Leon Skornicki

I read this article today and thought "What's the point?" These firms are spending loads of money on these tools but, for what? The article includes this statement about one of the firms' use cases: "The initiative is focused on delivering measurable outcomes: faster turnaround times, improved accuracy, and enhanced client value". 🚅 Faster turnaround times: do clients want faster turnaround times (than are, presumably, already being demanded)? 🎯 Improved accuracy: is this currently a problem? I would like to think that law firms are already providing accurate advice. 🤑 Enhanced client value: I would expect this to mean lower prices, but, I have yet to see any indication of a price war and, more importantly, does it make good business sense for a law firm to invest money for the sake of being able to charge their clients less? I think GenAI is impressive with what it can accomplish - and I know why I'm using it and how I am getting tremendous value from it, but based on discussions I've had with peers, I'm not convinced others fully "get" it just yet. https://lnkd.in/eQgM8f38

77

27 Comments

The legal tech world is debating the wrong metrics. Last week's discussion about Harvey's user numbers and utilization rates perfectly illustrates the problem - we're measuring vendor success, not client value. Law firm tech tracks billable hours, seat licenses, and utilization rates. But in-house teams need completely different metrics. We need to know how much we reduced outside counsel spend, how fast we can turn around contracts, and what capacity we created for strategic work. At Coherent, we've achieved a 78% reduction in contract review time. We're on track for 50%+ reduction in outside counsel dependency and have eliminated 30% of manual tasks, freeing our team for higher-value work. Unless we require accountability to the metrics that matter for us, tech built for law firms will never measure what matters to in-house teams. In-house teams need tech built specifically for in-house priorities. We need vendors (including law firms) who measure what actually matters to the business. And we need radical transparency about real outcomes, not vanity metrics. To my fellow CLOs - Start demanding the metrics that matter. Ask your vendors how their AI creates efficiency gains, not how many licenses they've sold. The conversation needs to shift from vendor success to customer value. Until then, we're having the wrong conversation about legal technology. I explore this further in my latest piece for Legal IT Insider--> https://lnkd.in/eieDEgvM

91

6 Comments

My team of 3 lawyers is responsible for 50,000 US contracts per year. This might seem impossible, but with the right systems and tools it can be done, and that number can be much higher with the same sized team. During my entire in-house legal career, the ongoing challenge has been to do more with less. Building scalable systems, automating processes, and creating tools to empower my teams have become my specialities. AI tools present new opportunities to do more with less, but to be successful you need to be just as aware of the limitations of these tools as their capabilities. After the success we’ve had in the US, this year we’ve launched new systems across our global markets, improving data tracking, contract management compliance, and speed to deal closure exponentially. The time made available from automating daily work is then reinvested into understanding our business better, spending more time with business leadership on understanding their priorities, and focusing on achieving the next level of success. #AI #legaloperations #contractmanagement #legal #tech #legaltech #automation #scalability #global #contracts #inhouselegal

414

58 Comments

“When’s the right time to hire your first General Counsel?” I get this question a lot from both founders and investors. Usually, I flip it back: “When do you think it’s appropriate?” The answers range from Series C to “right before going public.” Almost always it’s too late. I get it. When you’re early stage, underfunded, and still chasing product-market fit, hiring a lawyer sounds like a luxury. But waiting too long can quietly cost you a lot. Having a dedicated counsel (full-time or fractional) is like having a primary care doctor for your company. When you’re healthy, your doctor focuses on preventative care. When you skip those checkups, small issues turn into expensive emergencies. Startups are no different. Here’s why engaging counsel early matters: ✅ Preventative legal care saves money. Fixing problems later—cap table errors, IP gaps, compliance misses—is always more expensive. ✅ Counsel helps plan, not just react. The right GC builds scalable systems and supports smart growth. ✅ Fundraising gets easier. Investors appreciate clean documentation, clear ownership, and minimal surprises. ✅ Exits go smoother. Strong legal foundations protect value when it matters most. For founders, it’s about setting your company up for healthy growth. For investors, it’s about protecting your return. 🚩 Don’t wait for the emergency room. Preventative care - legal or otherwise - is always the smarter investment. #Startups #Founders #Investors #GeneralCounsel #FractionalGC #StartupLaw #LegalStrategy #Fundraising #StartupGrowth #ScaleSmarter

