I attended a fascinating presentation at this year’s CLOC Global Institute which focused on the results from the most recent CLOC in-house survey, which for the first time was conducted in collaboration with Harbor, a provider of legal services supporting law firms and corporate legal departments.
The findings from the survey were published in the 2025 CLOC State of the Industry Report, which was released in February 2025. The survey, now in its 21st year, serves as an important benchmarking resource for legal departments worldwide, and provides insights into legal spending, staffing, operations, and technology trends.
The survey itself offers important insights, but the panel discussion stood out for what they chose to highlight in just 45 minutes and how they interpreted the data made it a fun (think Steve Harvey meets State of the Industry) and engaging conversation with the audience.
The panel itself was a diverse group consisting of Kevin Clem, Chief Growth Officer, Harbor Legal; Lauren Chung, Practice Group Leader, Harbor Legal; Farrah Pepper, Chief Legal Innovation Officer, Marsh McLennan; and Oyango Snell, Executive Director, CLOC.
Key Insight: Demand for Legal Services Will Rise
First the survey itself: 65% of the participants were with Fortune 500 companies, 188 companies that participated were primarily billion-dollar-plus organizations, and the Survey looked at some 400 different metrics. What the panel decided to focus on was important.
The number one highlight from the Survey which illuminates and informs the other metrics: 83% of those surveyed expect increased demand for legal services. I have discussed the possible reasons for this before, but it is still pretty amazing given the proliferation of AI tools that can do many of the tasks that legal professional have in the past done. In addition, 77% of legal departments expect to prioritize or increase legal ops headcounts.
Responses To Increased Demand for Legal Services
In any event, given this, the first question and brought up by the panel was what are the options available to handle this expected increase. Here is what the Survey said were the top five results:
• Increasing workload of existing internal resources (39%)
• Increasing use of current technology (36%)
• Reengineering work processes (36%)
• Automating routine tasks (34%)
• Increasing use of outside counsel (33%)
The results are a bit surprising and, on its face, should strike fear in the hearts of legal professionals in house legal departments since it seems to suggest a never-ending “do more with less” mentality. But Pepper made an interesting comment. The findings don’t necessarily mean that as much as suggesting that there are tools like automation, AI, and GenAI that will enable in house legal departments to in fact do more high-value work. Chung added that new ways of working may enable more to be accomplished
Top Use Cases Legal Ops Can Address
The next question selected by the panel to discuss was the areas that legal ops professional can best address and improve. Here are the top five findings:
• Outside counsel management (95%)
• Technology strategy (91%)
• Technology administration (88%)
• Program/project management (84%)
• Financial management (80%)
Okay, but here’s an interesting point that the panel brought up. The 2024 findings were roughly the same as before, but a couple of additional areas gained significant ground. Citation of business intelligence as something legal ops could contribute increased from 58% to 65%, which suggest that participants are continuing to search for ways to get more and different value out of data and are using AI tools to get there.
A second noteworthy finding: knowledge management went from 71% to &79%, suggesting AI tools and data may enable legal ops professionals to play a greater role here, potentially reducing reliance on traditional law librarian roles.
Most Widely Implemented Technologies
Next question: What are the most widely implemented technologies by legal ops professionals?
• E-billing (84%)
• Matter management (72%)
• Document management (72%)
• Legal hold (71%)
• Contract management (62%)
Like most of the audience, I was surprised at where contract management ranked since that seems to be such a hot topic. Perhaps some early adopters are heading back to the market, looking for CLM tools that better meet today’s needs.
Planned Technology Implementations
But let’s look at the results of the next survey question: What technologies are participants planning to implement in the next year.
• AI (54%)
• Legal service request/intake (33%)
• Workflow automation (33%)
• Contract lifecycle (30%)
• Document management (14%)
Lots to unpack here. AI did not crack the top 5 for tools already in use but 54% say they will implement it in the next year. Frankly, that sounds like a low number given all the discussion and promise of AI.
But Clem suggested that lots of departments are waiting to see what the tools they already have can do with the addition of AI functions and to see what the overall business AI goals and implementation plan are. He believes there will be lots of movement here in the next year. Pepper noted that AI tools will be integrated more and more in tools already being used to make them better and enhancing their functionality. As she put it, in house legal “will not be asking for AI tools but expecting it to be integrated in other products.”
Top Outside Counsel Management Initiatives
The panel then turned to a review of the responses to the question what the top outside counsel management initiatives that in house legal has implemented. The top five results:
• More consistent use of matter planning and budgeting (50%)
• Structured review of annual rate increases (48%)
• Use of alternative fee arrangements (47%)
• Tougher enforcement of outside counsel guidelines (45%)
• Keeping more work in-house (41%)
Again, the panelists had lots of insights on these numbers. Chung suggested that the findings indicate that in-house legal is demanding more visibility and transparency in their relationships with outside counsel. For example, a key theme is more structure and governances to things like rate increase requests. Pepper added that use of the team guidelines should be changed to policy, procedures, or processes to reflect that need for alignment of business interests with outside counsel.
Finally, Clem brought up an interesting point: rates may continue to go up but not as a matter of rote. Rather rates will increase based on value that a lawyer can provide. More routine work will be done by AI tools and thus the time spent doing work that AI can’t do will be more valuable. To obtain a rate increase, value most be documented. By way of example, Clem informally surveyed the audience: the highest hourly rate requested the past year was $2,850 an hour which represented a 30% increase over the past year.
The Final Word
The panelists were asked for a final word on what the take aways from the survey. Here is what they shared:
Chung: Lean into data — benchmark and build from there.
Pepper: Go deeper into context before drawing conclusions.
Clem: Visualize and present data clearly to support decisions and engagement.
All three panelists didn’t focus on specific tools or use cases in their final remarks. Instead, they all emphasized process — how legal departments use data, visualize it, and engage with it to drive real transformation.
Stephen Embry is a lawyer, speaker, blogger and writer. He publishes TechLaw Crossroads, a blog devoted to the examination of the tension between technology, the law, and the practice of law.