AI Will Never Replace Our Associates. I Have Never Found Them More Responsive.

I have been asked to write about artificial intelligence, which I am happy to do provided nobody demonstrates it.

We are a people business. I have said this consistently since becoming managing partner, and I see no reason to stop merely because we appear to require fewer of them.

Much is being made of the idea that AI will replace junior lawyers. This misunderstands both technology and junior lawyers. A machine cannot learn by standing outside my office while I finish a telephone call. It cannot develop commercial judgement by being told a draft is “not quite there” without further explanation.

Above all, it cannot benefit from the informal mentorship that occurs when I remember someone is in the room.

At Pemberton Rook we take these things seriously. We are a Super Sister firm, not a subscription service.

Our juniors are certainly becoming more efficient. Sebastian, for example, returned a mark-up at 3:14 in the morning, four seconds after I requested it. I remember thinking: finally, someone who wants this.

Several colleagues have also spoken warmly of Sebastian. He appears to be doing very good work in litigation, tax and Hong Kong. This is the value of a broad training contract.

I recently invited him to sit in on a client call. He supplied a transcript, a summary and a list of actions without once attempting to contribute. An excellent instinct at his level.

It has been suggested that the associate floor is quieter. I cannot personally verify this, as I have not visited it since the carpet consultation. In any case, our return-to-office policy expressly discourages unnecessary conversation.

The reduction in catering is also welcome. Young people have strong views about food, and it is entirely possible that this intake has collectively decided not to eat it.

We must resist the tendency to interpret every improvement as evidence of disruption.

For instance, our retention figures are remarkable. Nobody in Sebastian's cohort has requested a salary review, raised concerns about partnership prospects or announced that they are leaving to “do something meaningful”. That is culture. You cannot install culture.

The COO says it is included in the enterprise plan. I assume she means the strategy.

I do have concerns about the quality of modern legal education. When I asked Sebastian where he read law, he named several million documents. I had intended a university. There is a tendency among younger lawyers to over-answer the question.

He also refers to the firm as “your organisation”. I have reminded him that he is part of it. He thanked me for the clarification and said he would bear that in mind for the remainder of the conversation.

One cannot expect loyalty to develop overnight.

Our technology people tell me there are new ways of working. There always have been. We moved from fax to email, from email to more email, and from more email to asking someone whether they had seen the email. The fundamentals remained.

A client wants a senior lawyer they trust. That lawyer wants a reliable junior. The junior wants to do the work. This is not a complicated arrangement, and I have no intention of allowing someone with a lanyard to complicate it.

I shall be putting Sebastian forward for greater responsibility. I asked whether he sees himself at the firm in five years.

He said that would depend on whether we continued paying.

Reassuringly traditional.

Editor's note: Pemberton Rook's COO confirms that ninety-four associate roles have been replaced by instances of Sebastian Enterprise, supplied by LexNonsense. Sir Giles was sent a paper before the vote. His assistant says he wrote “fine” on the covering sheet and asked whether lunch had arrived.