Sonderegger said the industry has been talking about the eventual demise of the billable hour for as long as he has been working—but that things have been changing. He is seeing a “very strong” increase in hourly rates in the U.S. markets, “which is probably not sustainable.” There is also a push for corporate counsel to take work in-house.
In a perfect world, he said, outside counsel would leverage AI to do a better job in less time, charge less, and still make more money. But the financial structure does not support that ideal, he said. “If I spend less time, I’m charging you less money.”
While there has been some movement toward fixed fees, not all matters lend themselves to that arrangement, including open-ended engagements and certain kinds of litigation, he said. Also, private equity is beginning to push into the small and midsize law market in the form of managed service organizations (MSOs), which will likely alter traditional law firm incentive structures.
“I think the potential is that you see different business models emerging,” said Sonderegger.
Winkler also expects a change to law firm business models. “I do truly believe that there’s going to be major impact to the billable hour over the next two to three to four years plus,” he said.
Tech charges are a new revenue option. Winkler said he has heard that some firms are already imposing these charges. He thinks that is a viable option, whether as a line item or part of an alternative fee arrangement.
Vlemincx believes that AI is the catalyst for a long-needed change to the billable hour model. But she does not think a tech charge sits well in the existing business model.
“If you just have it the way we always did it, and we add the tech charge on top of it? I don’t think clients will buy that,” she said.
From transactional service to trusted advisor
Vlemincx foresees a redesign of the attorney role to a trusted advisor who provides not only legal services but also strategic advice.
“If you just focus on output of the legal work, that’s not sufficient, because AI will take over a big part of that,” she said.
Similarly, Lemmi envisions a new intersection of business understanding with legal advice to advise clients on future risk, “in a world that is becoming increasingly full of risk.”
“I think in this way we can shift from a simple reduction of the bill to something that is more valuable,” Lemmi said.
AI and the “efficiency trap”
Turning to the practice of law, the survey found that about half (51 percent) believe that AI will accelerate the outsourcing of routine work to alternative legal service providers. The perceived AI impact varied by task, from a high of 53 percent for legal research and analysis to 24 percent for discovery.
Sixty percent of respondents reported that AI is providing time savings of 6 percent to 20 percent per week.
Vlemincx said there is an “efficiency trap” in which results are measured by speed rather than value.
“And that’s a big trap. Because the question is, are we doing the right things?” she said. “We need to shift more from not just the fast outcomes, but to better outcomes, better judgments and better strategy.”
Sonderegger agreed that AI can help shift the focus from speed to quality.
“It also could be that I’m able to create better work product,” he said. “I create a tighter contract. I can go deeper into diligence on contracts. I can be more prepared for a cross.”
Vlemincx stressed that AI amplifies results—the good, the bad and the ugly.
“The biggest risk is not being slow,” she said. “It’s about being fast, in the wrong direction, doing the wrong things, fast. That’s the biggest threat.”
She suggested that in realigning work, firms should start with what the client is looking for.
“If you start with asking what the client needs, you will come up with different solutions,” she said.
Training for AI
AI is clearly here to stay. Seventy-nine percent of legal departments and 72 percent of law firms said they expect AI investment to increase or remain steady. And 92 percent of respondents said they use at least one AI tool.
Yet 39 percent of respondents cited inadequate training and resources as a barrier to using AI tools. So what should AI training focus on?
According to Sonderegger, organizations need to clearly communicate the goals and boundaries of AI tools to avoid risky usage that could expose client data or waive privilege.
“The reality is, people are going to be using these tools,” said Sonderegger. “If we don’t have that in place, they’re going to find workarounds that might increase risk.”
At the same time, Vlemincx said that over-awareness of the risks can paralyze attorneys. Attorneys need to develop AI skills to make informed judgments in context.
“It’s not just about ‘Be careful using AI,’ but really building the skills so people feel confident to make that proper judgment in the context they are at,” she said. “It’s about trusting your ability to assess the tool—when to use which tool, how to use it, and how to properly evaluate what it processes and what it produces.”
Lemmi agreed that training needs to explain how to avoid or mitigate risk. She added that AI training should be customized to specific roles.
“It’s different to be a practitioner versus an assistant or a librarian,” she said. “Training should be grounded in real use cases and closely aligned to the workflow that people actually follow.”
Winkler agreed that training should focus on real-world applications.
“We’ve focused on identifying real-world training and education opportunities that we can put in front of them that specifically dive into the AI tools that are being used right now in litigation,” said Winkler.
Adapt and collaborate
Beyond specific AI training, Vlemincx emphasized that organizations need to move to “continuous improvement loops.”
“We’re treating training as if work is stable. It isn’t,” she said. “We constantly need to reskill, because AI is changing faster than we can retrain for the next program.”
She added that collaboration will become increasingly important as AI adoption moves forward.
Sonderegger agreed that collaboration will be key.
“I think it moves from individuals to the ecosystem, right?” he said. “It goes across organizations, firms, clients, technology, vendors. It’s a collective responsibility.”
2026 Future Ready Lawyer webinar series
- Scaling AI Across Organizations
- Competing for Trust in an AI-Driven World
- The New Architecture of Legal Work: People, Process & AI
- Leading Global Enterprises Through Accelerated AI Adoption
- Strategic Governance and Risk Mitigation for Professionals
- How Do We Train Lawyers of the Future?
- Future of International Law
Click to access:
