

“Nobody knows where anything is — for every template we have, there are probably 10 to 15 versions of that template floating around,” recalls Stacy Lettie, Chief of Staff to the General Counsel at Organon. “That in itself creates an inefficiency that is so hard to overcome, it’s almost a little daunting.”

However, even the greatest challenges can be overcome. At the recent Legalweek 2025 conference, Lettie and Jamal Brown, Head of Legal Operations and Knowledge Management at JPMorgan Chase, explain how to simplify the complex when it comes to managing the explosion of contracts.

Their takeaway: Such as in life, it takes a village — and this village includes a combination of people plus technology.

The right tool for the job

Originally, Lettie and the Organon team had a mostly manual process to try and compare and contrast contract templates. At one point, she says, the team took over a whole conference room, printed out as many templates as they could find, and sorted them into piles that could be compared against one another.

Now however, she says that technology provides another option, and it’s just a matter of finding the right tool for the job. “We need to lean into the technology to solve that inefficiency because that is one of the most solvable problems that we have in contract management,” Lettie explains. “But also, it doesn’t need to be perfect, it doesn’t need to be a template that solves everything. Let’s make it good enough.”

Indeed, AI technology is becoming a regular starting point for tasks — in fact, 82% of corporate C-suites report having used AI as a starting point for tasks, according to data from Thomson Reuters’ 2024 Future of Professionals Report.

However, not all technology is created equally, the Legalweek panel warns.

Brown says that at JPMorgan, for example, the team has experimented with two separate AI tools for contracting — and gotten two very different results. The first he called “a Cadillac, it was best-in-class and every feature and functionality.” However, it provided a number of solutions to problems the department didn’t necessarily have. In response, the legal department decided to develop “a smaller, medium-value solution that does one thing really well.” And because this solution attacks a single problem, it has been a better value.

“My recommendation is, don’t boil the ocean in the first instance that you build,” Brown notes.

The people side of contract tech

With so many different types of contracts to deal with, however, technology is not the only consideration. Brown and Lettie also discussed how to balance standardization and customization — and importantly, how to make attorneys feel empowered to prioritize what’s important.

Lettie notes that at Organon, the legal department does not actually own the contracting processes, the business side does. The legal team gives the templates and the playbook, but at times, those templates are not always followed, and the business side accepts the client side’s contract as the basis of the agreement.

What results is not a technological question, but a business one. “I felt that our younger lawyers in particular didn’t feel empowered,” Lettie says. “They had no basis to say, ‘No, I’m not going to review that.’”

“We need to lean into the technology to solve that inefficiency because that is one of the most solvable problems that we have in contract management; but also, it doesn’t need to be perfect, it doesn’t need to be a template that solves everything. Let’s make it good enough.”

In this case, she explains, tying contracting decisions to the business at large has helped her adopt a strong stance in dealing with the business. “There are certainly things you need to guard against, but honestly, if your non-disclosure is eight years versus three years, who knows, who cares?” she says, adding that it’s not worth an attorney’s time when they need to provide value to the business. “Reviewing an NDA is not any value to anybody.”

And it’s in these kind of human-centric decisions in which technology can play a valued-added role, especially as this technology continues to evolve. “There is no reason to even really be having that my paper/your paper discussion,” Lettie notes. Today, contract technology can take a template, turn it into a playbook, and put it against that third-party contract. “It comes in, it goes in the engine, you get a comparison, you sign it, or you don’t, and you move on with your day. It shouldn’t take longer than 30 minutes.”

Brown agrees, noting that in evaluating solutions, he comes back to the question: “What do I want my lawyers to be working on? Working on a multi-million-dollar M&A deal, or working on a single paper?”

To help free up that time, JPMorgan Chase’s legal team has developed a suite of 11 GenAI models, most slated for knowledge management, but that can be used across entire product line. This process provides a host of new capabilities, such as the ability to ask direct questions about contracts and documents. “We built models that have data across all of our products and services globally,” Brown adds. “It makes for a more intelligent way for the solution to interact with our internal professionals.”

That scale of technology-build may not be right for every legal department; but both Lettie and Brown agree that legal departments should be thinking about not just what the technology can do, but how it fits into the overall collaborative team picture. Departments also need to examine their ability to accept failure if it does not work.

Brown tells a story from two years ago, about a contract vendor that had a fantastic pitch to solve a crucial problem, However, the in-house trial wasn’t going well. Rather than push forward unnecessarily, the in-house team decided to take a step back. “Thank god we did that,” Brown says, “because we were able to recover and prepare for the next wave, which was [Chat]GPT.”

