Keep what works.
Test what could change it.
Build what comes next

Today’s legal institutions, new experiments and emerging alternatives can exist side by side. Choices about training, technology and access can strengthen existing practices or help different ones develop.

This guide draws on a 2026 workshop series exploring four possible futures for law in 2040. Use them to test choices about people, technology and providers. connects what to preserve, what to test and what to develop at the same time.

Compare the four futures See the choices for today ↗

A miniature legal system connects established institutions, legal infrastructure, human judgment, and access to legal help.

Four possible futures

The same legal work.
Different centers of power

These futures describe different conditions a legal team or business could face. Compare them to test a decision: what should you retain, which providers can you rely on, and where must people be able to intervene?

Future 01

The company builds the system

The company embeds legal checks in everyday business tools. It gains direct control and responsibility for decisions made through them.

Step into this future ↗

Future 02

Legal directs the network

The company’s legal team coordinates outside firms and tools while retaining its data. Keeping those services working together becomes a continuing responsibility.

Step into this future ↗

Future 03

Providers own the infrastructure

Outside firms and technology companies supply the systems that handle legal work. The company gains capability while depending on providers’ systems and knowledge.

Step into this future ↗

Future 04

People claim the final say

People are meant to review, challenge and stop automated decisions. Whether they have the information and authority to do so remains contested.

Step into this future ↗

What the work reveals / Editorial synthesis

Control. Judgment. Access.
The choices run deeper than tools

The workshops began from corporate legal’s perspective. Their questions reach anyone building, buying, delivering or relying on legal help.

Ownership affects your room to act

Control of data, software and working rules affects whether a company can change a service, check a result or act without a provider’s help.

Synthesis of the four scenario worlds

Human authority needs practical support

The fourth scenario questions whether people can meaningfully supervise automated work. Intervention depends on information, expertise and authority to act.

Scenario questions, especially world four

Access includes a way to challenge decisions

The consumer and small-business group emphasized affordable help, fair treatment and trust. It also raised the position of people poorly served by existing arrangements.

Recorded consumer-group priorities

How today connects to tomorrow

Preserve, experiment and build at the same time

Three Horizons separates work that keeps today’s legal services dependable, experiments that could change them, and longer-term alternatives. All three can be active at once.

Keep what people rely on

Maintain the institutions, expertise and practices that people still need.

Test what could change it

Try different tools or services and examine what they improve, and what they leave unresolved.

Build what comes next

Develop alternatives that could change how legal work is delivered and who can get help.

Explore the three horizons ↗

From possible futures to choices today

Different responsibilities.
Different priorities

Groups considered the same four futures from different positions. Their proposals help identify what an organization might retain, buy, develop or make easier for people to use.

Keep what works.
Test what could change it.
Build what comes next