AI certifications and CPD: what is worth it for women lawyers

A lawyer deciding whether to spend her own money or a training budget on an AI course has three questions to answer: what the course certifies, whether it counts towards continuing professional development (CPD), and whether anyone will see the result.

Our view is that a paid AI certificate is worth the money in a few situations: when it is tested and asked for in the work you want, or when someone else pays. Otherwise a free course and real work may give you more for less. We tested that view against the issuers' own pages, the CPD rules in seven jurisdictions and the research on how women describe their skills, and we work through one fictional lawyer's decision.

What do the main options cost and certify?

The options differ most in what they prove. A certification means you passed the issuer's exam, and you must renew it. A certificate of completion or attendance shows that you finished a course, which may or may not include a test. The table lists examples, including one free course, in no order of preference; this article does not recommend or endorse any of them.

The AIGP has to be renewed every two years, with 20 continuing education credits and a maintenance fee [1]. The two university courses state their value in hours: Stanford's course is approved for up to 8 hours of California MCLE (minimum continuing legal education) credit [2], and Cornell's certificate carries 60 professional development hours [3].

Exhibit 1

The courses we checked cost from nothing to USD 3,750

Fee stated by each issuer, US dollars, non-member price where there is one, checked 5 October 2026.

• Elements of AIFree
• AIGP examUSD 799
• AIGP online trainingUSD 1,195
• Stanford, AI Strategy for Legal LeadersUSD 1,200
• eCornell, AI Law and PolicyUSD 3,750

BSI's ISO/IEC 42001 Lead Implementer course is priced in pounds, at £2,600 + VAT (UK) [12]. Sources: MinnaLearn and the University of Helsinki [13]; IAPP [1], [11]; Stanford Law School [2]; eCornell [3].

Does AI training count towards CPD?

It can count in all seven jurisdictions we checked. The rules differ on minimum hours, required topics and local accreditation.

The rules for England and Wales may change. The SRA consulted from 22 April to 15 July 2026 on requiring solicitors to record their learning needs and how they addressed them, and on annual ethics discussions, and has said it will publish its decision [19].

Local accreditation counts most in Singapore and Hong Kong. In Singapore, at least half of the total must be Public points from accredited activities [16]. In Hong Kong, an overseas course needs accreditation, applied for before the course, unless it fits within the 3 points a year allowed without it [18]. Florida and North Carolina count approved programs [4][5]. A course's own CPD statement, such as Stanford's California MCLE approval [2], applies in California only; a lawyer elsewhere applies her own regulator's rules.

Lawyers already check which court's rules apply before they file. The same check applies here: read the rule where you hold your practising certificate before you book.

What does the research say about women and credentials?

Women describe their own performance less favourably than men who performed equally well. Exley and Kessler ran experiments with over 4,000 people recruited through online work platforms and over 10,000 school-aged young people [8]. Women described their ability and performance to potential employers less favourably than men who performed equally well, and the gap remained when there was no incentive to self-promote [8]. In one set of experiments, women and men both answered an average of 10 of 20 test questions correctly, yet the average woman rated her performance 46 on a scale of 1 to 100 and the average man 61 [20]. The participants were not lawyers, so the size of the gap in legal practice is unknown.

Exhibit 2

Women and men scored the same, and women rated themselves lower

Average self-rating of performance on a scale of 1 to 100, after both groups answered an average of 10 of 20 test questions correctly.

• Women46
• Men61

Participants were recruited through online work platforms and were not lawyers. Source: NBER Digest, on Exley and Kessler [20].

A similar pattern shows up in how skills are listed. In LinkedIn data analysed for the World Economic Forum, women's share of people with AI engineering skills rose from 29.8% to 37.7% when LinkedIn counted skills it deduced from members' profiles as well as the skills members listed themselves [9]. The World Economic Forum paper also cites research suggesting that employers prioritise AI training for male employees in all the economies surveyed except Belgium and India [9]. LinkedIn's hiring data show a related gap: women accounted for 26% of US AI hires in 2025, against 50% of hires into other jobs [21].

AI governance is one area where legal backgrounds are already in use. The IAPP's 2025 report found that 50% of AI governance professionals typically sit in ethics, compliance, privacy or legal teams [22]. Privacy is one of those teams, and in the IAPP's 2021 survey of privacy professionals, 49% of respondents were women [23]. At the introductory level, women already take up free courses: about 40% of Elements of AI participants are women, which its organisers say is more than double the average for computer science courses [13].

The self-promotion and LinkedIn findings concern how skills are described and listed, so the practical response is to make the learning visible: record it, use it in work other people see, and list it. A skill missing from a profile is missing from the count.

When is a paid certificate worth the money?

A paid credential is more likely to repay the cost when:

• It is tested and asked for in the work you want. If job descriptions for the role you want name a certification, that is the one to consider.
• Someone else pays, or it replaces CPD you would buy anyway. The SRA says who pays should be a discussion between you and your employer [14]. Given the finding that employers may offer AI training to men first [9], ask for the budget explicitly.
• You will use it on real work soon after. In the IAPP's survey of privacy and AI governance professionals, median salary was higher for respondents holding an IAPP qualification, but the IAPP says the results are not meant to prove cause and effect [24]. Work you have done with the knowledge is evidence an employer can check.

If none of these applies, a free course and real work may give you more for less money.

How would one lawyer decide?

Priya is senior counsel at a Sydney logistics company; she and her company are fictional. She has been asked to draft the company's policy on staff use of generative AI. Her manager has offered up to USD 1,500 towards training this year.

She compares two routes. Route A is the AIGP. The exam costs USD 799 without membership, or USD 944 with it (USD 295 for membership and USD 649 for the exam), and membership covers the USD 250 fee non-members pay at renewal [1]. Adding the online training at the member price of USD 995 brings the cheapest total to USD 1,939, above her budget [11].

