Artificial intelligence cannot replace the emotional intelligence that is critical to the practice of law, according to the 2025 AI and the Human Factor for In-House Legal Teams Survey Report published by DocJuris.
The survey results revealed that while legal teams are adopting AI to simplify tasks, the human touch remains necessary in relationship building and in leading strategy, judgment, and dealmaking. Thirty-six percent of respondents indicated that AI struggled with persuasion and relationship management; 28 percent said that AI's understanding of business and negotiation context was weak; and 22 percent said AI floundered when asked to identify hidden risks.
All respondents indicated that if two AIs were to negotiate, they would be unable to cultivate relationships and make trade-offs. Sixty-three percent noted that AI either missed, overlooked, or mislabeled contract problems, with 34 percent reporting this as a frequent occurrence.
"AI can redline with precision, flag risks with speed, and draft contracts at scale. But when it comes to negotiation, the human factor remains irreplaceable. True dealmaking requires more than algorithms; it demands emotional intelligence, strategic concession, and an instinct for nuance that only people bring to the table," DocJuris CEO Henal Patel said in a statement.
Fifty-four percent of respondents indicated that strategic pushback or concession is key to negotiation; 49 percent highlighted emotional intelligence and persuasion; and 36 percent emphasized understanding the motivations and goals of the opposing party. None of the respondents believed that AI could improve on this process.
Current AI application
Fifty percent of respondents are using Microsoft Co-Pilot, 34 percent ChatGPT, and 11 percent Gemini. Thirty percent of existing AI users apply it towards clause extraction, compliance checks, or redlining; just 5 percent generated drafts with it. Sixty-five percent of respondents reported being uncertain about AI tools' ability to meet due diligence; thus, they have hesitated on adopting AI for redlining, drafting, or clause checks.
Prompt engineering has become an important legal skill, but just 9 percent of respondents are "very confident" with penning prompts for redlines yielding accurate results. Approximately 53 percent indicated that AI misinterpreted their prompts; 28 percent said they required training; and 9 percent were unaware that prompt writing was a needed skill.
Nonetheless, 82 percent of companies have either already implemented a formal AI governance policy or are developing such a policy.
DocJuris surveyed 360 legal professionals in different industries for the 2025 AI and the Human Factor for In-House Legal Teams Survey Report, which the majority of respondents coming from North America. The Association of Corporate Counsel partnered with DocJuris on the survey.