Key takeaways:

• • • Commercial awareness is a group goal 鈥� This must be a team capability and not just the GC’s responsibility.

    • Being “in the room” is critical 鈥� As standard practice, being present when decisions are made 鈥� like in the boardroom 鈥� helps position the legal function as a strategic partner rather than an emergency contact.

    • The keys to enabling the business 鈥� Strategic enablement means understanding business objectives and finding solutions to make them happen.

A Chief Legal Officer at a software company had a revealing interview question for the internal candidates who were seeking a senior role: “What’s your favorite product that we make, and what value does it give our customers?”

Many struggled. Some couldn’t answer on the spot. Others sounded like they were merely reciting the company website. Those who succeeded spoke easily and authentically about customer value, showing that they thought about the business regularly, not just when legal issues arose.

The message was clear: In order to enable the business, you need to know it as well as the business knows itself.

In this second part of our series on the “Four Spinning Plates” model, which frames the General Counsels鈥� evolving responsibilities as:

1. 1. 1. delivering effective advice
      2. operating efficiently
      3. protecting the business, and
      4. enabling strategic ambitions.

This article focuses on the Enable plate.

Building commercial muscle across the entire team

The above story about the CLO鈥檚 interviews reveals the uncomfortable truth that lawyers can be proficient in their legal skills yet disconnected from the business they serve. They know contract law but not what makes customers choose their company’s products or services. They understand regulatory compliance but not the competitive dynamics that are shaping strategic decisions within the company. And this gap doesn’t just limit individual careers; it prevents legal departments from becoming true strategic enablers.

Commercial awareness isn’t just the GC’s responsibility 鈥� every team member needs to understand the company’s products, its customers, strategic objectives, and values. Everyone should be able to articulate not just what the company does, but why it matters to customers and how it creates competitive advantage.

For many corporate legal departments, this cultural shift requires deliberate efforts to help lawyers understand the commercial context of their work, create opportunities for them to engage directly with business functions, and make commercial acumen a clear expectation for career advancement.

One GC shifted their team members from a stay in your lane mentality to one in which they saw themselves strategic advisors. The GC did this by redefining excellence as not just providing technically sound legal advice but also offering a point of view about how the business develops and grows. Now, lawyers are welcomed at every meeting, whether or not there’s a legal issue on the agenda. Legal team members strive to know the business as well as anyone and identify issues proactively

Being in the room as standard, not emergency contact

There’s a difference between being called in when there’s a crisis and being present as strategy develops. When the legal team only appears during emergencies, relationships remain transactional. However, when legal has a regular presence in strategic discussions, it builds trust as business partners can see how legal thinking sharpens strategy, identifies opportunities others may miss, and helps the organization make better-informed decisions. Then, engagement becomes organic as leaders naturally seek out legal input because the relationship already exists.

One GC described their department as focused on enhancing commercial performance, not just mitigating risk. This means developing a refined understanding of competing risks alongside opportunities and making strategic bets informed by business goals rather than by defaulting to the most conservative position.

Many GCs aspire to have a seat at the table but aren鈥檛 yet invited into strategic planning. However, there are ways to start building that level of involvement, including initiating cross functional meetings, asking to observe other department meetings, and leading technology and process improvements that showcase legal’s forward thinking.

Of course, better integration into the overall business creates its own challenges 鈥� as the in-house legal team becomes more approachable and visible, requests will increase and demand must be managed. As one GC put it, “the reward for good work is more work.” That鈥檚 why the most effective GCs must find the balance across all four plates by being accessible enough to be valuable and structured enough to be sustainable.

From Department of No to Department of How

Being a strategic enabler doesn’t mean saying Yes to everything. It means legal’s voice is sought out by business leaders and thus, carries weight. Rather than automatically saying No and explaining the risks of a business initiative, effective GCs ask Why? and then make an effort to understand objectives and find safer paths to yes that balance risk with ambition.

When regulatory changes created opportunities for an energy company to build pipeline infrastructure, the company鈥檚 GC ensured leadership understood all facets of the durability of those regulatory changes before committing billions of dollars. Regulatory shifts were likely to be contested, which meant that permits granted today could be overturned years later, leaving the company with unusable infrastructure and lost investment. By helping the business think through these scenarios, the legal department enabled an informed strategic decision, rather than a reactive one.

