Defy the Default: Championing Innovation With Curiosity
Where I offer a bite-size reflection on Adam Grant’s idea of rejecting the default and how that mindset can energize lawyers to embrace AI responsibly
So, I’ve been bitten by the Adam Grant bug lately and smitten with his ideas. I think this one, about rejecting the default, translates really well to the legal profession and our challenges with innovation, so I thought I’d explore it in this piece. I hope you like it!
This substack, LawDroid Manifesto, is here to keep you in the loop about the intersection of AI and the law. Please share this article with your friends and colleagues and remember to tell me what you think in the comments below.
In Adam Grant’s book Originals, there’s a fascinating study about internet browsers and job performance. It turned out that people who deliberately downloaded Chrome, rather than sticking with the default (Internet Explorer), tended to be more proactive, curious, and high-performing employees. On the surface, this might seem surprising. How does a simple browser choice predict workplace excellence?
It turns out, it wasn’t the browser itself that caused the improvement. When we look deeper, it becomes clear: these employees chose to deviate from the default, signaling an independence and a willingness to ask: “Is there a better way?”
Today, lawyers face a similar moment of decision: remain within the “default browser” they received in law school, or step into an era where technology, particularly AI, offers an entirely different approach. In the spirit of Grant’s observation, this is a clarion call to reject the default mindset in legal practice. By doing so, we don’t just install new software; we open ourselves to novel possibilities for better serving our clients and society.
Traditional Law Practice as Default Browser
In many law firms, especially those steeped in tradition, the “default browser” is a mentality that says, “We do things the way we’ve always done them.” Junior associates learn the firm’s established processes. The methods might feel clunky or outdated, like using Internet Explorer with buggy behavior and security patches. But it’s what’s installed, so that’s what they use. If you’ve ever heard a well-meaning senior partner say, “We don’t use that new technology here…,” then you know the power of the default.
Adam Grant’s insight points to something deeper: Rejecting the default is not about being contrarian for its own sake. Rather, it’s about harnessing curiosity and initiative. If you install Chrome, you have asked (perhaps unconsciously), “Do I really need to stick with what was handed to me?” This question is the beginning of deeper exploration and innovation. And for lawyers, that same question, “Is there a better way?,” is the cornerstone of evolving your practice as technology shifts around us.
Is Generative AI a Better Way?
Generative AI tools promise faster contract review, more insightful research, and even automated first drafts of briefs and memoranda. Yet, many lawyers remain on the fence. Some worry about confidentiality and data security, others about the technology’s reliability. All valid concerns. But if these concerns merely default us back to the manual, time-draining processes of old, we miss out on a revolution that can help us serve clients more effectively.
The paradox is that many attorneys pride themselves on being problem-solvers and risk managers. Yet in clinging to familiar processes, they become risk avoiders instead of risk managers. Staying in the safe lane of tradition can feel like choosing Microsoft Explorer because it’s familiar. “Nobody gets fired for buying IBM,” right? But as the browser example suggests, that very comfort might come at the cost of creativity, agility, and, ultimately, competitiveness.
The Growth Mindset vs. The Fixed Mindset
Psychologist Carol Dweck’s concept of the “growth mindset” and “fixed mindset” can help us see why some lawyers leap at innovation while others resist. If you have a growth mindset, you see professional skills as fluid, improvable through learning and effort. If you have a fixed mindset, you see them as static traits: either you “get” technology or you don’t.
When it comes to AI, lawyers with a growth mindset are willing to experiment, adopt new tools, and push the boundaries of their practice. They’ll consider generative AI not just for eDiscovery or contract analysis, but for tasks like client intake, knowledge management, or even strategic case forecasting. They’ll ask, Can AI help me predict settlement outcomes? Can it identify the crux of an issue faster than manual review? The key is curiosity, not blind faith in AI or novelty for novelty’s sake.
Conversely, those with a fixed mindset might dismiss the technology as “not ready for prime time yet” or claim that AI tools “aren’t for serious lawyers.” Or, worse yet, they may conclude that lawyers that use AI are deficient as lawyers in some way. In so doing, they might be unknowingly self-selecting out of the next wave of legal innovation, much like those who never bothered to change their default browser despite a world of better options.
Nurturing a No-Default Mindset
Importantly, not accepting the default is both a choice and a habit, one that can be actively cultivated. Psychologists refer to “cognitive flexibility” as our ability to shift thinking patterns and adapt to new situations. This flexibility isn’t an inborn trait; it’s a muscle that grows through deliberate practice.
The Power of Intentional Choice
James Clear, in his book Atomic Habits, emphasizes how the small, consistent choices we make each day form the bedrock of our behavior. Every time you opt to try a new tool or process, you reinforce a mindset of possibility rather than limitation. Think of it like building “mental muscle memory”: each decision to explore an alternative to the default approach strengthens your capacity for innovative thinking.
