Mergers and acquisitions are high-stakes endeavors requiring meticulous due diligence to assess risks, opportunities, and compliance. Traditionally, this process has been labor-intensive, involving teams of lawyers poring over contracts, financials, and regulatory documents. The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) has revolutionized this landscape, offering tools that enhance speed, accuracy, and cost-efficiency. AI platforms use natural language processing and machine learning to analyze vast datasets, transforming due diligence into a more streamlined process. However, AI isn’t a magic bullet. It can miss nuances, introduce errors, or fail to grasp context, which is why human judgment remains vital. AI’s limitations—such as restricted data access, overreliance on training data, and susceptibility to inaccuracies—necessitate human oversight. Business teams, in partnership with M&A attorneys, should embrace a hybrid approach to due diligence, blending AI’s efficiency with legal expertise to create a powerful, reliable process.
Why AI Matters in Due Diligence
AI is reshaping M&A due diligence by automating repetitive tasks and providing deeper insights. For instance, AI can generate contract summaries in seconds, a task that once took days or even longer. This means deal teams can get a clearer picture of a target company’s risks and opportunities faster, potentially shaving weeks off deal timelines. AI-powered due diligence is becoming the standard, addressing the inefficiencies of traditional methods by automating data collection and analysis. However, as powerful as these tools are, they can sometimes produce misleading results. Consider a case where an AI tool summarized a supplier contract for a tech company acquiring a cloud services provider. The summary flagged the contract as low-risk, but it missed a critical change-of-control clause requiring supplier consent for M&A. The AI’s training data lacked examples of such non-standard provisions, leading to an incomplete analysis. An attorney’s review later caught the clause, preventing a potential revenue disruption, but only after significant time and resources were spent correcting the oversight.
The Role of Human Expertise
While AI is fast, it’s not flawless. It might misinterpret a clause, overlook cultural nuances in cross-border deals, or even generate incorrect conclusions. For example, during the acquisition of a manufacturing supplier, an AI tool analyzing financial statements confidently reported that a 2022 real estate sale was tax-compliant, citing a non-existent tax declaration document. This “hallucination” by the AI’s large language model went unnoticed until a human auditor discovered a $1.5 million tax liability post-deal, reducing the deal’s value by 10%. Such errors highlight the need for human judgment to complement AI’s capabilities. Experienced lawyers step in to validate AI findings within the deal’s specific context, assessing the materiality of flagged issues. Humans also audit AI for biases, such as those favoring certain industries, ensuring ethical decision-making.
AI’s limitations extend beyond technical errors to contextual gaps. In another case, a financial services firm acquiring a fintech startup relied on an AI-generated summary of the target’s key customer contracts. The summary highlighted payment terms and renewal dates but omitted a restrictive exclusivity clause that limited the startup’s ability to onboard new clients. The AI, trained on standard contract templates, failed to recognize the clause’s significance, and the oversight was only caught when an attorney reviewed the original documents, averting a strategic misstep that could have capped growth potential. Deal teams and specialists also handle “soft” factors—like assessing a target’s management team or market reputation—that AI can’t quantify. This human touch ensures clients are not just relying on data but making informed, strategic decisions.
Best Practices for AI Integration
To get the most out of AI while keeping human judgment central, deal teams, with the necessary client consent, should use AI to handle repetitive tasks via a method that protects the confidentiality of information, freeing lawyers for strategic work. However, attorneys should always carefully review AI outputs to catch errors or contextual gaps, such as missed contractual clauses or hallucinated documents. Firms should provide training to help legal professionals understand AI’s strengths and limits, ensuring they can effectively challenge AI-generated summaries. Throughout the lifecycle of a deal, attorneys must also be upfront with stakeholders about how AI is being used and the importance of human validation, ensuring they provide informed consent. Following these steps, deal teams can leverage AI’s speed while ensuring due diligence is thorough and trustworthy.
Conclusion
AI is transforming M&A due diligence, offering speed, accuracy, and cost savings. However, its limitations—illustrated by missed contract provisions, hallucinated financial documents, and undetected risks—require human checks and balances to ensure accuracy, ethical practices, and strategic depth. By adopting hybrid models, fostering transparency, and prioritizing human expertise, business teams can partner with experienced attorneys to navigate M&A with confidence, leveraging AI’s strengths while mitigating its risks.
This content is made available for educational purposes only and to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this content, you understand there is no attorney-client relationship between you and the publisher. The content should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.