This mindset shows up in everyday legal work too. A GC at a fast-moving technology company described their focus as: “Helping evolve our contracts to keep up with the strategies or keep up with what the company is doing.” Rather than treating every new business model as requiring completely new contractual frameworks, the legal team modifies existing approaches to accommodate new risks without becoming “too intrusive on the business” or creating “weeks and weeks of negotiating.” This agility demonstrates how seemingly routine legal work 鈥� such as contract negotiation 鈥� has significant business impact when approached with a commercial lens.

Moving forward: Strategic enablement as ongoing practice

As complexity and change intensify, the GC’s role as strategic enabler is crucial. To jumpstart this process, GCs should assess their department in key areas, asking:

• • • How does senior leadership view legal? As a strategic partner, a necessary gatekeeper, or an emergency contact?
    • How integrated is your department into business operations? Are representatives from the in-house legal team present as strategy develops, or are they called in to review decisions already made?
    • How well is your team building commercial muscle? Can everyone on your team succinctly describe what your business does, who its customers are, where the company is headed, and what its values are?

GCs who can build commercial muscle across their teams, maintain consistent presence in business decisions, and approach challenges with a mindset of enabling solutions will become indispensable strategic leaders that help their organizations thrive.

You can learn more about how the 成人VR视频 Institute’s Value Alignment toolkit allows you to assess your legal department’s strategic positioning, here

Plan for change

Before any decisions are made, however, corporate leaders need to understand that merely purchasing the latest technology does not guarantee success. That鈥檚 because in the context of a corporation, technological change also means cultural change. Introducing a new technological ecosystem means changing how people work, what roles they play, the skills they need, the procedures they follow, and many other variables, including those involving budget allocations and personnel shifts. Additional challenges also come from structural inertia, competing priorities, and cultural resistance to change.

Failing to plan for this inevitable turbulence all but ensures that a company鈥檚 technological investment will be squandered, and that the expected boost in productivity and performance will not materialize. Leaders and managers need to shift their thinking under these circumstances 鈥� before any new technological solution is purchases and pursued 鈥� because the speed at which technology is advancing today requires a more aggressively proactive approach to management. No one can afford to be passive anymore 鈥� the consequences of stasis are simply too dire.

The goal of moving toward a proactive approach

That said, technology transitions are the perfect time to realign a tax department鈥檚 strategies and goals with the vision of the larger organization, and to initiate cultural and procedural changes that will serve everyone better in the long run. Managed well, these changes can also help tax departments re-position themselves within the organization and help assert the tax function as one that can deliver higher levels of value and leadership.

If your organization is still struggling to evolve technologically, however, don鈥檛 panic. Few corporate tax departments have truly mastered their technological universe. In fact, according to the recently released听2025 Corporate Tax Technology Report听from the 成人VR视频 Institute and Tax Executives Institute, more than half of corporate tax professionals still describe their department鈥檚 relationship with technology as 鈥渃haotic鈥� or 鈥渞eactive,鈥� whereas roughly one-third (35%) said they thought their departments had reached the 鈥減roactive鈥� stage of the technology maturity curve, in which the investment in planning, training, and technology really starts to pay off.

In other words, it is not too late to nudge the needle toward proactive, no matter where a company is on its technological journey. Indeed, most companies are in between phases, trying to get the most out of the technology they already have while simultaneously planning for 鈥� or actively upgrading to 鈥� new technologies.

Vital steps for a smooth transition

In general, however, corporate tax departments should take the following steps to incorporate new technologies in ways that advance departmental goals and establish a proactive approach to tax management and compliance. These ways include:

Developing a strategic technology plan 鈥� Piecemeal, ad hoc solutions (reactive by nature) will only guarantee frustration and failure. To get on the right track, tax department leaders should develop a strategic plan for how the new technology will be used and why. The overall goal of such a plan should be to articulate precisely how the new technology will serve the department and the organization. Some questions to consider are:

• • • How will the technology help align the department鈥檚 goals with the company鈥檚 goals?
    • What tasks should be automated 鈥� and which ones shouldn鈥檛?
    • What additional skills will employees need to use the technology effectively?
    • How will the technology create process efficiencies and improve compliance?
    • What additional capabilities will the technology give the department?
    • How will those new capabilities be utilized or leveraged?