The result is a lesson: The whole team needs to be on board to truly innovate. “Start small and fail fast,” Brown says today. “Do not be afraid to let leadership know that something’s not going right.”

You can find more coverage of LegalWeek events over the years here

Since then, children accounted for 38% of victims detected globally, and since 2019 there has been an increase of approximately 38% in recorded child victims, according to a recent United Nations report on human trafficking.

To combat this growing issue, the HEROES project, which is part of the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation program funded by the European Commission, collaborated on a cross-jurisdictional initiative aimed at addressing human trafficking and child sexual abuse, including that which occurs online.

According to Ivanka Hainzl, an anti-trafficking expert at the International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD), the project brings together a diverse consortium comprised of 24 partners in 17 countries, international organizations, civil society groups, research institutes, and educational institutions. ICMPD’s work is focused on research and prevention strategies developed with partner organizations in Spain, the United Kingdom, Bangladesh, and Colombia. These four countries were selected to provide varied perspectives and approaches to tackling these issues.

Study reveals common factors

The HEROES Project identified several common factors across the countries studied that place children at risk of online sexual exploitation and abuse. Some of these factors include:

Environments with emotional neglect — Children lacking emotional support from dysfunctional family backgrounds consistently appear most susceptible to exploitation, according to Hainzl. In particular, adolescents and teenagers represent a particularly vulnerable demographic due to their developmental stage and increasing online presence. While girls are targeted more frequently, boys are not exempt from these dangers. Similarly, children with psychological or emotional challenges, including those experiencing isolation or loneliness, also faced heightened risk as they may seek connection online, according to the project’s findings.

Perpetrators using similar tactics to exploit victims online — Research on child sexual abuse reveals important distinctions between online and offline exploitation patterns. In many cases, child abuse and child sexual abuse is often perpetrated or initiated by individuals close to the child, including family members or acquaintances, and may correlate with socioeconomic factors. By contrast, online harassment often involves strangers contacting numerous potential victims simultaneously and pursuing those who respond. This distinction highlights the different mechanisms of exploitation that protection frameworks must address.

Economic vulnerability — Financially disadvantaged households also had higher levels of exploitation across the studied countries. Poverty and economic inequality create conditions in which children and families become vulnerable to various forms of abuse and exploitation.

Gaps in implementation of legal frameworks — While legal frameworks often exist on paper, inadequate implementation remains a critical issue, with authorities frequently lacking resources or training to enforce existing laws. Underdeveloped protection and migration services further compound these problems by failing to identify potential victims or provide adequate support.

Legal and judicial challenges

The rapid evolution of online technologies and reliance on digital tools by a growing number of people across the globe have brought about a new wave of child exploitation challenges for law enforcement agencies and judicial systems worldwide. As the internet knows no borders, the complexities of investigating and prosecuting online crimes that involve multiple jurisdictions, varying legal frameworks, and ever-changing digital landscapes have created significant obstacles for authorities.

Also, one of the most pressing issues is the inconsistency in the terminology and legal definitions related to child sexual abuse among countries. “There is a problem that is noticed in the terminology being different, especially when it comes to cross-border cases,” says Hainzl adding that this creates confusion in prosecution efforts. And while many countries have legislation addressing human trafficking and child sexual abuse, these laws often lack provisions specifically tailored to online aspects of these crimes.

Further, law enforcement agencies face numerous technical obstacles when investigating online exploitation. Encrypted communications, rapidly changing online behaviors, and difficulties in obtaining and preserving digital evidence all impede successful investigations. “Law enforcement should be able to respond to this very quick and very often, but it is not possible because of a lack of knowledge on current and changing tactics and tools, technology, and equipment,” explains Hainzl.

The global fight continues

The global fight against online child sexual abuse requires coordinated international action across multiple fronts. One fundamental starting point would be the development of a common international definition for online child sexual abuse, similar to how the UN Palermo Protocol established a unified understanding of human trafficking, Hainzl says.

In addition, comprehensive training programs for law enforcement and all responsible professionals are essential along with efforts to raise public awareness about online risks. Educational initiatives must target children directly, teaching them to recognize potential dangers in online interactions.

The corporate sector bears significant responsibility in this fight because their platforms often facilitate exploitation. Already, proactive identification systems using algorithms to detect potential cases represent a shift from purely reactive approaches to prevention-focused strategies. And developing regulatory frameworks similar to their own corporate sustainability due diligence requirements could hold companies accountable for monitoring and preventing exploitation on their platforms, says Hainzl.

