Practice Specific AI Outperforms General Platforms
Director of Innovation at large law firm on why firms adopt Harvey over Legora
This reveals that legal AI is settling into workflow wedges, not one winning chat platform. In drafting, the product that wins is usually the one built around a narrow job, like redlining commercial contracts or drafting patent applications, with product teams who know which clauses matter, what facts are missing, and which follow up questions change the output from usable to risky.
-
At large firms, even Harvey and Legora are landing as small practice group deployments, not firm wide rollouts. That creates room for specialists to win one workflow at a time, because buyers are already evaluating tools at the practice level rather than choosing a single system for everyone.
-
The strongest specialist pattern is tools embedded where lawyers already work. Spellbook lives inside Microsoft Word and focuses only on contracts, surfacing issues, applying playbooks, and editing with track changes. That is a very different product shape from a general legal chat workspace.
-
The market is already fragmenting this way. Contracts are becoming a wedge for Spellbook, patent drafting is a wedge for Solve Intelligence, and Harvey itself is being pushed toward broader orchestration, search, and cross workflow coverage rather than being best at every drafting task.
From here, general platforms will keep owning broad research, document analysis, and multi tool coordination, while specialists keep taking the highest stakes drafting jobs inside each practice. The firms that win adoption will be the ones that pair a broad platform for common tasks with deeply embedded drafting products for the workflows where precision matters most.