Last
week,
Stephen
Embry
wrote
an
article
declaring
that
the
old
model
of
running
into
a
senior
partner
at
the
water
cooler
and
picking
up
their
dropped
gems
about
how
to
be
a
good
lawyer
is
dead
and
gone.
COVID
took
away
the
certainty
that
anyone
was
even
working
in
the
office.
Office
mandates
and
Biglaw
real
estate
buying
sprees
are
forcing
people
back
in
proximity
with
each
other,
but
that
doesn’t
mean
that
the
community
is
there.
Rather
than
leaving
the
desk
to
get
advice
from
senior
attorneys,
associates
have
been
turning
to
the
in-house
LLMs
firms
have
been
providing
to
help
streamline
workflows.
Recognizing
that,
among
other
things,
heavy
reliance
on
LLMs
can
reduce
the
trust
associates
have
with
their
human
colleagues,
Embry
encouraged
partners
to
change
how
they
approach
training:
[W]e
have
to
work
to
replace
the
informal
water
cooler
with
more
formal
and
designed
training
that
creates
the
opportunities
for
interaction
between
associates
and
between
associates
and
partners.
Structured
training
ensures
that
training
will
actually
happen
and
that
all
will
get
the
training,
not
just
those
who
are
lucky
enough
to
be
at
the
water
cooler
at
the
right
time.
We
have
to
set
aside
the
myopic
focus
on
billable
hours
and
commit
to
nonbillable
time
to
create
the
training
and
the
interactions
that
are
needed.
That’s
cool
and
all,
but
what
if
we
just
delegated
that
to
AI?
Vorys,
Sater,
Seymour
and
Pease
launched
a
new
way
for
associates
to
work
closely
with
their
partners.*
Reuters
has
coverage:
Vorys
has
developed
“AI
personas”
of
19
of
its
partners,
which
can
be
embedded
within
generative
AI
tools
to
offer
responses
to
questions
and
edit
documents
in
the
style
of
individual
partners.
…
The
personas
essentially
work
as
an
AI
chatbot
that
spits
out
replies
and
edits
documents
in
the
mindset
of
the
partner.
The
digital
personalities
are
developed
from
hours-long
interviews
about
the
attorney’s
approach
to
practicing
law,
values
and
experiences.
They
aren’t
trained
on
work
product
from
the
partners,
but
instead
seek
to
embody
their
individual
thinking
styles.“It’s
almost
like
having
a
low
resolution
map
of
the
person’s
brain,”
said
Nate
Jedinak,
Vorys’
senior
director
of
software,
data
and
innovation.
Ah,
yes.
The
ol’
“I’ll
phone
it
in
with
my
clones
while
I’m
doing
the
actual,
important
work”
gambit:
For
what
it’s
worth,
both
associates
and
partners
have
found
the
AI
partner
skins
useful.
One
partner
said
that
he
was
surprised
that
the
AI’s
responses
to
questions
sounded
a
lot
like
him.
Now
all
we
need
is
for
Stanford
to
run
a
double
blind
study
to
determine
if
the
AI
partners
do
a
better
job
of
teaching
associates
than
their
respective
biological
inspirations.
The
innovation
isn’t
being
sold
as
a
replacement
for
partner
expertise.
But
there
is
still
room
for
it
to
be
very
useful.
It
will
probably
be
more
cost
effective
to
run
questions
about
smaller
matters
through
the
AI
than
to
ask
a
several-thousand-an-hour
partner
what
they
think
about
things.
And
for
bigger
problems,
the
door
will
presumably
still
be
open
—
any
differences
in
opinion
between
the
AI
partner
feedback
and
what
the
actual
partner
thinks
about
the
issue
could
tease
out
nuances
in
reasoning
that
make
for
great
learning
opportunities.
As
far
as
Biglaw
AI
adoption
stories
go,
I’m
interested
in
seeing
how
this
pans
out
for
the
firm
and
firms
that
adopt
the
technology.
Lawyers,
Meet
Your
AI
‘Twin’
[Reuters]
Earlier:
Did
Chat
GPT
Just
Replace
Law
School
Office
Hours?
It’s
Time
To
Say
Goodbye
To
Water
Cooler
Training
Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s
.
He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boat
builder
who
is
learning
to
swim
and
is
interested
in
rhetoric,
Spinozists
and
humor.
Getting
back
in
to
cycling
wouldn’t
hurt
either.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at
[email protected]
and
by
Tweet/Bluesky
at @WritesForRent.