You can find more on this topic in the Thomson Reuters Institute’s Human Rights Crimes Resource Center

This article is part of an ongoing series titled Scaling Justice, by Maya Markovich and others in consultation with the Thomson Reuters Institute. This series aims to not only explore how justice technology fits within the modern legal system, but how technology companies themselves can scale as businesses while maintaining their access to justice mission.

Despite the historic domination of business law in the field of legal tech, the industry has begun to include mention of access to justice in discussions of tech application, entrepreneurship, and investment in solutions that aim to narrow the justice gap through technology. The opportunity is vast, with a total addressable market of 5 billion people worldwide.

Like any nascent sector, startups on the crest of this breaking wave of justice tech must work through this lack of market awareness and stakeholder inertia toward new models. Further, they also face a gauntlet of regulatory obstacles in an antiquated profession that is reluctant to release its monopoly on the market. These restrictions hamper progress toward universal access to justice. With the advent of widely available AI tools, however, technology can and should be part of the solution, and clearing roadblocks to scale innovation in access to justice is essential.

Legal advice and services in the US and the UK

Regulations differ across regions of course but often have the same effect of hampering progress and market growth. In the United States for example, the American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct 5.4 prohibits unauthorized practice of law, precluding non-licensed attorneys from delivering legal services. Each of the 50 states have adopted some form of Rule 5.4, but there is no bright line between providing legal information and legal advice, leaving those who help pro se litigants just making their best guess.

Given the scale of the access to justice gap, lawyers alone cannot narrow it. Not only will there never be enough lawyers in the US to represent everyone who needs help with their legal issue, it does not make economic sense for them to take on clients in certain types of matters. Pro bono and legal aid organizations are doing incredible work, but they are under-resourced and overwhelmed. As tech tools reach true viability in the legal sector, the profession needs clarity on what constitutes unauthorized practice of law and where and how technology can fit in to address the access issue.

In the United Kingdom, legal advice and services are similarly regulated. Legal advice is defined as guidance on legal rights and obligations, while reserved legal services include activities such as litigation and conveyancing (property transfer), which can only be performed by authorized professionals. This regulatory framework, while designed to ensure quality of legal services, also limits their accessibility to those who can afford them.

Clients often face overwhelming legal jargon and documentation, with no support for implementation or follow-up once a case concludes. This lack of transparency and continuity further alienates individuals seeking resolution to their legal problems. Moreover, costs can spiral without a clear ceiling, often leaving clients worse off than they were before they engaged legal services.

The UK and US have thriving legal tech communities, yet their impact on access to justice has been limited. Current first touchpoints for legal advice, such as UK.gov and Citizens Advice in the UK and local bar associations in the US, simply direct users to lawyers rather than offering self-serve solutions. Collaboration is essential: government bodies, courts, legal aid organizations, and lawyers should work with justice tech companies to harness the potential of generative AI (GenAI) to promote access to justice.

Exploratory frameworks like Utah’s legal regulatory sandbox go beyond just providing innovators with access to regulators for Q&As and instead can provide a platform for joint learning, user testing, and feedback-gathering that will enable evidence-based policy changes. This approach not only fosters trust and understanding but also paves the way for AI-driven legal services to gain the recognition needed to transform the sector.

The knotty state of current regulations

Without regulatory change, direct to consumer justice tech companies cannot help the millions of Americans who need it — because they are stuck. Indeed, some of the challenges that justice tech companies face are very well laid out in Upsolve’s recent complaint in New York, especially around outdated rules of professional responsibility, which includes hurdles such as:

• • • vagueness of unauthorized practice of law statutes and revenue-sharing restrictions;
    • the inability to hire lawyers directly to provide legal advice;
    • the fact that, with very limited exception, only law firms can collect fees directly from clients seeking legal advice, otherwise it is “fee splitting” or revenue sharing, which is prohibited;
    • also, companies cannot hire paralegals with decades of experience to give any sort of public-facing advice to consumers unless they are supervised by a lawyer in a firm. What is allowed, however, is a lawyer with zero years of experience in an area of law supervising a paralegal within a firm structure to deliver the same advice; and
    • justice tech companies live under the constant threat of looming lawsuits for the unauthorized practice of law, which are threatened monthly and can easily bankrupt a startup.

These outmoded regulations governing unauthorized practice of law and revenue-sharing are standing in the way of ameliorating the access to justice crisis. And while their principles are incredibly important, there are no clear standards. Often unauthorized practice of law situations are subjective and oversee by legal bar groups that are often set up to protect lawyers’ market share, not the consumer.