Creating a technology roadmap 鈥� Once a strategy has been developed, it鈥檚 essential to create a technology roadmap 鈥� a detailed, step-by-step breakdown of the implementation process that explains how the project will unfold, the timeline, and what to expect along the way. Take into consideration that tech transitions don鈥檛 happen instantly; they take time, so thoroughness is a virtue here.

Placing someone in charge 鈥� According to our Corporate Tax Technology report, only about half of all companies have an individual in place who is formally empowered to guide the overall tech strategy for their tax department. Don鈥檛 make that mistake, because leadership is essential for any tech transition. Ideally, the person in charge, whatever their title, should have both tech experience and deep knowledge of the company鈥檚 larger operations. Experience and training in change management is also a plus, because tech transitions aren鈥檛 just about the technology. Indeed, those who neglect to address the impact that technological change is going to have on the workforce are missing half the picture.

Communicating early and often 鈥� It cannot be stressed enough how important it is to keep open lines of communication with tax teams and the larger network of stakeholders throughout the organization who may be affected by a new technological ecosystem. Within the tax department, it鈥檚 important to articulate a vision of the future, one that explains how job roles are likely to change, how the department鈥檚 processes and workflows will be affected, what performance expectations will look like after the transition, and how the department will adapt to better serve the needs of the larger organization.

Training for the technological future 鈥� While most large companies (those with more than $1 billion in annual revenue) have technology training programs, smaller companies tend to struggle in this area. However, technology training isn鈥檛 just about teaching people to use software tools effectively, it鈥檚 also about continuously upgrading people鈥檚 skills so that they can make more productive use of these tools going forward. Training, in other words, is the best way to ensure that the organization gets the most out of its technology investment.

Launching pilot projects 鈥� Communication and training provide a solid theoretical foundation for technology usage, but nothing beats hands-on experience. A great way to ease into the future is to develop pilot projects that allow people to apply new tech tools and discover for themselves what fresh capabilities they have at their fingertips. Pilot projects can also help troubleshoot departmental operations that may be impacted by the technology and give team members the opportunity to brainstorm potential solutions.

Toward a more proactive approach to tax

At the top of the corporate food chain, investing in a new technological ecosystem is about improving productivity and profits. At the departmental level, however, the above preparations lay the groundwork for a much more dynamic tax function that leverages new technology to potentially redefine its role within the organization.

Once the technology is in place, tax professionals are essentially entering a brave new world 鈥� one in which it is possible to guarantee compliance, mitigate almost all risk, and drastically reduce the chance of damaging audits and penalties. A much larger universe of tax data also gives departments the power to analyze supply-chain risks and inefficiencies, develop new tax strategies, and scout the horizon for new opportunities to save money and create value for the business.

These are just a few of the benefits of a more proactive approach to tax management, but only those tax department leaders who plan and prepare properly will be positioned to get the most out of the tech-driven future of corporate tax management.

You can download a copy of the recently released听2025 Corporate Tax Technology Report听from the 成人VR视频 Institute and Tax Executives Institute here

This gap allows a degree of flexibility on how companies present their performance around environmental, social & governance (ESG) issue, with the likelihood that they might omit certain information and present a more favorable image. This has sparked significant public debate and concerns with so-called greenwashing.

British-based consumer goods conglomerate Unilever that has been a vocal advocate for sustainable business practices particularly with their Sustainable Living Brands, which has been reported to in terms of growth. However the company is now into greenwashing, a situation that has raised questions about the accuracy of environmental claims made to consumers. Further, 53% of investors about the scarcity of essential ESG data that is crucial for assessing an organization鈥檚 sustainability level, according to a survey from BlackRock.

reported that 81% of Scope 3 emissions reside in the two most material Scope 3 categories 鈥� purchased goods and services; and use of sold products and capital goods 鈥� across a 4,000-company universe of downstream leased assets impacting greenhouse gas emissions the most.

