Slow Tech Adoption in Professions

Introduction

Professionals in law, dispute resolution, and medicine—such as attorneys, mediators, arbitrators, and physicians—have historically been slow to adopt new technologies. Despite advancements in cloud computing, artificial intelligence (AI), and digital communication, these fields continue to lag behind other industries. This report explores the reasons for delayed adoption, regional differences, commonly resisted technologies, and the consequences of resistance. Finally, it outlines strategies for accelerating tech adoption in these fields.

The motivation for this research stems from my experience as the founder of NextLevel™ Mediation, a software platform designed to help mediators and attorneys resolve disputes more efficiently and rationally rather than emotionally. Throughout the development and launch of NextLevel™ Mediation, I encountered significant resistance from professionals who were hesitant to integrate technology into their practice. Many mediators and attorneys prefer traditional, face-to-face methods, believing that technology cannot replicate the nuances of human interaction even though human interaction has changed dramatically over the past decade. It also overlooks the potential for technology to enhance efficiency, improve decision-making, and facilitate fairer outcomes.

This resistance to adopting mediation technology is part of a broader trend affecting legal and healthcare industries. Professionals in these fields are often skeptical of new systems, fearing that they may compromise confidentiality, reduce personal engagement, or require a steep learning curve. However, given the increasing complexity of disputes and legal matters, integrating well-designed, data-driven platforms can provide significant advantages. This paper aims to identify the barriers to adoption, highlight the benefits of technology in dispute resolution, and propose strategies to encourage more widespread acceptance of innovative solutions like NextLevel™ Mediation.

Barriers to Adoption

Cultural and Professional Norms

Legal and medical fields emphasize precedent, stability, and in-person interaction, fostering a culture resistant to technological change. Lawyers and judges adhere to risk-averse traditions that prioritize established methods, while many dispute resolution professionals long believed mediation could only be done face-to-face until the COVID-19 pandemic forced change. Similarly, physicians fear that technology might depersonalize patient care. Surveys suggest lawyers tend to be cautious and value stability over innovation, contributing to their reluctance.

Economic and Business Model Factors

Financial constraints and business models present major hurdles. Small law firms and solo practitioners often lack the capital for new systems, while hospitals and clinics face similar financial burdens. The billable-hour model in law discourages efficiency improvements, as time spent learning technology is non-billable. In healthcare, fee-for-service models dis-incentivize cost-saving technologies since revenue is tied to service volume rather than efficiency.

Regulatory and Ethical Constraints

Strict privacy regulations and ethical considerations make professionals wary of new technologies. Lawyers must protect attorney-client privilege, leading many to distrust cloud storage or AI tools for document review. Physicians must comply with HIPAA and similar laws, making them cautious about software that handles patient data. Liability concerns also deter adoption—attorneys fear tech errors harming clients, while doctors worry about malpractice risks.

Institutional and Workflow Challenges

Adopting new technology often requires workflow adjustments and training, which many firms and institutions struggle to provide. Law firms frequently lack structured IT strategies, and training is minimal. In hospitals, complex procurement processes delay adoption, while smaller practices lack IT support, making implementation daunting. Professionals default to familiar methods rather than endure the transition to new systems.

Regional Differences

Legal Sector

Legal technology adoption varies widely by region. The U.S. and U.K. lead in adoption, benefiting from large legal markets and proximity to tech hubs. Australia and Singapore have also embraced legal tech, aided by government-backed innovation programs. In contrast, some European countries, constrained by stringent data laws, have been slower to adopt cloud-based legal services. Developing nations often face resource limitations that slow down legal tech implementation.

Healthcare Technology

Electronic health records (EHRs) and telemedicine adoption show stark regional differences. Countries like Sweden and Denmark achieved widespread EHR usage early due to government incentives, whereas the U.S. lagged until federal funding spurred adoption. Telemedicine grew rapidly in North America during the COVID-19 pandemic, but adoption remains inconsistent in Europe. China has heavily invested in telehealth, while Africa and parts of Latin America struggle with infrastructure challenges that limit adoption.

Technology Types Slow to Be Adopted

Cloud Computing and Digital Record Systems

Law firms and healthcare providers have been slow to transition to cloud-based systems due to concerns over security and compliance. Many lawyers continue to rely on paper files, and physicians resisted EHRs until mandates were introduced.

