Webinar Replay: The State of Legal Tech – An End to the Status Quo

Why It Matters

The findings expose a costly gap between perceived tech satisfaction and actual inefficiency, urging legal firms to adopt AI‑enabled, integrated solutions to protect data, reduce waste, and stay competitive.

Key Takeaways

• Lawyers report high tech satisfaction despite losing up to 44 days annually.
• Data ownership confidence low; nearly half doubt control over client data.
• AI adoption reshapes barriers, making tech switching less disruptive.
• 12% see tech aiding growth, while 8% claim it hinders growth.
• Legacy integrations cause inefficiencies, driving demand for unified platforms.

Summary

The webinar, hosted by Caroline Hill and featuring Cleo’s senior director Robin Chesterman, unpacked findings from Cleo’s new "State of Legal Tech" report, which surveyed more than 2,000 legal professionals across the UK and Australia. The discussion centered on persistent frustrations with existing tech stacks, data ownership uncertainties, and the emerging role of AI in reshaping legal workflows. Key insights revealed a paradox: roughly 85% of respondents claim they are happy with their technology, yet up to half report losing the equivalent of 44 workdays a year to inefficient systems. Data ownership confidence is alarmingly low, with nearly half of firms unsure they truly control client data, and 12% see technology as a growth catalyst while 8% say it hampers growth. The report also highlighted steep exit costs and governance gaps that deter platform switches. Robin emphasized that “satisfaction is not the same as performance,” calling the complacency around outdated tools a hidden cost. He noted AI’s potential to lower switching barriers, describing modern AI interfaces as conversational partners that feel more human than traditional software. The panel cited real‑world examples of firms wrestling with fragmented integrations, password fatigue, and costly data migrations. The implications are clear: law firms must move beyond mere acceptance of sub‑par tools, prioritize data sovereignty, and leverage AI‑driven, unified platforms to unlock efficiency and growth. Failure to act risks continued productivity losses, talent attrition, and competitive disadvantage in an increasingly tech‑savvy market.

Original Description

In this TalkingTech webinar, Clio’s senior director of product management, Robin Chesterman, walks us through the findings of Clio’s new State of Legal Tech report. Surveying more than 2,000 legal professionals across the UK and Australia, the report uncovers the real frustrations, risks, and opportunities shaping today’s legal tech landscape.

The webinar begins with a striking contradiction: although 85% of lawyers say they’re satisfied with their technology, nearly half also report losing the equivalent of 44 working days per year due to inefficient systems, which suggests lawyers have grown accustomed to poor tech performance—normalising friction rather than challenging it. Anecdotally, we know this to be true, and these stats add some interesting weight.

Chesterman argues that this complacency is becoming unsustainable. With AI advancing rapidly, the gap between outdated legacy platforms and modern, AI‑enabled tools has widened dramatically. The real question facing firms is no longer whether switching systems is disruptive, but what opportunities they’re missing by staying put.

Clio, like any vendor, has its own agenda in highlighting these stats, which, interestingly, show that while most lawyers acknowledge tech’s role in driving performance, 12% say their software has had no effect, and 8% believe it has hindered growth. Many frustrations stem from fragmented systems, weak integrations, and manual processes that slow everyday work.

Data ownership and portability emerge as major concerns. Almost half of lawyers aren’t confident they truly control their data, largely due to unclear contracts and painful migration processes. Vendors often delay access to data or charge high extraction fees, with UK firms paying on average £12,888—a practice Chesterman predicts will not survive as AI tools make switching easier and vendor lock‑in harder to justify.

Another urgent issue is AI governance: only around 40% of firms have strong policies in place, despite widespread use of consumer AI tools. Without clear internal guidance and safe, firm‑approved alternatives, shadow IT becomes inevitable.

The session closes with a clear message: modernisation is no longer optional. Firms must embrace flexible, integrated, AI‑ready systems to stay competitive. Law firms know this, really, and action is the hard bit. But stats like this help to illustrate the gaps.