The potential of GenAI

There is hope, however, in advanced technology. GenAI, particularly large language models (LLMs), holds much promise for the legal sector. By 2026, it is anticipated that 80% of legal cases will involve GenAI, significantly reducing time and resources. Further, GenAI has the potential to democratize access to justice by making legal advice affordable, accessible, and equitable. This scalability could provide exceptional value, far surpassing any incremental increases in the legal aid budget.

The UK and US stand at a similar crossroads, with the opportunity to lead the integration of GenAI into legal services and create a more accessible, affordable, and equitable legal system. The advent of Generative AI presents a chance to build upon alternative business models, transforming legal services in a way that benefits billions of consumers rather than merely increasing margins for law firms.

To effectively promote adoption and impact, however, regulators should transition from merely facilitating advocacy to instead establishing regulatory sandboxes. These sandboxes would allow consumers to safely experiment with new technologies, while innovators would gain visibility and a platform to build trust. Meanwhile, regulators could collect feedback and evidence from real users to guide their policy changes.

With the demand for legal access outstripping the supply of professionals, GenAI has the potential to transform justice tech by ensuring its applications are affordable, available at all hours, and equitable for every user. It is also critical to the future of the legal profession, which is desperately in need of new and creative ways to adapt to and survive in our changing world.

You can find out more about the impact of Justice Tech here

For professionals in legal, tax, risk & fraud, and government industries, the shift has been both quick and dramatic. Already more than half of all legal, tax, risk & fraud and government professionals have used GenAI in some fashion, with a wide range of use cases already arising, according to the newly published Thomson Reuters Institute’s 2025 Generative AI in Professional Services Report. In fact, the report shows that professionals from across the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Latin America, Australia, and New Zealand are not only expecting GenAI to become a more common part of their work, but they’re feeling more positive about the impact GenAI will have on their profession.

However, even with usage skyrocketing, many of the firms, departments, and agencies in which these professionals work still have a way to go to fully extract value from GenAI. The report shows that few organizations are capturing return-on-investment (ROI) metrics, regularly training staff on GenAI updates, or integrating GenAI use into their policies. In addition, few professionals say their firms and their clients are having conversations around GenAI use. And even more worrisome, questions about GenAI’s impact on billing rates and costs remain unanswered.

This year’s report reflects a crossroads: GenAI itself is seeing adoption on a wide scale, but professional services industries largely still have yet to discern what it means for the future of their businesses.

Key findings in the report

Some key findings in this year’s Generative AI in Professional Services Report include:

• • • Steady usage increases — A large portion (41%) of respondents said they personally use publicly-available tools such as ChatGPT, and 17% said they personally use industry-specific GenAI tools. On an organization-wide level, the percentage of respondents who said their organizations were actively using GenAI nearly doubled over the past year, to 22% in 2025, compared to 12% in 2024.
    • Soon to be central to workflow — Just 13% said GenAI is central to their organizations, workflow currently, but an additional 29% said they believe it will be central within the next year. Further, 95% of all respondents believe it will be central to their organization’s workflow within the next five years.

• • • Maintaining positivity — More than half (55%) of all respondents categorize their sentiment towards GenAI in their profession as excited or hopeful. Meanwhile, the proportion who said they were hesitant, concerned or fearful fell 12 percentage points over the past year.
    • Business questions remain — Only 20% said they knew their organizations were measuring ROI of GenAI, and many firm respondents remain unsure about GenAI’s impact on rates or client costs. And while 57% of corporate clients want their outside firms to be using GenAI, 71% of law firms’ clients and 59% of tax firms’ clients said they did not know whether their firms were using it or not.
    • Policies & training still needed — More than half of respondents (52%) said they believed their organizations had no policies around GenAI at work, whether a standalone policy or as part of a larger technology policy. Nearly two-thirds (64%), meanwhile, said they had received no GenAI training at work.

At this point, it is evident that GenAI is here to stay. Professionals across multiple industries are adopting it for their own personal use in droves, whether leveraging free tools or, increasingly, business or industry-specific technologies. Organization-wide adoption is beginning to occur as well, albeit slowly.

The question, then, becomes what will professional services industries do with GenAI once it’s adopted. As the report reveals, many may not yet know — but they do know they need to begin having those conversations quickly.

“The next 24 months will be extremely telling on the impact of GenAI on the legal industry and professional work more broadly,” said one Australian law firm attorney. “As products move out of development [and in]to production, we will be able to see the actual effects of this technology across various sectors.”

You can download a full copy of the 2025 Generative AI in Professional Services Report here