Intimate conference, stale AI talk.
EVOLVE 2026, true to its mission, maintained its identity as a smaller, more intimate conference that encouraged networking and relationships just like its predecessors. That, in and of itself, made for some interesting interactions between attendees, vendors, and even writers like me. Like the late afternoon when a vendor saw me trying to balance carrying a bunch of swag with all my other stuff. She grabbed a bag from an adjoining vendor table and chased me down to give it to me to help. All in all, I would say it was a success and well worth coming back to.
But that’s not to say there weren’t a few things that could have been better.
The Pace: Breathless and Brutal
For example, the conference proceeded at a breathless pace. Three full days of content from morning to night. Even with breaks, the pace was pretty exhausting. That plus the fact that the only formal evening network reception took place after the first day made it seem like a pretty heavy working conference. That’s not necessarily a criticism; people come to conferences to learn and work, so packing a lot of content to enable attendees to get their money’s worth is not necessarily bad. But looking out at the snow-covered Rocky Mountains with little time to enjoy them was a bit of a bummer. It feels like a missed opportunity when the venue offers such scenic distraction.
The Missing Voice: Where Are The Senior Lawyers?
Because the primary ILTA audience is made up of those who serve lawyer business owners, there was an inevitable us-versus-them undercurrent at some sessions. A substantial amount of content was directed toward how attendees could convince the lawyers for whom they work to do what they think the lawyers ought to be doing. How to approach them. How to convince them. How to manipulate them to move from point A to point B. Implicit in this was the suggestion that they know more than the lawyers about what’s good for them. That undercurrent is understandable, occurs at lots of legal tech conferences, and is often well deserved.
But missing from many of these conversations is the senior, experienced lawyer to provide the perspective of what it’s like to practice and the business pressures they face. Granted, there were some lawyer panel presenters, but these were mostly younger lawyers, not equity partners. I know. It’s hard to get these lawyers to take time to speak. But it is nevertheless an often-missing voice in the room. This gap creates a skewed perception of the legal profession’s realities for the IT professionals tasked with guiding its technological future.
The Audience Paradox: A Spectrum of AI Literacy
Of course, having planned large conferences myself, I know how hard it is to connect with an audience with a broad range of experiences and knowledge about things like AI. Some attendees are high up on the learning curve. Some are just learning what ChatGPT is. As a result, it would have been nice to have some skill levels attached to the course descriptions so attendees could better determine whether and what to attend. In addition, assessing content always has to take into account the audience. EVOLVE attendees are mainly IT professionals or other legal professionals and not lawyers. That skews the content that is offered, prioritizing the needs of the implementers over the end-users.
Content: Repetition Over Revelation
But still, I have mixed emotions about the content. Some of it was very good. The opening Zach Abramowitz keynote on which I reported was excellent and framed a lot of ongoing issues with AI. But the closing keynote by a non-legal celebrity was a bit disjointed and missed the mark. In between, I found the content on the AI side a little spotty. But I should quickly point out though that I’m pretty knowledgeable about AI and attend a lot of legal tech conferences. So, I’m a bit jaded. Even so, there did seem to be a lot of repetition of things said at every other conference and too much making the simple complicated.
It also seems we should be beyond talking so much about things like how to prompt and what mundane and repetitive tasks AI can do. We should be beyond talking about how to get general information out of GenAI and doing simple exercises in front of a group. Instead, it’s time we move on toward learning how to get it to do the things that it does the best. We need to be talking more about how GenAI will impact our profession and where it is going. These are the critical questions that need exploring.
Indeed, someone asked me outside the presentations where I thought we would be with AI in three years. That’s a hard question and one I would have loved to hear some experts talk about since it impacts things like long-range planning. It’s easy now to address things like prompt-writing issues. It’s much harder to address future impact and preparation. It reminds me of a humorous paraphrase of the John F. Kennedy quote in his famous going to the moon speech. That speech was a challenge to face and do things that are difficult, like, at the time, a manned mission to the moon. The humorous paraphrase: we do these things not because they are easy but because we think they are easy. This sentiment sadly echoes the AI content at EVOLVE 2026: focusing on the easily demonstrable rather than the complex, impactful future.
Is This The Right Audience for AI Deep Dives?
The audience paradox at EVOLVE 2026 is a persistent challenge for legal tech conferences. While IT professionals and legal support staff are crucial for technology adoption, their primary focus may not always align with the strategic, forward-looking discussions that senior legal practitioners engage in. This leads to a situation where the “how-to” of AI implementation is thoroughly covered, but the “why” and “where-to”—the strategic implications for the profession—are left wanting. It’s like discussing the engine mechanics of a car without ever talking about the destination. The conference’s intimate nature likely amplified this, creating a concentrated group all wrestling with similar, perhaps more tactical, implementation challenges.
What’s Next for Legal AI Conversations?
EVOLVE 2026’s AI content, while earnest, highlights a broader industry struggle: transitioning from introductory AI education to sophisticated strategic dialogue. The repetition of basic prompting techniques and AI capabilities suggests a market still onboarding many users. However, for those already beyond that initial phase, the need for foresight is paramount. Conferences aiming to be at the forefront must curate content that pushes these boundaries, perhaps by segmenting sessions based on AI maturity levels or by actively recruiting voices with long-term vision—even if they’re harder to book. The future of legal AI isn’t in mastering current tools, but in anticipating how those tools will reshape the practice of law itself.
The Human Touch
Despite the critiques, the conference’s commitment to fostering relationships was palpable. The story of the vendor offering a bag to the overloaded writer illustrates the personal connections that larger, more impersonal events often lose. This intimate setting, while sometimes leading to content gaps, cultivates a genuine sense of community. It’s this human element that often makes the difference between an information dump and a truly valuable professional experience.
**
🧬 Related Insights
- Read more: Higbee’s Copyright Extortion Fizzles: A Web Host’s Epic Smackdown
- Read more: Supreme Court to ISPs: You’re Not the Internet’s Copyright Cops
Frequently Asked Questions**
What was the main focus of EVOLVE 2026? EVOLVE 2026 focused on fostering networking and relationships within the legal tech community, alongside providing content on AI and other industry trends.
Was the AI content at EVOLVE 2026 considered advanced? No, the AI content was largely seen as introductory, focusing on basic prompting and general capabilities, with a perceived lack of forward-looking strategic discussion.
What was a recurring criticism of the conference structure? The conference pace was described as too fast and exhausting, with a lack of formal evening networking events after the first day, limiting opportunities to enjoy the venue or connect socially.
