AI is changing more than legal work itself. It is also reshaping how young professionals learn the job. As some of the work that once helped them develop becomes quicker, less common or partly automated, a different question comes into focus: what should they focus on to keep learning and progressing?
In my recruitment work, I am usually asked to find legal professionals with a few years of experience. Employers have traditionally been less likely to call on external recruiters when hiring recent graduates.
Yet I am increasingly hearing from young professionals who are struggling to find a role that genuinely suits them. And not because their profiles are obviously weak. Most have strong academic records, speak several languages and already have worthwhile experience.
I am, of course, looking at this through the eyes of a recruiter, with all the limitations that entails. But this is happening against the backdrop of a much broader shift in the legal profession. AI is not only changing how we work. It is also beginning to change how we learn the job.
For a long time, a large part of legal training was built into the first few years of practice: working through files, comparing clauses, preparing a memo, building an argument, producing a first draft and having it reviewed by someone more experienced.
Those tasks were not always particularly rewarding, but they forced you to read, hesitate, go back, check, organise your thoughts, make mistakes and try again. Doing the work was part of learning the job.
AI is beginning to change that too. Several recent analyses have pointed to the risk that automating work traditionally carried out by juniors may remove some of the opportunities to learn, receive feedback and develop sound professional judgement (Simmons & Simmons, Wolters Kluwer, Thomson Reuters).
So the question is not simply whether AI will mean fewer junior roles. It is also how young legal professionals will learn their craft if some of the steps that used to teach them the job become quicker, less common or partly automated.
Employers and universities will have to adapt, of course. But they are still figuring this out themselves. That makes it even more important for young professionals to take a more active role in their own development.
Use AI, but do not let it do the thinking for you too soon
I do not think students or junior legal professionals should deliberately avoid AI, however understandable their reasons might be. It is already part of legal work and its use will only grow. Wolters Kluwer’s Future Ready Lawyer 2026, based on an international survey of legal professionals, found that 92% of respondents already use at least one AI tool in their day-to-day work.
Learning how to use it therefore matters: knowing what it is good at, understanding its limits and recognising when its output needs particularly careful checking.
But there is also value in not asking AI for the answer straight away. Try the problem yourself first. Work out what the real questions are. Identify the uncertainties. Build your reasoning. Then use AI to challenge it.
That strikes me as far more useful for learning than starting every problem by asking a tool for the solution.
Students seem to recognise that tension themselves. In its Law Student Pulse Survey 2026, conducted among more than 1,800 law students in April 2026, Thomson Reuters found that 72% see AI literacy as an essential professional skill, while 74% believe that relying on it too heavily could weaken the development of their legal skills.
What is the strongest argument against my position? What have I overlooked? Where does my reasoning break down? What question am I not asking? What still needs to be checked? Used that way, AI can become an intellectual sparring partner.
The real danger is not necessarily using AI too much. It is reaching for it too soon, before you have done enough thinking yourself.
Seek out situations where you still have to learn by doing
If some parts of legal work become easier or faster, experiences that put you in real situations become more valuable, not less.
That is one reason I still see internships during university as particularly worthwhile. A placement in a law firm, a company, a notary’s office or an institution gives you exposure to legal practice as it actually happens. You see how a legal question fits into a real matter, how teams work, how experienced professionals approach problems and how practical realities can change what looks like the right answer on paper.
Internships are also a way of building relationships. A student who has done well is no longer simply a CV a few months later. People have seen how that person works, asks questions, interacts and learns. Those experiences often lead to useful contacts, and sometimes directly to a job after graduation.
If you are unsure, the Bar is still an excellent place to learn
The same applies when choosing a first job. If you are not yet sure where you want your career to go, starting at the Bar remains a very strong option.
The first few years in practice force you to deal with things university can never fully reproduce: incomplete information, precise drafting, deadlines, several matters competing for attention, defending a position, dealing with clients and having your work challenged by more experienced lawyers.
