Legal Process Automation: Why Firms Must Abandon Outdated Workflows

Legal Process Automation: Why Firms Must Abandon Outdated Workflows

In a recent article, Ryan McKeen of Best Era argues that law firms must confront their reliance on outdated processes and integrate legal process automation at the core of their operations. He argues that the traditional model—pyramids of associates billing thousands of hours for document review, contract drafting, and research—has become indefensible when automation can complete these tasks faster, cheaper, and in many cases more consistently.

McKeen stresses that the actual issue is not vendor selection or procurement strategy. He criticizes management committees that debate which platform to buy while missing the larger point: the legal profession must fundamentally rewire how lawyers think and work. To him, AI is not a single product but an environment that demands fluency across tools, the ability to validate outputs, and the judgment to know when human oversight matters most.

The firms adapting effectively, McKeen explains, are fostering experimentation rather than buying “legal-specific” wrappers of general-purpose systems. They are rewarding lawyers who test workflows, document best practices, and apply automation to eliminate low-value processes. In these settings, routine drafting and review are shrinking from days to hours, freeing time for strategy and client service.

For managing partners, McKeen’s message is clear: legal process automation is not an incremental efficiency measure but a structural shift. Firms that cling to traditional models will fall behind. Those that build AI fluency into their culture, eliminate redundant processes, and rethink billing approaches will be positioned to thrive in the next decade of practice.