I recently received an email announcement of a high-profile legal initiative exploring the future of legal services. The organization’s first big event is sponsored by Big Law, and admission is by invitation only. It felt like a slap in the face of one of the small firm attorneys I know helped develop this initiative and to all the solo and small firm practitioners who have been working on similar projects, so I spoke up:
“One of the issues with the legal profession…and many organizations targeting lawyers is that they focus on the quick money they can get from Big Law. They are exclusive—which means they exclude while alleging they want to be inclusive. The legal profession is a lot more than Big Law.”
I am not against Big Law. However, solo and small law practices are often overlooked when discussing the practice of law. Yet they make up 70 to 75% of all law firms in the United States. We are the attorneys serving small business owners, managers, and other employees navigating complex workplace conditions. Our colleagues help them with wills, real and intellectual property, personal injuries, housing, immigration, and more. We see the impact the law has on people and have much to contribute to systemic reform.
Disappointingly, the event organizer responded with a common refrain:
“[We are] not for profit so our resources to host on our own are greatly limited and cannot happen without help from those resources that have it…Once we are able to scale, we will be providing more resources across law schools and other areas…”
Our exchange highlights a fundamental challenge facing the legal profession. The law is promoted as the people’s governance, yet it remains structurally tethered to Big Law sponsorship and elite institutions, which limits understanding of the issues. Even well-intentioned organizations continue to look primarily from the vantage points of the elite. This is not where the access to justice issues are.
Here are three actions law firms, law schools, and government agencies can take now to improve the justice system.
Challenge the Exclusivity Model
If we genuinely want sustainable change and a system that works for the people, we must look more closely at the unchallenged beliefs that keep us is the same doom loops. One of those beliefs is that the opinions of the elite are the ones that matter. While researching Unsustainable: Why Our Workplaces Aren’t Working and What to Do About It, this became even clearer. We can’t only ask the fox how to help the hen house thrive if we want to address the full scope of challenges, such as:
-
Automation Over Human Judgment. High-budget conferences often highlight enterprise AI tools for document review and due diligence. While AI offers procedural assistance, it cannot replace human lawyers’ duties of independent legal judgment, fiduciary care, and compassion.
-
The “Business Sandwich” Pressure. Telling solo practitioners, small firms, and community organizations to wait for trickle-down resources “once we scale” leaves the vast majority of day-to-day legal friction unaddressed when it doesn’t need to wait.
- Access to Justice. A 2022 study by the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) revealed that 92% of low-income people go without help for their civil legal problems. Although large corporations consume a lot of legal services, it is not necessarily because others don’t need them.
Shift the Focus
Challenging the system isn’t about playing a blame game or excluding large institutions. We need Big Law, corporate legal departments, and enterprise resources. Mine is an invitation to think differently about how we design reform and broaden access across the entire legal ecosystem.
At Third Ear Conflict Resolution, we approach (workplace) disputes and legal impasses as systemic misalignment. Real legal innovation happens when dispute resolution shifts from reactive, high-cost court battles to accessible, front-end intervention that saves parties time, money, and energy. We use tools like:
1. Third Ear Listening
Recognizing that hardline legal positions are usually driven by unstated fears, unmet expectations, or unaddressed emotional injuries, we moving past surface-level demands. We uncover underlying human needs, which allows affected parties to co-create sustainable, mutually beneficial solutions.
2. The HAQ Standard
Resolving friction does not require years of formal legal proceedings. By applying the HAQ Standard, practitioners and leaders can resolve systemic disputes early and effectively:
-
Humane: Protect human dignity and recognize whole-person realities instead of treating people as “the problem.”
-
Affordable: Eliminate the hidden financial drain of prolonged litigation, administrative complaints, and lost productivity.
-
Quick: Address friction directly through structured, solutions-focused dialogue before relationships break down completely.
3. Employment as a Partnership
Instead of viewing relationships through outdated command-and-control hierarchies, alignment requires clarity, shared expectations, and transparent boundaries that support both organizational health and individual well-being. Mutually beneficial partnerships are possible throughout systems and make them sustainable.
Co-Creating a More Inclusive Legal Future
Real change in the legal profession does not require a C-suite title, a Big Law partnership, or an elite invitation. Solo practitioners, small firm attorneys, and aspiring leaders at all levels hold the power to change how conflict is navigated.
By shifting our focus from money-driven speech toward human-centered judgment and front-end dispute prevention, we can build a legal ecosystem that truly serves as governance for everyone. Several studies also that this still drives revenue, too.