Getting started with AI in your law firm
You don't need a strategy deck or a big budget to begin. You need one useful task, a clear rule about what data you'll use, and a lawyer who reviews the output. Here's a calm first-30-days plan.
The short answer: pick one repetitive, text-based task; agree what client information may be used and where; try a saved prompt on it for a couple of weeks with a person reviewing every output; then expand to a second task once the first is trusted. Start small, keep a human in the loop, and grow from there.
Before you begin: three ground rules
These hold no matter which tool you use.
1. Protect client information
Decide what may be pasted into which tool and understand where that data is stored. Keep privileged and identifying client detail out of any tool your firm hasn't approved. When in doubt, use anonymised or non-sensitive material while you're learning.
2. A lawyer reviews everything
AI produces drafts, not finished work. Every output is checked against the source and approved by a responsible person before it's sent, filed or relied on. AI never has the final word.
3. Check your obligations
Your professional-conduct and confidentiality duties are set by your own regulator and firm policies. Read them before you start. This page is general guidance, not legal advice, and doesn't interpret any specific rule for you.
A simple 30-day plan
Play with one general assistant on safe material
Pick a mainstream AI assistant and get a feel for it using non-sensitive or anonymised text — a public document, a generic policy, an internal note with no client detail. Try summarising, rewriting and structuring so you learn what it's good at and where it goes wrong.
I'm a solicitor trying AI for the first time. Summarise the text below in plain English, list the key points, and tell me one thing in it that's ambiguous or could be misread. Don't add anything that isn't there.
Text:
[paste non-sensitive text]
Choose a high-volume, low-judgement job
File notes, intake structuring, or first-draft routine replies are good candidates. Use a consistent prompt each time and have someone review every result. Note where the drafts are strong and where they need fixing.
Turn my rough notes into a dated file note. Structure: date/time, attendees, purpose, discussion (bullets), decisions, action items with owners. Factual and neutral, add nothing I did not note, mark unclear points with [CHECK]. Matter: [matter] Notes: [paste notes]
Turn good prompts into shared team prompts
When a prompt reliably produces a draft your team trusts, save it somewhere everyone can reach and agree it's the standard for that task. Consistency is where the time saving compounds. The prompt library is a good starting set to adapt.
Expand carefully, then consider proper integration
Add one more task — perhaps document summaries or drafting correspondence. By now you'll know whether copy-paste is enough or whether it's worth connecting AI to your matter files and systems so the work happens in the background, within confidentiality boundaries you control. That's usually the point to bring in help.
Keep it grounded. AI can be confidently wrong and doesn't understand your professional obligations. Protect client information, verify everything against the source, and keep a qualified lawyer responsible for reviewing and approving all output. Start small, stay in control, and grow from there. Nothing here is legal advice.
Next: browse the full prompt library, see how to automate law-firm admin with AI, or read the FAQ.
Want a hand getting started?
SG1 Consulting helps legal practices take the first steps with AI safely — choosing tools, protecting confidentiality, and connecting AI to the systems you already use so it saves real time.
Talk to SG1 Consulting →SG1 also builds The Everything, an AI assistant that works inside your existing tools.