Clients Now Require AI Governance Documentation in RFPs — "How Are You Using It?" Replaces "Do You Use It?"

National Law Review analysis published August 21 documented the maturation of client AI requirements from binary disclosure to governance specificity: RFPs now regularly require firms to specify which AI models and platforms are used on matters, confirm that client data is not retained for model training, provide attorney supervision standards for AI-assisted work, and produce incident escalation procedures. The same week, a Litera survey finding — 85% of law firms say clients are driving AI investment decisions, with 51% reporting a direct client influence on an AI investment in the past 12 months — confirmed that client expectations have already moved inside the firm's operating decisions. For BD directors and managing partners, the convergence of RFP governance requirements and client-driven AI investment decisions creates a specific operational need: a client-facing AI governance narrative that is accurate, current, specific to practice area, and deployable across pitch contexts without requiring legal review of every submission. Firms that cannot produce that narrative in a pitch context are exposed in competitive panel reviews.