72

10 Comments

The legal technology landscape has never been more promising, yet I continue to observe fundamental disconnects between our tools and our workflows. After years of working at the intersection of law and technology, I've identified six critical gaps that deserve our collective attention as opportunities for meaningful improvement: 1. The Workflow Integration Challenge We invest in sophisticated AI-powered contract review platforms while basic document intake remains fragmented. The most advanced technology loses its impact when the foundation isn't solid. Success requires us to examine and optimize entire workflows, not just individual tools. 2. Demonstrating Value Beyond Intuition "It feels more efficient" doesn't satisfy stakeholders who need concrete metrics. We must develop better frameworks for measuring and communicating the value of legal technology investments. This means tracking not just time saved, but quality improvements, risk reduction, and business enablement. 3. Resource Allocation Reality Legal departments face increasing demands with static resources. The solution isn't always more headcount or bigger budgets—it's reimagining how work flows through our departments. Strategic automation and process optimization can multiply our impact without multiplying costs. 4. Empowering Business Partners The most effective legal departments enable self-service for routine matters. When business partners can confidently handle standard NDAs or basic contract questions independently, legal professionals can focus on higher-value strategic work. This shift requires intentional design and change management, but the payoff is substantial. 5. Measuring What Truly Matters While cost per contract provides one data point, we need metrics that capture our true business impact. Are we accelerating deal velocity? Reducing friction in the sales process? Enabling better business decisions? These outcomes matter more than pure efficiency metrics. 6. Meeting Users Where They Work The best legal technology integrates seamlessly into existing workflows. Rather than creating another portal or login, we should focus on bringing legal intelligence into the tools our colleagues already use daily. Invisible technology often provides the most visible results. Each of these challenges represents an opportunity to strengthen the connection between legal and business teams while leveraging technology more effectively. The path forward requires honest assessment, collaborative problem-solving, and a willingness to challenge traditional approaches. We have the tools and knowledge. We now we need to align them with how people actually work. Let's continue building a legal tech community that transforms these disconnects into opportunities for innovation and growth. #legaltech #innovation #law #business #learning

39

20 Comments

Over the years, I’ve reviewed countless employment agreements. Some are airtight, many are not. Here are 5 clauses no company should ignore: 1️⃣ Clear job description + reporting structure 2️⃣ Confidentiality & IP ownership 3️⃣ Non-compete / non-solicit (reasonable, not overreaching) 4️⃣ Termination & notice period clarity 5️⃣ Dispute resolution mechanism (saves time later!) Most disputes I’ve seen arise because either these were missing — or written vaguely. 👉 If you’re a founder, HR manager, or employee, reviewing just these 5 can save months of pain. What’s the trickiest clause you’ve had to negotiate?

41

4 Comments

The smallest edits can cause the biggest contract headaches. Take Deliverables. If you redefine it to exclude the “Vendor IP/ SaaS platform” are you sure, that’s safe enough? You’d want to understand how that single edit can ripple through every other clause where the term is used—and more importantly, amend those to give authority to the change you just made. Think indemnities, acceptance, warranties, IP ownership, liability. One tweak in a definition can shift the balance of an entire contract. Good contract review is about context, not just words. What’s the most “innocent-looking” definition you’ve seen that carried an outsized impact? #contracts #SaaS #negotiation #inhousecounsel #lawyers

19

1 Comment

I've been getting many questions about the intersection of AI and privacy laws, particularly around automated decision-making. To address these important issues, my co-authors Burak Haylamaz, Nick Reem, Juliann Susas and I collaborated on an article on this topic. We provide insights and guidance on how automated decision-making and profiling impact AI-driven decisions. #AI #Privacy #AutomatedDecisionMaking #TechLaw #LegalTech #DataPrivacy #ArtificialIntelligence https://lnkd.in/gmdrKg69

40

I’m currently in the middle of a beauty parade of legal tech solutions, evaluating platforms that could reshape how my legal team operates. The goal is clear: find a system that helps us scale, stay compliant, and become more strategic. But the landscape is murkier than ever. Chief Legal Officers (CLOs) like myself are at a crossroads when it comes to contract lifecycle management (CLM)and legal AI. On one side, traditional CLM providers such as Icertis, Docusign CLM and Agiloft offer comprehensive contract workflow automation. These platforms have proven infrastructure and enterprise-grade controls. Yet, their so-called “AI” capabilities often feel like an afterthought, tools added to tick boxes rather than transform the legal experience. On the other side, a fast-growing ecosystem of AI-native legal platforms, like Harvey, Spellbook, or Flank, is delivering excellent advanced features in document analysis, redlining, drafting, clause comparison, and increasingly, legal advisory. And that last piece—advisory—is where AI has the potential to become more than just a productivity tool. We’re not talking about replacing legal judgment, but imagine an AI-powered legal advisory agent could instantly return guidance like: "Yes", "Yes, if...", or "No, due to policy X or regulation Y". That kind of functionality reduces legal bottlenecks, empowers business teams, and allows the legal department to focus on strategy and risk, not routine triage. Yet even the most advanced AI legal tools often lack full CLM functionality. They don’t offer seamless contract intake, template management, audit trails, or obligation tracking. Conversely, traditional CLMs often lack the agility, insights, or UX that today’s AI tools bring. For most CLOs, the current reality is a fragmented one: - One tool for contracting workflows - Another for AI drafting - Yet another for internal legal Q&A The Way Forward? CLOs must now become technology architects, not just legal gatekeepers. The ideal platform will be one that: - Unifies full-cycle CLM with - Powerful, context-aware AI, including - A reliable legal advisory agent function for daily decision support. Until that vision is fully realized, we’re left balancing trade-offs—between maturity and innovation, depth and speed, structure and intelligence. Final Thought: The platforms that win will be those that don’t just streamline contracts, they’ll empower legal teams to scale judgment, improve responsiveness, and become proactive business enablers in the age of AI. So here’s my open question to the market: can any platform truly deliver it all? - End-to-end CLM maturity - Native, real-time AI document intelligence - And a reliable, enterprise-grade legal advisory agent, ready to handle “yes,” “yes if,” or “no” answers at scale? If you’re building this, or believe you already have, I’m listening. Let’s talk. #LegalTech #CLO #CLM #AI #LegalAdvisory #ContractManagement

19

2 Comments