Beyond the Stack: Turning LegalTech into Real Impact in Law Firms

Law firms are under increasing pressure to deliver work more efficiently while maintaining quality and consistency. The focus is shifting from simply adopting technology to ensuring it is effectively embedded into everyday workflows.

Hélder Santos, Head of LegalTech and Innovation at Bird & Bird, shares his perspective on how firms can drive meaningful impact through LegalTech, balancing efficiency, governance, and commercial value.

In this Q&A, Hélder reflects on AI adoption, return on investment, evolving business models, and why people, workflows, and trust remain central to successful innovation.

---

1. Innovation roles in law firms are still relatively new. How do you define success in your position, and how do you demonstrate tangible return on investment to a partnership that is inherently focused on billable output?

While success ultimately hinges on the impact of new technologies, it is equally important to create an environment where our people feel empowered to experiment freely and responsibly, all within the firm’s established guardrails. Innovation matters most when it automates repeatable workflows and allows our lawyers to focus their time on higher-value, strategic work.

Return on investment is therefore demonstrated through a combination of adoption, efficiency, and commercial relevance. Adoption shows how our lawyers are using new capabilities in real work. Efficiency looks at how we can deliver the same level of quality while using LegalTech and AI to save time and ensure consistency. And commercial impact focuses on whether technology helps us to respond to pricing pressure, protect margins, and support new ways of working with clients. Framing innovation in those terms makes the conversation relevant to a billable‑output‑focused partnership.

2. How do you prioritise which problems are worth innovating around? With finite resources and near‑infinite potential use cases for technology, what framework or instinct guides where you focus attention?

The most compelling use cases to prioritise tend to be high-volume, repeatable areas of work where clients need the work done quickly and transparently.  

There is also a strong practical filter. Innovative solutions are most effective when they fit naturally into our lawyers' existing workflows and can scale across teams and jurisdictions. However, if a solution operates in isolation and proves challenging to embed into everyday practice, it is unlikely to deliver meaningful value.

3. What capabilities do you wish newly qualified lawyers arrived with, and are you filling those gaps yourself through internal training?

Newly qualified lawyers are typically very strong in their technical expertise, but some have had limited exposure to process thinking, data, or technology‑enabled delivery. This gap reflects a broader limitation in legal education, which has yet to fully adapt to the evolving demands of technological innovation, rather than reflecting any individual shortcoming.

We’d never want this to be a hindrance, so we ensure that all new recruits are upskilled to have a basic level of digital and AI literacy: understanding how tools work at a high level, how to use them responsibly, and where the risks are. That’s why we invest in LegalTech & AI secondments and training that keep our people close to the industries we serve. We have invested in AI skills at scale by mandating training through our firm-wide Digital Academy and upskilling our people in areas like prompt engineering and LLMs.

4. As AI tools are embedded deeper into legal workflows, how are you thinking about governance, accountability, and professional responsibility?

We believe AI should support human judgement, not replace it, so we always put human thinking at the heart of everything we do. That’s why governance needs to be designed from the start. Clear principles around data use, human oversight, and professional responsibility are essential if AI is to be used responsibly in legal practice.

Crucially, accountability does not move from the lawyer to the technology. AI can support analysis and decision‑making, but responsibility for advice and outcomes always remains within the professional. Treating AI as an assistive input rather than a decision‑maker ensures trust with clients and regulators.

5. How do you think the business model of large law firms will need to evolve to remain competitive as legal service delivery continues to fragment and specialise?

Clients increasingly expect predictability, transparency, and evidence of efficiency. So, while the traditional billable hour will remain part of the model, it will need to evolve with the advent and increased adoption of innovative technologies.

As a result, firms are moving towards a more blended model that includes fixed fees, subscriptions, and more productised services. In that environment, competitiveness depends less on hours worked and more on how effectively firms combine legal expertise, process, and technology to deliver consistent outcomes.

6. In your opinion, how is Legal Tech fundamentally reshaping the role of legal professionals?

A basic level of technical literacy is becoming part of the professional baseline, rather than a niche specialism. Technology is increasingly absorbing the repetitive and mechanical aspects of legal work, so LegalTech is gradually shifting lawyers' focus away from routine production. This means they can focus their time on judgement, risk assessment, and client interaction.

As a result, the value of a legal professional increasingly lies in problem framing, decision-making, and communication.

7. What advice would you give to law firms just starting their AI and Legal Tech journey?

AI can be a genuinely positive force for innovation and growth, but only if it’s used thoughtfully. Avoid large, abstract transformation programmes; instead, focus on a small number of use cases that matter to clients and lawyers, and build out from there.

Great technology doesn’t always guarantee success, and adoption is most impactful when you’re clear on the problem you’re solving, practical about how people will actually use the tool, and thoughtful about how it fits into existing workflows and systems.

Essentially, success is as much about people and trust as it is about tech. Starting small and iterating tends to win.

Also, investing early in training and change management, and putting governance in place from the outset, is crucial. Responsible adoption is far easier when expectations, boundaries, and accountability are clear from day one.

8. What insights do you hope the audience will take away after your session at Future Lawyer Europe in Italy?

I hope the audience leaves with a realistic and grounded view of AI and LegalTech in legal practice, including what it can do today, what it cannot, and where it genuinely adds value.

Most importantly, I hope there is a recognition that the biggest challenges are rarely technological. They are about behaviour, incentives, leadership, and how organisations choose to evolve.

---

Hélder’s perspective points to a shift in how law firms approach innovation. Real progress comes from adoption, usability, and alignment with how lawyers actually work, not from the technology alone.

Hélder will be joining Future Lawyer Europe Italy’s Day 1 for the “Beyond the Stack: Vibecoding and the Next Wave of Legal Tech” fireside chat, exploring how firms can move beyond technology hype and focus on practical, people-driven innovation.

Register now to join the discussion at Future Lawyer Europe - Italy.