BLG is putting artificial intelligence at the centre of its legal innovation strategy.
The national law firm recently created a partner-level role dedicated to innovation and artificial intelligence, appointing Laura Levine as Partner, Innovation and Artificial Intelligence. For Levine, the move signals that AI is no longer being treated as a conventional legal technology project, but as a core strategic capability that affects how legal advice is delivered, risk is managed, and lawyers collaborate with clients.
In a discussion with LegalTech.ca, Levine said BLG’s approach is rooted in senior leadership, firmwide governance, and practical application across practice groups. She emphasized that the firm is focused on moving from experimentation to measurable client impact, while maintaining professional judgment, data security, and clear guardrails.
Levine, who continues to practise in securities and capital markets, said staying close to client work helps keep BLG’s AI strategy practical, especially in highly regulated, time-sensitive areas of law. As Canadian firms move at uneven speeds on AI adoption, she argues that leadership alignment, controlled experimentation, and strong governance will separate those moving decisively from those still waiting for certainty.
BLG created a Partner-level role dedicated to AI and innovation—what does that signal about how the firm views AI compared to traditional legal tech initiatives?
LL: The creation of a partner-level role is a deliberate signal that we view artificial intelligence as a core strategic capability and not just a technology project. Traditional legal tech has often focused on efficiency or infrastructure. By contrast, AI is affecting how we deliver advice, manage risk, and collaborate with our clients. This shift requires that we better integrate the practice of law with the operational components of the law firm. This integration requires senior leadership attention and by elevating this role, we are ensuring that our AI strategy is driven by the rigorous standards of legal practice, rather than treating the practice of law as an afterthought to the technology.
Your role sits close to firm leadership and spans multiple practice groups—how does that change the way AI strategy actually gets implemented inside BLG?
LL: Direct access to firm leadership means that BLG can move from pilot to adoption to realized value in an efficient, intentional and systematic way. Use cases are better aligned with firm priorities and consistent governance standards can be set quickly and evolve with real-time needs. Spanning multiple practice groups also means that solutions are designed for reusability and scale. While we still optimize custom workflows for specific matters, this broad view allows us to take an efficiency gained in one practice area and scale it immediately to benefit clients and matters across the entire firm.
BLG has been exploring generative AI internally for some time—what has moved from experimentation into real, client-facing impact?
LL: BLG’s journey with generative AI started a number of years ago, but what has really pushed the Firm to work toward client-facing impact is our clients’ expectation that we continually deliver increased value. In the beginning, many clients shared concerns about data security and confidentiality, with some imposing restrictions on the use of Gen AI in our services. More recently, however, client expectations have shifted as they see how we can enhance our legal work through the responsible use of technology. This shift has accelerated our move from experimentation to impact as we continuously integrate Gen AI into our defined workflows with clear guardrails. Rather than positioning AI as a standalone product, we focus on how it augments lawyers’ work product and improves speed, consistency, and transparency for clients, while preserving professional judgment.
There’s a strong emphasis on co-developing AI solutions with clients—what does that collaboration look like in practice, and what are clients actually asking for right now?
LL: Clients are increasingly looking to us not only for our legal expertise, but for guidance on implementing AI within their own operations. This allows us to deepen our partnerships with clients by sharing the practical lessons learned from our own AI journey.
In practice, co-development starts with a deep understanding of the client’s risk profile, operational pressures, and regulatory environment. Our clients are less interested in novelty and more focused on reliability, explainability, and governance. They want solutions that integrate seamlessly into existing processes, help manage compliance risk and produce insights they can operationalize. We also bring an understanding that Gen AI is not the solution to every friction point. Sometimes an existing process is just as effective, and our focus remains firmly on deploying the right tool for the right job.
BLG leadership has framed AI as both a governance imperative and a client opportunity—where do you see the biggest risks firms need to manage today?
LL: Our biggest risk is forgetting that, ultimately, a law firm’s number one resource is its people. At a large, national firm like BLG, we have hundreds of professionals executing diverse and complex work across the country. That scale makes AI governance incredibly important. We need to manage data security, the limitations of our tools and the risk of uncritical reliance on outputs – all of which ultimately carry reputational risks. Because the technology and our people are constantly adapting, treating AI governance as a living framework, rather than a static policy, is essential.
You continue to practice in securities and capital markets—how does staying close to client work influence how you approach AI and innovation?
LL: Securities and capital markets work is time-sensitive, disclosure-driven, and heavily regulated which creates an ideal stress test for AI tools. Maintaining an active practice helps to anchor our AI initiatives in real client needs and provides me with the opportunities to test tools and solutions in real time. This is a lesson I learned many years ago when I started working in knowledge management. Maintaining this hybrid role ensures a level of practicality and pragmatism in decision making, allowing you to be your own best critic. It also provides me with a distinct type of credibility when encouraging other lawyers across the firm to try something new.
Across the Canadian legal market, adoption still feels uneven—what separates firms that are moving decisively on AI from those that are still hesitating?
LL: The differentiator is less about technology access and more about leadership alignment and risk tolerance. Firms moving decisively tend to invest early in governance, training, and change management. Those hesitating often wait for perfect certainty, which is unrealistic in such a fast-evolving area. The key is controlled experimentation with clear accountability and a willingness to test securely, learn rapidly and pivot when needed.
Looking ahead, how will you measure whether BLG’s AI strategy is working—what does success actually look like in terms of client value or firm performance?
LL: Ultimately, success is defined by measurable improvements in the client experience. Internally, it means AI is used thoughtfully and confidently, supported by rigorous governance. Externally, it means clients view BLG as a trusted advisor not only on the law, but on how AI reshapes legal risk and opportunity.
If your firm is charting its own path in AI, innovation, or legal operations — and you’d like to share what you’ve learned — we’d be honoured to feature your voice here on LegalTech.ca. Contact us at rob@legaltech.ca or DM via LinkedIn to start the conversation.