Exercises to Strengthen the Habit
Daily Default Audit
Spend five minutes each morning identifying one default you accept without question. It could be as simple as how you organize your emails or the templates you routinely use for drafting. Ask: “Could I do this differently or more efficiently?” Even if you discover the default still works best, you’ll have sharpened your ability to question the norms of your own behavior.Innovation Journaling
Keep a short log of moments throughout the day when you face a process or task that feels tedious or outdated. Write down any quick ideas, no matter how far-fetched, for how it could be improved. This habit primes your mind to spot friction and think creatively about solutions.Collaborative “No Default” Discussions
Encourage your team to hold a monthly or quarterly meeting specifically to discuss “process ruts,” where are you coasting on old assumptions? By making it a collective practice, you reduce the stigma or fear that some might feel when critiquing established methods.
By deliberately choosing to question the routine, we create an environment where innovation doesn’t just happen by accident but becomes a thoughtful exercise and embedded in the firm’s culture.
Small Steps, Big Shifts
Transitioning your firm into a more AI-driven operation doesn’t need to be a light-switch change. Start with low-stakes tasks, basic research assistance for instance, and gauge the results. If you see tangible benefits, expand the usage. If something fails, treat it like a pilot project: glean the lessons and improve the approach.
We can think of this incremental adoption as “customizing your new browser,” installing a single extension at a time. You don’t have to overhaul your entire technology infrastructure overnight. Instead, pick one or two pinch points in your workflow, such as the client intake process or the endless production during discovery, and see if an AI tool can streamline it.
Overcoming the Barriers
Of course, lawyers are trained to see pitfalls. Data privacy, client confidentiality, malpractice liability. These concerns are real, and ignoring them would be irresponsible. But “rejecting the default” doesn’t mean tossing caution to the wind. It means asking: “Is there a better way to handle risk while still embracing innovation?”
Confidentiality: Many AI vendors are building secure, on-premises or private cloud solutions specifically for law firms. Asking the right questions about data encryption and storage is akin to deciding which “browser version” to trust.
Reliability: Generative AI may produce “hallucinations” or inaccurate results. But careful training, quality control, and validation can mitigate errors. Lawyers already rely on associates who, let’s face it, can err or misinterpret a case. We adapt, supervise, and refine. We can do the same with AI.
Ethics and Professional Responsibility: A host of bar associations are weighing in on AI use. Staying updated and actively participating in shaping best practices can help lawyers innovate ethically.
The biggest barrier is rarely the technology itself; it’s the reluctance to shift a well-worn workflow. Yet, as Adam Grant demonstrated with browser choice, the difference between the best performers and the rest isn’t raw intelligence (or event the tool itself), it’s the willingness to challenge the status quo and think differently.
Taking the Leap: The Cost of Doing Nothing
In 1995, ignoring an internet browser choice was a trivial matter. But in 2025 and beyond, ignoring the possibilities of AI could mean losing a competitive edge. Clients are becoming more tech-savvy. They will expect faster response times, more accurate insights, and greater transparency into their matters. Firms that don’t adapt risk being perceived as inefficient, outdated, or even exploitative if they continue to bill for hours that might be drastically reduced through automation.
Remember, doing nothing is also a choice. Sticking to the default might feel safer, but as the world changes, that “safe” choice morphs into a liability. From a purely economic standpoint, you pay for every hour an associate spends wading through hundreds of documents. A well-deployed AI solution might save you thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, over the lifetime of a large litigation or corporate transaction.
Closing Thoughts
The lawyer who refuses to explore AI’s potential is no different from the employee who never bothers to switch from Internet Explorer. The problem isn’t lack of intelligence or skill; it’s a reluctance to challenge the assumptions baked into our day-to-day tools. By recognizing that we can reject the default, and that doing so signals initiative, curiosity, and grit, we open doors to a more innovative legal practice.
It starts with a simple step: Ask if there’s a better way.
And the answer doesn’t have to be AI. This isn't about technology for technology's sake; it's about reconnecting with our fundamental purpose: delivering exceptional value and service to those who depend on our counsel. The choice we face as legal professionals isn't simply whether to adopt AI, it's whether we'll remain architects of our profession's future or passive observers as change happens around us.
Just as no one mourns Internet Explorer's demise, few will sympathize with firms that cling to outdated methods while their competitors evolve. The question isn't whether legal practice will change, it's who will lead that change. By rejecting the default and actively choosing innovation, we don't just install a better browser; we write a better future for our profession, our clients, and ultimately, for justice itself.
In a profession rooted in precedent, refusing to settle for “the way things have always been done” might just be the most defiant and powerful choice you’ll ever make.
Many thanks to Adam Grant for the inspiration from his book Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World, which I think should be required reading for lawyers.
By the way, did you know that I now offer a daily AI news update? You get 5 🆕 news items and my take on what it all means, delivered to your inbox, every weekday.
Subscribe to the LawDroid AI Daily News and don’t miss tomorrow’s edition:
LawDroid AI Daily News, is here to keep you up to date on the latest news items and analysis about where AI is going, from a local and global perspective. Please share this edition with your friends and colleagues and remember to tell me what you think in the comments below.
If you’re an existing subscriber, you can read the daily news here. I look forward to seeing you on the inside. ;)
Cheers,
Tom Martin
CEO and Founder, LawDroid
 | A guest post by
|