Our Approach
Why most AI adoption fails
It's not the technology. Most "AI pilots" fail because nobody mapped what success looks like. Structure in, structure out. That's not a slogan—it's how knowledge work actually functions.
The Methodology
What systemic thinking actually means
The firms and schemes seeing real results from AI aren't the ones with the most sophisticated tools. They're the ones who've done the unglamorous work first. Three things, in order:
Map your knowledge processes
What do you actually do when you research a pensions law question? What categories do you check? What sources do you consult? What does "thorough" look like? Until you can articulate this, you're working on intuition—and intuition doesn't transfer to juniors or AI.
Identify where AI adds value
AI is excellent at rapid synthesis, pattern matching, first-draft generation, and structured output. It's poor at novel legal judgment, understanding scheme-specific context, and knowing what it doesn't know. Until you've mapped this, you're guessing.
Build frameworks before tools
If you throw unstructured questions at AI, you get unstructured answers. The quality of your framework determines the quality of your results. Structure in, structure out—every time.
Why Pensions Law
The perfect test case for systemic methodology
Pensions law is uniquely challenging: multiple Acts (PA 1995, PA 2004, PA 2008, Finance Acts), overlapping regulatory regimes (TPR, FCA, HMRC), constant evolution, and scheme-specific variation that makes generic answers dangerous.
This complexity is precisely why systemic thinking matters so much here. A methodology that works for pensions law works for anything. And a pensions lawyer who's mapped their knowledge processes has something genuinely transferable—both to juniors and to AI systems.
We work specifically in this space because we know it. A qualified pensions lawyer since 2016, not an AI consultant who's read a few articles. That matters when you're building tools that need to understand the difference between a PPF-eligible scheme and a public sector arrangement.
The Uncomfortable Truth
What nobody wants to admit
Most AI pilots fail
Not because the technology doesn't work, but because nobody mapped what success looks like. They're measuring "AI usage" instead of "problems solved."
Generic AI doesn't understand pensions
Ask ChatGPT about GMP equalisation and watch it confidently produce something that would get you sued. Domain expertise isn't optional.
The methodology requires discipline
This isn't a quick fix. It's a way of thinking about legal knowledge that compounds over time. If you want magic, look elsewhere.
Access to AI is no longer an advantage
Everyone has it. The competitive advantage is the systemic thinking that makes it useful. That's what we teach.
"AI doesn't solve your knowledge problem. It reveals it."
Without structure, AI just makes you faster at being confused. The framework exposes gaps you didn't know you had—and that's valuable, even before you fix them.
What Makes 45black Different
Pensions lawyer, not AI vendor
Most AI consultancies are technology companies trying to understand law. We're the opposite: a qualified pensions lawyer who's built systemic methodology for legal knowledge work.
We don't have a product to sell you. We're not trying to get you onto a platform or lock you into a subscription. We teach methodology that you own—and that works whether you use AI or not.
The framework works without AI. But AI makes the benefit visible in minutes rather than months. That's why we use it in training. Not because AI is magic, but because it's the fastest way to demonstrate that structure enables cognition.
Interested in the methodology?
We run training sessions for pensions teams and offer consulting on systemic approaches to legal knowledge. No sales pitch—just a conversation about whether this makes sense for your situation.
Start a Conversation