AI considerations for Information Governance processes

The term artificial intelligence (AI) was originally coined in 1956 and has evolved over time from expert systems to machine learning (ML) and natural language processing (NLP) and now to large language models (LLMs) and generative AI (GenAI). While the use of AI in various forms is not a novel concept for law firms, the adoption of GenAI could revolutionize the practice of law, offering unprecedented levels of efficiency and innovation (see Appendix A for a more detailed explanation of terms). Unlike its predecessors, whose functions are primarily analytical, GenAI can create original legal content. As described in our previous paper on Generative AI and Law Firm Information Governance, these expansive new functions create new risks. It is imperative for firms to approach GenAI tools with a measured understanding of their capabilities, limitations, and risks, including how the technology impacts an organization’s information governance (IG) program and vice versa.

This paper will build upon the IG-specific considerations highlighted at a high level in our previous paper as of July 2023. Here, we delve into more detail as to how GenAI impacts and is impacted by certain law firm IG process components as outlined in the “wheel” in our LFIGS 2.0 paper: An Established Law Firm Information Governance Framework. A complementary paper will follow on the technological aspects of Generative AI through the lens of IG. The goal is to update it periodically as significant technological changes occur in the AI/IG space.

Privacy and regulatory compliance

One of the key challenges in using GenAI for legal work is ensuring that such use complies with applicable laws and regulations, including privacy law. A January 2024 study by KPMG found that 63% of consumers were concerned about the potential for GenAI to compromise an individual’s privacy by exposing personal data through breaches or other forms of unauthorized access or misuse. The fact that the legislative framework is nascent makes IG professionals’ roles even more challenging.

Countries are designing and implementing GenAI governance policies and legislation at varied paces. Efforts include the development of comprehensive legislation, focused legislation for specific use cases, and voluntary guidelines and standards. There is no standard approach, and the democratization of access to LLM tools is heightening the importance of having something over nothing. Given the transformative nature of GenAI technology, the challenge is to find a balance between promoting or allowing innovation and regulating risks. Therefore, governance of AI often begins with a jurisdictional strategy or ethics policy instead of legislation.

Many current legislative efforts are focused on regulating GenAI technology providers. For example, in May 2024 the EU passed its Artificial Intelligence Act (with overwhelming support) to establish a uniform framework for the development and marketing of AI systems that are considered ’trustworthy’ and ensure the rights enshrined in GDPR. In October 2023, the United States issued guidance to help establish guardrails surrounding AI development.

Law firms are only indirectly affected by the above; what they need to be most concerned about is professional regulations that set out conditions for the use of AI in providing legal services to clients. One key topic that existing professional guidelines cover is transparency around the use of GenAI. The California and Florida Bars were the first state bars to issue draft ethical guidance on GenAI, and several other state bars and the American Bar Association are working on them, with more and evolving guidance to come. These guidelines should inform each firm’s ethical principles, which in turn can be shared in response to client requests. It’s advisable for lawyers, and by extension, IG professionals to stay informed about jurisdiction-specific regulations and professional guidelines to determine whether disclosure or other steps are necessary prior to using GenAI in legal work.

The rapid evolution of generative AI (GenAI) is transforming the legal landscape, necessitating a nuanced understanding of its implications for Information Governance (IG) within law firms. As GenAI tools become more integrated into legal practices, firms must navigate ethical, regulatory, and practical considerations to maintain compliance and client trust. Education and awareness are crucial, with law schools and firms updating curricula and training programs to include GenAI-related learning objectives. Intellectual property concerns and client directives require careful navigation to protect client information and comply with regulations. Overall, the integration of GenAI into legal practices demands a careful approach to balance innovation with the need to protect sensitive information and adhere to evolving legal standards.

The US places a stronger emphasis on streamlining operations compared to the global average (55% vs 47%). This increased focus may be driven by the need to optimize productivity and minimize inefficiencies as organizations scale and integrate new technologies. In fact, the US economy grew by 2.8% in 2024, surpassing many other economies – an achievement that highlights the potentially critical role of effective technology implementation in driving sustained economic growth and operational success.

The US also has an increased focus on customer service – likely due to the prevalence of tech-savvy consumers in the US. The US is renowned for their innovative and customer-centric operations, with growing demands for the buying journey. Customers are expecting personalized experiences throughout the journey, with many businesses prioritizing omni-channel engagement. The emphasis on AI for customer service demonstrates how US organizations are not only meeting but shaping consumer expectations in a hyper-competitive market. By leveraging AI to deliver seamless, personalized, and omnichannel experiences, businesses are positioning themselves as leaders in customer satisfaction, ultimately driving loyalty and long-term revenue growth. A combination of techniques that would have been devastatingly time-consuming without the use of AI.

What’s more, US organizations also report a stronger focus on implementing AI across customer service touchpoints than the average (63% vs 53%), further highlighting their dedication to unique customer experiences. However, customer service isn’t the only area where AI is implemented. In fact, similar to the global trend, the most common use for AI in the US is in IT and security areas.

These two areas are just two of the ways the US has implemented AI into its operations. On average, a US organization uses AI across five areas, aligning with the global average and reflecting their understanding of AI’s value and a refined approach to its application.

Furthermore, maturity analysis at the end of data collection first revealed a clear trend: As organizations advance to AI maturity, they focus their efforts on areas where AI delivers the greatest impact. This trend is clearly demonstrated in US organizations, where decision-makers indicate they have realized the value of AI and have refined their use accordingly. In addition, when looking at the overall maturity of US organizations we found that they’re relatively in line with the global average, with slightly fewer sitting in the mid-level maturity stages.

Download the full report below.

To read other reports written by the Law Firm Information Governance Symposium, please visit: symposium.ironmountain.com