Route B costs nothing. She completes Elements of AI [13], drafts the policy, writes a 2,000-word article on AI-use policies for a law society journal and presents a one-hour CPD session for other in-house lawyers. She needs 10 NSW CPD units a year [15]. Writing counts at 1 unit per 1,000 words and presenting at 1 unit per hour, each capped at 5 units [15], so the article and session give her 3 of her 10 units.

Priya expects to apply for AI governance roles within two years, and in this example those roles ask for a named certification. She sits the AIGP exam without the paid training, preparing with the IAPP's free syllabus and study guide [10], and also does the writing and presenting from Route B. If she planned to stay in a general legal role, Route B alone would meet her immediate needs.

Where the skeptics are right

Some doubt about AI certificates is sound judgment. A certificate of completion shows that you finished a course, and a certification shows that you passed an exam. Neither shows that you can draft a policy or advise on an AI system, which is why the work you do with the knowledge counts for more with an employer. The salary figures for IAPP qualification holders do not prove cause and effect, as the IAPP itself says.

The evidence also has limits we want to state plainly. The self-promotion experiments were run with online workers and school-aged young people. The LinkedIn figures measure how skills are listed and who is hired, and the finding on employers' training choices comes from research that the World Economic Forum paper cites. We found no current gender breakdown for AI governance roles. Prices and rules in this article were checked on 5 October 2026. Readers should confirm them with the issuer or regulator before booking a course or claiming CPD.

What we'd ask

If you lead a legal team or hold the training budget:

• Agree with each lawyer who pays for AI training. The SRA says who pays should be a discussion between the solicitor and the employer [14].
• Offer AI training on the same terms to women and men, given the research suggesting that employers prioritise AI training for male employees [9].
• Give people real work to use the training on soon after, such as drafting the team's generative AI use policy, so that the result is something others can see.

If you are choosing training for yourself:

• Keep a record of each activity: the date, the hours, the provider and what you used it for. NSW requires CPD records to be kept for at least 3 years [15], Singapore requires a record of your CPD activities [16], and the SRA has proposed a recording requirement [19]. It is the same discipline as a time entry.
• Teach or write about what you learned. Singapore gives 2 CPD points for each hour spent speaking, against 1 for each hour attending [7]. Hong Kong allows up to 15 points a year from articles in approved legal journals and counts twice the time spent presenting an approved course [18].
• List the credential with what you did with it, for example "drafted the company's generative AI use policy". LinkedIn's main count of AI skills in the World Economic Forum paper uses the skills members list themselves [9], so a skill you leave off your profile does not appear in that count.
• Confirm prices and CPD rules with the issuer or regulator before you book or claim.

Why we built the course

Training counts for more when it is used on real work that other people can see. We built AI Women in Law so that women lawyers finish with that work done: over five weeks, participants redesign one piece of their team's work and build a first version of a tool for it. See the course.

References

1. IAPP, AIGP Exam (IAPP Store product page), checked 5 October 2026.
2. Stanford Law School Executive Education, AI Strategy for Legal Leaders, checked 5 October 2026.
3. eCornell, Cornell University, AI Law and Policy (certificate program), checked 5 October 2026.
4. Supreme Court of Florida, In re: Code for Resolving Professionalism Referrals and Amendments to Rule Regulating The Florida Bar 6-10.3, No. SC2023-0884, 6 July 2023.
5. The North Carolina State Bar, Rule .1518 Continuing Legal Education Requirements, checked 5 October 2026.
6. The State Bar of California, MCLE Requirements, checked 5 October 2026.
7. Singapore Institute of Legal Education, Guide to the SILE CPD Scheme 2026, effective 1 January 2026.
8. NBER, Christine L. Exley and Judd B. Kessler, The Gender Gap in Self-Promotion, NBER Working Paper 26345, 2019 (published in The Quarterly Journal of Economics 137(3), 1345-1381, 2022).
9. World Economic Forum with LinkedIn, Gender Parity in the Intelligent Age (white paper), March 2025.
10. IAPP, AIGP: Artificial Intelligence Governance Professional, checked 5 October 2026.
11. IAPP, AI Governance Professional (AIGP) Online Training (IAPP Store product page), checked 5 October 2026.
12. BSI, ISO/IEC 42001 Artificial Intelligence (AI) Lead Implementer Training Course (UK), checked 5 October 2026.
13. MinnaLearn and the University of Helsinki, Elements of AI, checked 5 October 2026.
14. Solicitors Regulation Authority, FAQs about continuing competence, updated 23 January 2025.
15. The Law Society of NSW, Continuing Professional Development, checked 5 October 2026.
16. Singapore Institute of Legal Education, SILE CPD Centre, CPD Requirements: Lawyers (CPD Year 2026), checked 5 October 2026.
17. The Law Society of Hong Kong, Mandatory Continuing Professional Development Requirements, checked 5 October 2026.
18. The Law Society of Hong Kong, Guidelines for compliance with CPD requirements issued under Sections 2 and 5(3) of the CPD Rules, checked 5 October 2026.
19. Solicitors Regulation Authority, Strengthening our continuing competence approach (consultation, 22 April to 15 July 2026), 16 July 2026.
20. NBER Digest, Women Persistently Sell Themselves Short of Same-Skill Men, 1 December 2019.
21. LinkedIn Pressroom, New LinkedIn Research Finds Women Account for Just 26% of AI Hires as AI Jobs Surge, 18 August 2026.
22. IAPP, AI Governance Profession Report 2025, 16 April 2025.
23. IAPP, 2021 Privacy Professionals Salary Survey, 2021.
24. IAPP, Salary and Jobs Report 2025-26: Privacy, AI Governance and Digital Responsibility, 3 August 2025.