That experience is one reason why time at the Bar continues to be valued by many employers. It does not lock you into private practice either. On the contrary, a few years as a lawyer can make a later move in-house much easier.
That does not mean every graduate should become a lawyer. But if you are still unsure which way to go, the Bar is worth serious consideration.
Languages still matter, but they will not necessarily set you apart
In Belgium, and particularly in Brussels, language skills remain hard to ignore. A good command of the other national language still opens plenty of doors. Even a solid professional level — around B2 — can make opportunities available that otherwise would not be.
But there is an important qualification. I now see very strong bilingual and trilingual candidates struggling to find the right first role too. Being multilingual remains a major advantage, but it is not always enough to distinguish you from the field.
And what counts is being able to use those languages when it matters. If your CV says your French or Dutch is “very good”, you need to be comfortable when an interviewer suddenly switches language halfway through the conversation. Employers often test languages during recruitment, and ten years of lessons do not necessarily make someone a confident speaker.
So my advice is simple: practise, and above all, speak.
Keep developing the skills that depend on people
As technology takes on more of the work, genuinely human skills matter more.
Listening properly. Picking up what is left unsaid. Adjusting the way you communicate. Working with others. Persuading without putting people’s backs up. Showing empathy. Building trust. Finding a way forward together.
None of this is new, and it is not only about AI. Younger generations have grown up with more and more communication taking place through social media, messaging and screens. That brings huge benefits, but it does not replace being in the room with other people, where conversations are less predictable and you constantly have to read the situation and adapt.
Some of the best practice may therefore come from experiences with very little to do with law: youth organisations, team sports, artistic activities, student jobs, volunteering, running a project with others or travelling without every detail mapped out in advance.
Not because they make a CV look better. Because they put you in situations where you have to deal with people, find your place, listen, adapt and sometimes make yourself uncomfortable.
Do another degree for what it will teach you, not for the line on your CV
The same principle applies to further study. An LL.M. or another qualification after your master’s can absolutely be worthwhile. Some firms value international academic experience highly. A year abroad can deepen your expertise, improve a language, expose you to another legal system, expand your network and make you more independent.
But another qualification and another year of learning are not necessarily the same thing.
If you want to specialise in intellectual property because you genuinely enjoy the subject, experience another jurisdiction or build expertise in a particular field, the case is easy to make.
Spending another year studying mainly because it looks good on a CV is harder to justify. A better question is: “What will I actually learn, understand better or experience during that year?”
Depending on the answer, an LL.M. may be exactly the right choice. But the better investment might also be a first job, a particularly good internship, time abroad, improving a language or something else entirely.
Learn to see the problem behind the legal question
There is one more habit worth developing early: stepping back and looking at the bigger picture.
With experience, you start asking different questions. Why am I being asked this? What problem is the client or business actually trying to solve? Whose interests are involved? What if the legally perfect solution simply does not work in practice? How much risk is acceptable here?
No one expects a recent graduate to have the judgement of someone who has been practising for fifteen years. But you can start early by developing the habit of looking beyond the first question put in front of you.
And as AI gets better at producing first answers, working out whether you are answering the right question becomes increasingly valuable.
Learning how to learn may matter more than ever
A strong degree, language skills, a good internship, an LL.M. or a first role at an excellent firm all still matter. But it is becoming harder to assume that any of them, on their own, will set you apart.
More importantly, some of the learning that used to happen naturally through junior work may no longer happen quite so automatically. For those starting out now, the ability to keep learning deliberately becomes more important.
That also means knowing something about what you want. My first article explored the role of self-awareness in career choices, and the same question matters here: when time is limited, what is actually worth investing it in — and where are you prepared to compromise?
For earlier generations, much of the learning came with the work. Those starting today may need to take more responsibility for creating those learning opportunities themselves.
Which leaves one question I think is worth asking regularly: if I have a year, a few months or even a few hours a week to get better, what is the best use of that time?
