Case: Jones Walker — Strategic AI Adoption with Measurable Results

Andy Lee

From experimentation to responsible, firm-wide AI adoption
This case shows how Jones Walker turned a promising AI initiative into a strategic investment—by resisting “pet project” dynamics, testing assumptions, and using evidence to guide decisions before scaling.

Note: This case reflects work delivered during Jones Walker’s early generative AI pilots and subsequent firm-wide rollout, supported by structured governance, metrics, and coaching.

When Andy Lee, partner and Innovation Committee chair at Jones Walker LLP, recognized the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in litigation practice, he knew the implementation would require more than just technological enthusiasm. As a leader at a national firm facing rising IT costs, Andy needed to transform a potential "pet project" into a strategic initiative that would deliver measurable value.

What shifted
AI moved from a promising experiment to a governed strategic initiative.
Enthusiasm was tested against measurable outcomes, not assumed value.
Early pilots became a decision filter, not a rubber stamp for rollout.

The challenge wasn’t just technological; it was organizational. The initiative required a way to align busy attorneys and staff around shared objectives, evaluate AI tools against real outcomes, and maintain momentum despite competing priorities. Organizing4Innovation’s structured approach helped transform a group of time-constrained attorneys and staff into a cohesive, committed project team, with a clear focus on reducing associate write-downs and improving firm-wide efficiency.

What made the difference was the structure around the work: agree objectives, shared metrics, and regular checkpoints that allowed the team to learn quickly without losing momentum. This made it possible to test assumptions rigorously—without forcing premature decisions.

The initial pilot was designed to demonstrate the value of the team’s systematic approach. While early user feedback on the new AI tool was positive — which typically triggers immediate adoption at many firms — Andy's team dug deeper. Their rigorous analysis revealed that despite user enthusiasm, the tool wasn't delivering the targeted improvements in quality and efficiency. This insight proved invaluable.

Instead of abandoning the initiative, the team leveraged their pilot data to identify specific challenges around training requirements, accuracy concerns, and policy implications. What could have been a discouraging setback became a learning opportunity.

This led to a second, more successful pilot with Lexis+ AI, which showed stronger alignment with the firm's objectives. The subsequent rollout exemplified Jones Walker's commitment to responsible generative AI use by:

  • Implementing comprehensive monitoring protocols
  • Establishing mandatory training programs for attorneys and staff wanting to use Generative AI tools
  • Achieving 70% attorney and staff participation in AI training within two months
  • Increasing Lexis+ usage by 15% compared to the previous year
  • Generating 18% of Lexis+ requests through AI features
  • Catalyzing a 500% increase in approved generative AI tool usage across the firm

The project's success demonstrated how the right support structure can enable busy professionals to drive significant change. Despite demanding litigation schedules, Andy and his team maintained their commitment throughout the process, turning skepticism into enthusiasm and ideas into measurable results.

Building on this success, Andy and his team are now focused on an ambitious next phase: leveraging AI to enhance work quality while significantly reducing attorneys’ time on routine tasks.

Altogether, generative AI has enabled Jones Walker to further advance its position as a leader in legal innovation and a leading law firm.

This case illustrates how responsible AI adoption happens in practice: by testing tools against real objectives, learning from early pilots, and scaling only when evidence supports the decision. Structure didn’t slow innovation—it made progress defensible.