Does your lawyer’s use of AI translate into savings?

The following thought leadership post was originally presented on LinkedIn by Yelena Ambartsumian (our founder) and is available here.

Yesterday I saw a post stating GCs (general counsel) are worried big law firms are using gen AI without passing on the savings.

For those of you working with traditional leveraged-model firms, are you seeing a discount—or is your legal spend the same?

Many big firms are touting their use of gen AI, while slowing junior hiring and shrinking class sizes. So, GCs are right to be skeptical. But there are solutions.

Here’s how I’m approaching this as a fractional GC who helps clients select and manage outside counsel:

1️⃣ Put AI terms in the engagement letter
Require outside counsel to spell out how they use AI: research, drafting, due diligence, etc. I’ve seen broad “AI waivers” in engagement terms. Don’t assume they’re non‑negotiable.

2️⃣ Tie AI to time entries
If you’re on hourly billing, firms can only bill for time spent on your matter. If a research task goes from 6 hours to 1 with AI (though I doubt it), you should see 1 hour on the invoice, not 6. If things feel fuzzy, have a conversation.

3️⃣ Understand who is actually using AI
Some GCs worry AI is a 1:1 replacement for junior associates. I wouldn’t go that far; the tech isn’t there. From what I have learned in my conversations with big law partners, it's often the partners and senior lawyers using gen AI to quickly pull up an answer or statute, find a precedent, or stress‑test their analysis. This is work they may have handed to a junior or done themselves. Ask your firms how they’re actually using gen AI. You may be relieved to learn it's making the partner (with the highest hourly rate) more efficient.

4️⃣ Join the party
In-house teams should also leverage gen AI for lower‑risk, process-heavy work:
- Contract management
- Redlining and playbook review (and creation)
- Procurement and vendor flows
- Reviewing outside counsel invoices 😇

One hard truth: in this market, big law's $800–$1,000/hour for junior associates may be tough to justify.

The tech and SaaS GCs with whom I work often need customized, senior-level advice.

Boutique firms like mine are delivering that at $400–$700/hour (for senior counsel), if not less (via predictable fractional GC packages, at reduced rates).

There’s a place for big law, and I value my big law partners—but we’re not competing. AI hasn’t changed the legal market so much as it has exposed existing inefficiencies in the traditional, leveraged model and highlighted the growing role for boutique firms and fractional GCs like AMBART LAW PLLC.

If you have questions about negotiating AI waivers or would like to know about the AI tools in-house teams are using, send me a DM.