Extract from Rose Hunter Jones’ article, “AI Governance Is Not a Policy Problem—It’s a Workflow Problem.”
This distinction matters because much of the current conversation surrounding responsible AI use assumes that governance is primarily a compliance exercise. Organizations focus on selecting approved tools, drafting acceptable use policies, and requiring lawyers to complete training modules. While each of those measures plays an important role, none creates accountability.
During a recent EDRM webinar on responsible AI use in legal practice, Ralph Artigliere (Florida Circuit Court Judge (ret.), 10th Judicial Circuit for Polk, Highlands, and Hardee Counties) posed a question that has stayed with me long after the panel concluded.
The discussion focused on policies, training, approved tools, and the broader governance structures organizations are rushing to implement. Judge Artigliere shifted the conversation to something more practical: How do lawyers actually use AI in a way that is explainable, supervisable, and defensible?
It is a deceptively simple question, but it captures what I believe is the most significant challenge facing legal organizations today.
Over the last two years, legal organizations have devoted enormous resources to developing artificial intelligence policies. Firms have adopted acceptable use policies. Corporate legal departments have issued guidance on approved tools. Vendors have rolled out training programs designed to educate lawyers about the risks and benefits of generative AI. These efforts are necessary. They are also insufficient.
