Should clients get a discount if firms use AI?

What We Covered

* Richard’s 40 years of working with law firms on pricing

* His viral LinkedIn post from January 2026 that sparked debate: a fictional partner’s letter explaining why AI may not mean lower fees - we get into the arguments for and against

* Richard’s view that transparency and benefit-sharing between firms and clients is the only sustainable path forward

* The difference Richard has observed between what clients say they want (lowest price) and what actually drives their buying decisions

* How productised legal services like Littler’s employee classification tool represent a new pricing paradigm

* The “creative destruction” mindset firms need to avoid being disrupted

* Richard’s journey from managing partner to pricing consultant, and the Aderant acquisition of Virtual Pricing Director

Key Takeaways

* Richard believes firms that have invested heavily in AI tools deserve ROI on that investment, not a race to the bottom on fees

* When GCs were asked to prioritize price factors, less than 10% chose “lowest price” as most important

* Richard believes the winning formula is transparent benefit-sharing: if AI reduces delivery cost from £100k to £70k, billing £85k splits the value fairly

* Clients aren’t just buying legal advice. They’re buying security, reassurance, and the firm’s professional indemnity coverage

* If you don’t destroy your own business model, someone else will

* The legal profession’s greatest pricing limitation is lack of confidence. As one senior partner told Richard: “If you don’t think you’re worth it, why should anyone else?”

* Legal work will grow, not shrink. Life and commerce are getting more complex, and AI itself creates new advisory opportunities

* Technology alone won’t transform pricing. Sustainable change requires addressing people, process, and technology together