Key challenges in the supply chain

The challenges within the corporate supply chain remain and are likely to worsen as jurisdictions around the world tighten their scrutiny. Some of these challenges include:

• • • Supply chain transparency 鈥� Collecting ESG data has posed significant challenges for companies operating globally, especially given their complex network of multiple tiers of suppliers and decentralized production processes. The absence of adequate oversight and visibility within the supply chain represents reputational risk for the reporting companies.
    • Supplier compliance and monitoring 鈥� Ensuring supplier compliance with ESG standards is contingent upon comprehensive knowledge of third-party entities involved in supply chain operations. However, the lack of visibility into supplier practices and the absence of monitoring mechanisms in global supply chains in which suppliers operate in diverse regulatory environments, has made ensuring adherence to ESG standards even more complex. More than ever, companies struggle to implement consistent oversight practices across different regions.
    • Quantifying environmental impact 鈥� Accurately measuring and reporting the environmental impact of supply chain activities is crucial for informed decision-making and sustainability initiatives. However, quantifying environmental metrics such as carbon emissions and resource usage across geographically dispersed operations presents significant challenges. The intricate nature of global supply chain activities, coupled with variations in production processes and regional regulations, complicates the standardization of environmental impact assessment methodologies.

AI likely to ease data challenges

While admittedly ESG management presents a complex challenge, it also creates an opportunity for companies to make strategic investments in cutting-edge technologies with artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI to advance their enterprise value. AI-driven technology solutions can address many data challenges, including:

• • • Enabling global multilingual data analysis 鈥� AI algorithms can process information in multiple languages and provide translation, enabling organizations to analyze data from various sources around the world. These algorithms can be trained to detect adverse media news related to a company or its global supply chain partners, which could indicate unethical practices, including forced labor issues, sanctions violations, and other illicit practices.
    • Detecting data issues 鈥� AI and machine learning can analyze vast datasets that anticipate possible disruptions or can pinpoint areas of inefficiency. Companies employing diverse ESG standards can benefit from AI’s ability to detect anomalies, data gaps, and predict relevant metrics based on a custom set of inputs, such as various policies across regions. This method leads to a more accurate ESG reporting based on reliable information.
    • Automating alerts 鈥� Performing due diligence involves a labor-intensive process that relies on manual efforts and extensive human reviews. AI interaction enables easy customization of to monitor various changes related to ESG factors. For instance, instead of manually re-running reports yearly, a dashboard could flag changes in third-party data since the last check, making it easier for companies to stay updated on new potential risks and opportunities.

Recommended actions

While AI may address many data challenges, the fundamentals of selecting a tool through the evaluation processes of potential tools do not change. Indeed, a cross-functional team from IT, operations managers, sustainability leaders, and others may be necessary to partner in the selection of the tool with specific priority on several key factors, such as:

• • • Understanding ESG goals and data pain points 鈥� To effectively analyze how AI could address an organization鈥檚 data challenges, the first step is to address reporting needs to more thoroughly understand the company’s specific ESG goals and information gaps. This involves identifying relevant ESG areas that are most pertinent to the company鈥檚 operations and industry.
    • Defining requirements to address problem areas 鈥� To make sense of the vast range of technology options and to understand where to focus resources, companies must outline functional requirements and understand in detail how the technology address those requirements. And once the selection is complete, companies should perform a cost-benefit analysis of the chosen solutions to quantify the long-term return of investment.
    • Performing a trial run 鈥� Before full implementation, companies should conduct pilot tests to understand effectiveness and challenges, including how new solutions seamlessly integrate into existing systems and processes, to ensure minimal disruption. Companies should also provide necessary training to key stakeholders in the organization not only on the technical aspect but also on the broader context of ESG reporting.

Additionally, it is necessary for the company to iterate and improve based on the feedback it receives and the experiences it has. Indeed, companies should be prepared to adapt as ESG standards, investor expectations, and technological advancements evolve. It is also important to make sure that the tool has the ability to provide an audit trail of the data journey from raw data to that which is reported to government regulators.

By taking these actions, company leaders in this area will alleviate these headaches around supply chain compliance and ESG reporting, helping to improve efficiency and promote cross-functional collaboration while getting crucial data from unprocessed into a reportable format.

Regardless of your focus, effective change management is critical to a successful digital transformation. So, how can we demystify change management for various members of the legal profession and provide a framework for those in disparate roles to communicate effectively?

One way might be to examine a case study. Let鈥檚 imagine a need where a law firm or legal software company desired to build a matter management system for a client whose legal issues are truly unique, thus requiring either significant modifications to an off-the-shelf software product or a customized software build.

As we embark on this journey, we will identify three main phases of our case study: Plan, Build and Deploy. We will also define the key change management aspects of each phase as we create a customized matter management platform.

