An anonymous first-hand example
A business owner used AI to work through a lease because a lawyer felt unaffordable—and got the lease wrong. The ability to produce a plausible answer had not supplied the experience needed to recognise what mattered.
The assumption worth revisiting.
That does not rule out useful internal preparation. It makes service design important: what can colleagues do themselves, what context must travel with the work, and where does expert judgement still change the decision?
What does the person asking for this document need to understand before acting on it?
Give the capacity a purpose.
Create a useful route for preparation and access to expertise. If the only route is too slow or expensive to use, colleagues may invent their own.
How this fits the capacity allocation →
Use AI to challenge your first interpretation
Help me explore this question: What does the person asking for this document need to understand before acting on it? Identify the assumptions in our current approach. Offer alternative explanations, including one that challenges our preferred answer. Separate hypotheses from evidence and suggest what we should ask the people affected.
Treat the answers as possibilities to test with people and evidence.
Go deeper into the evidence.
UK Government Commercial Agency / Government Commercial Function · Official decision framework
The framework compares internal, purchased and mixed delivery using whole-life costs, capability, risks and outcomes.
Public-sector guidance, not evidence that insourcing saves money or a general legal requirement for private companies. Applying the method here is TIP’s interpretation.
Judiciary of England and Wales · Published judgment
The judgment addresses false legal citations and the responsibility of legal professionals to verify research and authorities.
Specific proceedings, not a general error rate for AI legal tools. The practical application here is a review workflow, not advice on a particular dispute.
video · 4 min
AI lawyers are here – can you trust artificial intelligence for legal help?
University of Sheffield
A short introduction to the opportunity and limits of AI-supported legal help, connecting customer empowerment with responsibility for accurate decisions.
Listen or watch for: What can a better-prepared customer now question, and where will they still need expert support?
About this resource
University and legal-support practitioner perspectives, including student tests; not evidence of a measured increase in successful legal claims.
Turn the question around.
Your customer’s insourcing opportunity could change your own business model. Explore which part of your offer they could own, and the value they would still want from you.
Explore the commercial risk →How TIP applies this to itself →