Dorte Carlsson, Founder and CEO of the Copenhagen Legal Tech Association, has a career spanning law, technology, and business. She began as a tax lawyer and later worked within legal publishing and technology, including as part of the Wolters Kluwer organisation. Today, through the Copenhagen Legal Tech Association, she brings together legal professionals, technologists, businesses and investors, with a particular focus on helping small and medium-sized law firms adopt technology. Throughout the session, Carlsson’s approach was clear: lawyers should become more comfortable experimenting with technology, while ensuring that adoption remains practical, secure and centred on how legal work is actually delivered.
Overview
Carlsson argued that SME law firms should resist starting their technology journey by asking which product to buy. Instead, they should first understand their existing processes and identify where technology can genuinely improve the way work is delivered. With a growing number of legal-tech solutions available, firms need to prioritise tools that meet appropriate compliance and data-security requirements and that lawyers feel confident using with client information. Interoperability is equally important: technology should connect with existing systems and allow data to flow between them rather than creating additional silos or manual work.
A recurring theme was the importance of experimentation and “play”. Carlsson encouraged lawyers to test technology in manageable situations rather than treating adoption as an immediate firm-wide transformation. Small workflows can provide quick wins, allowing lawyers to experience the benefit of a tool early and increasing the likelihood of continued use. Before automating anything, however, firms need to understand how work currently happens. Carlsson recommended documenting processes step by step and then considering how they could be redesigned “by design”. This shifts firms away from simply repeating inherited ways of working and towards deliberately choosing more effective processes.
Technology adoption also creates a significant people and cultural challenge. Carlsson described an emerging conflict between junior lawyers, who may be quicker to use AI tools, and senior lawyers, who possess the experience and judgement required to recognise when AI-generated work is wrong or incomplete. Rather than allowing this divide to undermine adoption, firms should create opportunities for both groups to work together. Carlsson highlighted collaborative AI design sprints, where teams redesign a process using AI, as one practical way of breaking down hierarchical barriers and developing AI literacy. Peer review between junior lawyers can provide an additional quality check, while senior lawyers can focus on explaining why an AI-generated result is incorrect and transferring the judgement that comes from experience. Ultimately, accountability for both inputs and outputs remains essential.
Key Takeaways
- Start with the process, not the product. Map existing workflows before deciding where AI or legal technology can add meaningful value.
- Prioritise security, compliance and trust. Firms need tools they are comfortable using with sensitive client information.
- Choose technology that works together. Interoperability matters; disconnected tools that require repeated manual data transfers can create more friction rather than less.
- Build adoption through quick wins. Start with manageable use cases where lawyers can see an immediate benefit and gain confidence in the technology.
- Bridge the junior–senior AI divide. Junior lawyers may be more willing to experiment, while senior lawyers contribute context, expertise and judgement. Effective adoption requires both.
- Balance speed with scrutiny. SME firms can move quickly and adapt their technology stacks, but faster adoption is not automatically better. The objective is technology that fits the firm’s processes, culture and responsibilities while enabling lawyers to make better use of their distinctly human skills.