Plan

Nadine Ezzie: Ken, from your viewpoint on the technical side of the shop, what are the key change management points to be addressed during the planning phase of a legal tech build out?

Kenneth Jones: The initial phase of a project is one where business requirements are defined. Documenting these in a manner both technologists and legal professionals can comprehend is critical. Defining other essential elements of a project 鈥� such as the need to migrate over legacy data, reporting, data interfaces, and necessary workflow 鈥� is also vital at this stage.

Defining project scope, deliverables, timing (often in stages), and cost are elements of this project phase as well. Specifically as it relates to matter management, defining data points needed in areas such as legal venue, plaintiff information and allegations, the tracking of matter milestones and key documents, and company specific facilities and hierarchies required for reporting are all part of the mix.

In your legal experience, Nadine, what should happen next?

Nadine Ezzie: I find this period to be the most critical when ensuring a successful legal tech transformation or adoption. Attorneys, by our nature, are trained to mitigate risk where possible. Persuading us to change our ways is not easy, but also not impossible. Communication and transparency is key.

Communicating early not only about the scope of the project but also about how it ties into the overall business objectives of the firm or organization can foster greater adoption. I also advise tapping a legal champion of the project. This is someone from the legal team, usually mid- to senior-level, who is open to digital transformation, understands the value it can bring, and will help champion the project to other team members. This last part is critical as these are the users who will actually use the system and enter the relevant data (such as matters, report creation, processing tasks, etc.)

Having your ultimate end-users not only understand the value proposition of the project but also appreciate how it will improve their ability to perform their roles can decrease any sentiments of threat or reluctance to change. Remember, the less surprises, the better.

Defining end goals for a matter management project 鈥� for example, lowering the overall cost of a litigation by x% per year, or reducing the average settlement by y% 鈥� also are excellent approaches for defining the parameters of a large-scale project.

Build

Nadine Ezzie: Now, it鈥檚 time to build the solution 鈥� so, we鈥檙e in your wheelhouse, Ken. What change management considerations should be kept in mind during this phase?

Kenneth Jones: One vital element in this phase is transforming business requirements into a data model with functional specifications. One best practice during the build phase is to construct the new system, in short-cycle build phases often known as chewable bites, and offer frequent visibility to end-users in order to solicit incremental feedback.

Sharing system mockups is a great way to ask users if all the data points associated with a matter are being tracked or if reports created by the system will meet the needs of the client. In our example, this might mean sharing the matter-entry process flow and field list with users prior to moving on to reporting needs to ensure that the required litigation data points are integrated into the system.

And speaking of reporting, reviewing what is created with end-users for purposes like projecting legal costs for future years, filing insurance claims, or assisting with outside counsel evaluation and review processes in an iterative manner makes good sense, especially as reports are built. Indeed, it鈥檚 important to review not only the report content, but also the format (PDF, Excel, etc.) and the ability to export or transfer data to other systems. It鈥檚 also critical to get this feedback from those in various job functions, such as legal professionals, attorneys, or executives rather than just the technologists.

In the technical area, change management in the build phase also should include code repositories, reviewing code changes, and a formal test plan to better implement system changes.

Deploy

Nadine Ezzie: This is the phase we鈥檝e all been waiting for. I find that deployment in phases works best for increased adoption. I work with teams to identify which part of their existing process will be modified first, and then set a time frame for training and questions. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

End-users need to know they have an advocate and support system during this time of deployment that can relate to this time of change. It鈥檚 also important to tailor messages to different workers through the process chain. For example, those in legal operations who enter and maintain data would get a different message than those in leadership roles who probably never log into a system but use data reports to project litigation impact and cost.

Well-designed and user-friendly support materials help tremendously as well. Make it so these materials are easily accessible so end-users can refer to them easily once live training support has ended.

Kenneth Jones: Clearly, a significant element of deployment is training end-users. They need to know how to address client questions about matters, efficient data update strategies, generating litigation reports, etc. On the tech front, using issue-tracking with tagging to categorize development needs and writing technical documentation are strong practices to follow.

Conclusion

Change management is an intricate process with many flavors 鈥� those coordinated by attorneys, legal professionals, or core technology professionals will likely show those differences.

The better those in the legal profession do, the more likely the result of our case study will be improved outcomes and lower costs that鈥檚 powered by the new technology which was successfully adopted, used, and even appreciated.