That is the real case for legal workflow automation. The point is not replacing lawyers. It is recovering the hours that never involved lawyering in the first place. Thomson Reuters' Future of Professionals report projects that AI could free up nearly 240 hours per professional each year, roughly six working weeks. That is a projection of potential freed time, not a measured saving, but the direction is clear.
In practice the gains come from unglamorous places: a triaged intake queue instead of a vague inbox, retrieval over the team's own precedent, first drafts of routine documents. None of this decides the matter. Triage and retrieval feed the decision; the final legal judgment, and the verification behind it, stay with the lawyer. What the tooling does is clear the runway.
The discipline matters more than the tooling. Start with one workflow, measure it honestly, and expand only when the numbers hold.
Sources
Next: What generative AI actually changes for in-house legal teams →