Legal Teams Add Staff Even as AI Use Becomes Routine, Global Study Finds

Artificial intelligence is now a routine part of legal work, but it has not yet reshaped how legal teams hire, according to a study released on November 12 that surveyed practitioners across 20 countries. The research, titled AI in Legal: 2026 Research Data, combined primary research with analysis by International Data Corporation, a survey of state court judges, and findings from an upcoming general counsel report.

The study drew on feedback gathered between April and October 2026 from 700 legal professionals, including an IDC survey of 401 respondents. Participants included lawyers, paralegals, legal technologists and legal information technology staff in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China (Hong Kong), Colombia, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Hiring holds steady as adoption spreads

The headline finding is that adoption has not translated into staff reductions. According to IDC, 57.9 percent of respondents said AI has had no impact on their hiring, and more reported increasing hiring at 24.2 percent than decreasing it at 9.2 percent. Use of the technology, by contrast, is widespread: more than 91.0 percent of chief legal officers and more than 80.0 percent of all legal professionals said they use AI.

David Horrigan, discovery counsel and legal education director at the company that commissioned the study, said the 2026 follow-up to a 2024 survey shows AI use in the profession is settled, and that the open question is now how and why legal teams apply it. He said the finding that surprised researchers was that, for most respondents, AI has had no effect on hiring so far, with more adding staff than cutting it.

The data also indicate that billing has not been upended in aggregate. Many observers predicted that faster work would lead clients to demand an end to hourly billing, but the study found no broad shift of that kind reported by respondents. For legal professionals, that combination, heavy tool use alongside stable headcount, suggests AI is being layered onto existing roles rather than replacing them outright.

Judges and governance draw scrutiny

The research also drew on a survey of state court judges conducted with the National Association of Women Judges, alongside the general counsel report produced with FTI Consulting. Together the strands point to growing attention on trust, governance and accountability as legal teams adopt tools that generate research and draft documents. Those themes matter for paralegals, compliance staff and legal operations teams who are often asked to check machine output before it reaches a client or a court.

For people building careers in the field, the findings point to demand for skills that sit alongside the technology rather than compete with it. Verification of AI-generated work, data handling, and the judgment to decide when a tool's output is reliable are becoming part of everyday practice in law firms and in-house departments alike.

What to watch next is whether the picture changes as adoption deepens. The study captures a moment when use is near universal but staffing effects remain muted. Future editions of the general counsel report and follow-up surveys will show whether hiring, billing and training patterns shift as legal teams move from individual tool use to organization-wide programs. The current data offer a baseline: widespread use, limited workforce change, and rising attention to governance.