Briefing: Learning without ladders
Aileen Johnson, director of knowledge at Charles Russell Speechlys, explores how AI is quietly reshaping the way lawyers learn and outlines why knowledge teams hold the key to ensuring the profession grows sharper, not shallower, as a result
Learning in law firms has followed a familiar pattern for decades. Knowledge was built up over time, skills were acquired progressively and training programmes were designed around what lawyers would need in the future. The environment was never static but the ‘ladder’ felt predictable: climb steadily, acquire your expertise, refine your judgement.
Technological change, increased regulation, client expectations and new ways of working have all fundamentally altered how knowledge is acquired and how skills are developed and sustained. The introduction of genAI has accelerated this shift and skills are becoming dated faster than traditional training cycles can refresh them.
Clients are, of course, increasingly using AI themselves and are keen to know what AI we can use for them and where the benefits will be. Looking further ahead, collaborating with clients using AI through model context protocol (MCP) will unlock truly integrated workflows. As such, we will need to make sure all of our lawyers have the skills to work in this new landscape where data flows to and from clients more quickly and seamlessly than ever. At the same time, every word a lawyer writes can and will be scrutinised for accuracy by digital eyes, as well as human ones. Seamless workflows will pose further challenges to supervision.
In this perfect storm, critical thinking and good judgement are more important than ever. All of this creates a very real challenge for firms — as learning can no longer be designed as a series of discrete events, delivered once and revised from time to time.
AI brings opportunities — and raises the stakes
GenAI has undoubtedly opened up new possibilities for legal practice, promising efficiencies, insight and new ways of delivering value to clients. But it has also introduced novel and evolving risks: around confidentiality, privilege, supervision, regulatory compliance and professional judgement.
This article originally appeared in Briefing. Read the complete article here.