Analytics, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

Despite growth in the use of AI, many lawyers and mediators remain hesitant to fully implement AI, citing concerns about accuracy, transparency, and skills, among others. Surveys consistently highlight several barriers:

• Accuracy and Reliability: A primary concern is whether AI tools can be trusted to produce correct, high-quality results. Roughly 35% of lawyers in an ABA survey (2020) said they worry about the accuracy of AI technology. In a late-2024 Thomson Reuters survey, 77% of legal professionals said they remain cautious with AI due to risks like inaccurate content or misuse of confidential data​, highlighting the ongoing demand for dependable and error-free AI outputs.
• Transparency (Black-Box Concern): Many attorneys are uneasy with the “black box” nature of AI and machine learning. They often don’t fully understand how AI systems arrive at a given answer, which makes it hard to trust the tools in sensitive legal matters. This opacity in AI decision-making feeds into the overall hesitation – lawyers prefer tools that can explain their reasoning, especially when outcomes could affect clients’ cases.
• Skills and Training Gaps: Another barrier is the lack of necessary skill sets or knowledge to effectively use AI. In the ABA’s 2023 Tech Report, over 58% of respondents admitted they didn’t know enough about AI to even answer questions about their firm’s AI plans​. Many lawyers and mediators feel they lack training on how AI systems work or how to integrate them into practice. An ACC/Everlaw study of corporate legal departments similarly found low levels of AI education – only about 43% of in-house legal respondents had even a basic understanding of generative AI, and less than half said their departments provide AI training or resources​. This skills gap makes attorneys less confident in adopting new AI tools.
• Security and Confidentiality: Law is a highly sensitive domain, and confidential client information must be protected. Many firms worry that using cloud-based AI tools could risk exposing client data or breaching confidentiality. In surveys, lawyers often cite data security and privacy alongside accuracy as top concerns

Process Automation and Workflow Software

Many law firms still manage scheduling and case updates manually, with only about half using practice management software. In healthcare, automation tools for patient monitoring and electronic reminders remain underutilized.

Telecommunication Technologies

Before COVID-19, virtual legal services and telemedicine were underused due to concerns about quality and reimbursement. The pandemic accelerated adoption, but resistance remains in some areas.

Consequences of Slow Adoption

Reduced Efficiency and Higher Costs

Professionals relying on outdated methods face inefficiencies and increased costs. Manual legal research and document review are time-consuming compared to AI-assisted processes. In healthcare, slow adoption of digital records leads to administrative burdens and redundant work.

Impact on Client and Patient Outcomes

Slow tech adoption can negatively affect clients and patients. Without EHR alerts, medical errors are more likely. Lawyers relying on manual processes may take longer to resolve cases, frustrating clients who expect faster service.

Competitive Disadvantage

Firms slow to adopt technology risk losing business to more innovative competitors. A survey found that tech-forward law firms were the most profitable, while those lagging in adoption struggled. In healthcare, tech-savvy providers attract more patients by offering convenient digital services.

Encouraging More Widespread Use

Despite the current gaps, the outlook for technology adoption in these professions is trending upward. The combination of generational change, market pressure, and lessons learned during the pandemic suggests that attorneys, mediators, and physicians will increasingly integrate technology into their work. To accelerate this shift and overcome persistent barriers, a multi-pronged approach can be employed:

• Policy Reforms and Incentives: Government and institutional policies can powerfully influence adoption. The healthcare sector offers a clear blueprint: when the U.S. government launched incentive programs for EHR adoption (through the HITECH Act), hospital and clinic adoption rates surged dramatically after years of stagnation. Similar policy levers could help in legal fields. For example, governments or bar associations might provide grants or tax incentives for law practices (especially small firms) to invest in approved secure technology.
• As of 2023, 40 U.S. states have adopted a duty of tech competence in their professional conduct rules, mandating that lawyers stay abreast of relevant technology. Enforcing such standards would push reluctant professionals to at least maintain baseline knowledge of new tools. Additionally, alignment of payment models with tech-enabled efficiency is crucial in healthcare and legal industries (healthcare: fee for service move to value-based medicine, Legal: reduce dependency on billable hours), Simply put, when policies reward efficiency and quality, technology that delivers these benefits will be eagerly adopted.
• Education and Training Initiatives: One of the most direct ways to overcome resistance is through education. Professionals need to feel competent and confident in using new systems. Building tech literacy can start early – law schools and medical schools are increasingly incorporating technology training into their curricula so that new graduates enter the field with digital skills. Continuing education is equally important for current practitioners. Bar associations and medical boards can require or strongly encourage CLE/CME courses on technology.

Endnotes

ABA Journal, 2021. https://www.abajournal.com

ADR.org, 2023. https://www.adr.org

Healthcare Reimagined, 2014. https://www.healthcarereimagined.net

VXT, 2022. https://www.vxt.co.nz

Commonwealth Fund, 2004. https://www.commonwealthfund.org

Wynhouse Consulting, 2022. https://www.wynhouse.co

Commonwealth Fund, 2004. https://www.commonwealthfund.org

ELLE LawTech, 2023. https://www.elle.lawyer

Brookings, 2020. https://www.brookings.edu

Artificial Lawyer, 2019. https://www.artificiallawyer.com

YouMedico, 2021. https://www.youmedico.com

Thomson Reuters’ 2024 Future of Professionals Report, https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en/c/future-of-professionals
Legal.io, https://www.legal.io/articles/5543376/AI-Adoption-in-Legal-Sector-Soars-Study-Finds

Robert Bergman

Robert Bergman with Next Level Mediation provides full mediation services - including proprietary and confidential Decision Science (DS) analysis that assists each party in understanding their true litigation priorities as aligned with their business objectives. Each party receives a one-time user license to access our exclusive DS Application Cloud. We… MORE