After a few days at LegalOps Running Legal Like a Business (RLLB) 2026 in Las Vegas, one thing was clear: conversations about Artificial Intelligence (AI) and legal operations have matured. The question has shifted from whether legal teams should use AI to figuring out where it fits and how it can create measurable value without losing judgment or accountability.
We attended RLLB to learn what matters most to in-house legal teams right now and talk with them about their challenges. What we found was a conference full of practical conversations about technology, matter management, leadership, communication, and the economics of legal services.
Legal departments are no longer exploring change. The ideas people have discussed for years are starting to affect how legal work actually gets done. They are now waist-deep in implementation (maybe even six feet overhead), and RLLB provided great insights for attendees to consider.
AI Is Moving From Interest to Implementation
AI was part of nearly every conversation, but the tone felt different. The discussion has moved to answer the more specific questions about use cases, workflows, and operating models.
In Rise of the Agents: Real-World Practical Use Cases to Ship Outcomes, Not Architecture, Damien Riehl (Clio) made the point that AI does not need to replace the best lawyer to transform legal work. It needs to handle the large volume of research, review, drafting, classification, and analysis that fills the middle of the legal work bell curve.
Asking a chatbot a question is only the first step of AI usage. Legal teams are beginning to think about supervised systems of specialized agents that can complete and test larger workflows. Lawyers will still need to define their objectives and apply context as they use AI to effectively manage risk and take responsibility for the results. Carefully guided AI frees up more time for human judgment, bringing more value to the process.
That theme showed up again in The Law Firm of 2030, which looked at what AI could mean for firms and clients of the future. Sam Bernstein (Davis Wright Tremaine) and Emily Wesson (Borden Ladner Gervais) discussed how clients will increasingly expect technology-enabled services and more predictable fees. If AI lowers delivery costs, firms may be able to offer flat fees more profitably. That could pressure traditional billing models and make legal help more accessible to organizations that have historically struggled with cost.
Adoption Is Where Technology Proves Itself
We appreciated the sessions that focused less on the technology itself and more on what it takes to make technology work.
In The Shape of Innovation, Wil Srubar from the University of Colorado used a Las Vegas-appropriate exercise. In this simple task, three teams built houses of cards. And the lesson stuck. Innovation is iterative. You test to see where the structure fails, and then you adjust and build again.
That connected directly to The Adoption Paradox, led by Whitney Stefko Dover (Director and Senior Counsel, Policy & Legal Ops+ at Ford) and Andy Krebs (Head of Legal Operations at Ionis). Their discussion focused on why good technology implementations fail and why team buy-in matters so much. Training cannot be treated as a one-time event. Failures and successes both have to become part of the adoption process.
One question kept coming back. Where is the service provider in that process?
If a provider helps design or implement a solution, their responsibility shouldn’t end when the technology goes live. Internal teams still have to change workflows, build confidence, keep learning, and improve the process over time. Adoption is part of the work.
Legal Teams Want Technology That Fits
Most people we spoke with were excited about AI. A common concern we heard was how these innovative tools could improve the systems they already use without forcing them to replace everything.
This also came up often in conversations about matter management. One attendee described having to open several systems each month and pull that information together to manually rebuild parts of a leadership report because the data was not tracked consistently. Many legal departments are still using spreadsheets for matters, outside counsel communication, tasks, and budgets. They want better reporting, but they are skeptical of adopting yet another tool that creates more work than it removes.
This is the type of problem CVUnity was built to help solve. It brings matter information, activity, budgets, and reporting from tools already in use into one place for the user. More broadly, it reflects how TCDI thinks about legal technology and the importance of starting with the team’s actual workflow and then looking for technology that supports it.
The Human Side Still Matters
For all the discussion of AI, RLLB was also a reminder that human skills are becoming more important, not less.
In The Rules of Persuasion: How Great Communicators Convince, Inspire, Lead, and Sometimes Deceive, Carlos Alvarenga (LegalOps.com) led the panelists in discussing how persuasion starts with a truth, not a pitch. Your message has to fit the audience and then win their trust with evidence and emotion. You must listen before building the argument, and persuasion works best when the other person reaches the conclusion without feeling pushed.
The personal-brand session and LinkedIn Mastery workshop reinforced a similar point. Passion and authenticity matter, but they are only effective when people see them. That means showing up consistently and taking part in real conversations.
This conference was a great place to put this into practice. Everyone was encouraged to get out of their comfort zone and meet new people each day. The exhibit hall was built around the education sessions, which made networking feel like part of the learning environment rather than a separate track.
We left with new relationships, not just business cards.
What We Brought Home
RLLB was one of the strongest legal conferences we have attended. Connie Brenton, Jeff Franke, and the LegalOps.com community have truly created a place where legal operations professionals, in-house counsel, paralegals, providers, and technical teams can talk honestly about what is or isn’t working now and what comes next.
Our biggest takeaway is that technology is moving quickly, but successful legal operations will still depend on the effectiveness of their people, processes, adoption, and measurable business outcomes.
We left Las Vegas with plenty of notes and many new relationships. We also feel like we have a better understanding of what in-house teams need now, along with even more useful questions to ponder, including a healthy dose of fear for what lies ahead (mostly thanks to Damien Riehl’s talk about building plaintiff, defense, judge, and jury agents).
We won’t get into all of that just yet! For now, we’re focusing on how the changes brought by AI are here to stay, and we are ready to tackle them together.
Jake Brown
Author
Share article:
Jake is an experienced business development leader with deep experience in digital forensics, electronic discovery, managed document review, and technology-enabled investigations. He has also been recognized for a consultative, client-centered approach that helps law firms and corporate legal teams navigate complex matters with greater clarity, efficiency, and confidence.
Learn more about Jake >
Shane Zelm
Author
Share article:
Since 2008, Shane has supported clients in solving their eDiscovery challenges. During that time, he’s established defensible protocols for in-house legal departments, managed litigation response efforts, and coordinated with outside counsel to lead efficient eDiscovery processes.
Shane specializes in strategic litigation management by bringing together the right people and the right technology to drive early resolutions and inform risk mitigation.