Apr 21: The traditional foundations of legal training are being dismantled by automation, leaving the industry’s elite firms facing a radical ‘capabilities gap’ in their future talent pipeline. This is according to a new study from leadership consultancy firm The Positive Group, which highlights how the rapid adoption of GenAI is transforming the centuries-old apprenticeship model that underpins how trainee lawyers develop legal judgement, expertise and the skills needed to become a partner.
The report, titled The AI Leadership Challenge in Law, was produced in collaboration with researchers from Harvard Business School, RSGI, and Hubel Labs. It draws on insights from 16 of the industry’s most influential decision-makers -including Managing Partners, Chief AI Officers, and heads of professional standards from firms including Orrick, Herbert Smith Freehills, Baker McKenzie, Bird & Bird, A&O Shearman, White & Case, and Gilbert + Tobin.
The end of ‘learning by doing’
For generations, junior lawyers built their “legal muscle” through repetition: document review, due diligence, and exhaustive research. The report argues that this “volume work” was not merely a revenue driver, but a psychological necessity for building the cognitive foundations of professional reasoning and judgement.
However, the study warns that as AI takes over these foundational tasks, the ‘repetition loop’ is breaking. Junior lawyers are being catapulted into higher-level advisory work much earlier in their careers—often before they have developed the instinctive ‘gut feel’ for risk that only comes from years of interrogating primary sources.
Anna Sutherland, Executive Partner at Herbert Smith Freehills, a contributor to the research, highlights the scale of the challenge: “Traditionally, juniors learned by repetition through drafting, due diligence, and volume work. AI is changing that, so the challenge is to ensure they still build solid foundations while acquiring new skills.”
A Scrutiny Gap is emerging:
The report identifies a burgeoning risk within the firm hierarchy: a decline in critical scrutiny. One participant noted that with AI-generated drafts, there is now “less requirement to go and interrogate sources”, creating a dangerous psychological bias where outputs are accepted at face value.
“We are heading toward a potential crisis of potential skills deficit in critical thinking and appraisal,” says Will Marien, Director at The Positive Group. “If a junior lawyer hasn’t spent years digging through the ‘why’ behind a contract clause because a machine produced it in seconds, they lose the ability to spot the nuance where the real risk lives. The apprenticeship model wasn’t just about learning the law; it was about learning how to think under pressure. By removing the repetitive, routine work, we are inadvertently removing the training ground for work that involves judgement, appraisal and interrogation of sources.”
Marien continues: “Law firm leaders must recognise that AI doesn’t just change the workflow; it changes the cognitive development of their most valuable asset: their people. We are seeing the end of the stable strategy; firms must now move to a model of ‘Adaptive Apprenticeship’ where critical thinking is taught as a primary skill, not an accidental byproduct of volume work.”
From information generators to curators of meaning
The research suggests that the role of the junior lawyer is being redefined in real-time. Rather than acting purely as generators of information, they are increasingly becoming “curators of meaning” and “challengers of logic”. This shift is not only changing the skills required, but is reshaping where expertise sits within firms.
Junior lawyers are often more fluent in emerging AI tools and are playing a growing role in driving innovation from the ground up. As Christian Bartsch, CEO of Bird & Bird, notes: “Some of our best ideas don’t come from senior leaders, but from next-gen talent. We’ve built innovation channels to capture these ideas so they aren’t lost in our wider organisation. As part of our journey, we’ve become braver about calling time on what doesn’t work.” In this environment, curiosity, adaptability, and the ability to interrogate AI outputs are becoming core capabilities at every level of the firm.
However, the report warns that this transition must be managed carefully. Rather than relying solely on traditional repetition-based learning, leaders are being encouraged to take a more active role in shaping how junior lawyers engage with AI through clear narratives, role-modelling, and creating environments where questioning and critical thinking are actively encouraged.
By fostering trust and openness around both the potential and limitations of AI, firms can ensure that junior lawyers build the confidence and nuance needed to apply these tools effectively. In this way, the transition becomes less about managing risk, and more about intentionally developing the next generation of lawyers to combine technological fluency with strong professional judgement.
The Leadership Mandate: devising adaptive apprenticeships
For the law firm C-suite, the findings reinforce the need for a radical departure from traditional talent management. The report concludes that AI maturity is not about how many licences a firm buys, but how it re-engineers the path to expertise.
Marien concluded: “The task for leading law firms is no longer to protect the old ways of working, but to find new pathways for developing “depth” in an automated environment. This means placing an unprecedented premium on “soft” cognitive skills—curiosity, the ability to challenge automated reasoning, and ethical interpretation—that were previously assumed to develop over time.
“In a world where the commodity – the legal output – is increasingly free, the ‘Psychology of AI Maturity’ proves that the only remaining value is the human at the keyboard. If firms fail to fix the apprenticeship model now, they aren’t just losing their juniors; they are losing their future partnership.
