One of the core decisions for any legal marketplace is determining the type of platform it wants to be. The choice boils down to two fundamental models: the "Connector" or the "Orchestrator." The path chosen has a direct impact on the platform's most critical challenge: lawyer responsiveness.

🔗The "Connector" Model: Accepting Leakage

The Connector model is straightforward. It profits from initial matchmaking, then steps aside, accepting—or even encouraging—that the ongoing client relationship moves offline. Think of a legal directory that provides a solicitor's contact details after an initial inquiry.

This approach has clear advantages: low operating costs and minimal platform liability. However, it comes at the price of a fragmented user experience, low lifetime value, and a business model highly vulnerable to competition.

⚖️The Orchestrator's Paradox in Law

The alternative is the "Orchestrator" model, which aims to own the entire client workflow. To achieve this, traditional Orchestrators try to lock all communication inside their own proprietary messaging portal to prevent leakage.

And here lies the paradox.

In its pursuit of control, this model often harms the very engagement it seeks to foster. It asks busy legal professionals to depart from their daily communication habits (email, WhatsApp) and constantly log into a separate platform. This friction actively damages responsiveness.

This leaves the marketplace with a false choice: either constantly chase lawyers to use a system they don't like, or give up, allow them to connect directly, and lose all the benefits of orchestration.

🧑‍⚖️The Modern Orchestrator: A Third Way for Legal Tech

A new, more intelligent model is emerging that resolves this paradox, designed for the high-stakes legal world. A "Modern Orchestrator" doesn't force a choice between control and convenience; it delivers both.

Instead of trying to change a lawyer's habits, it adapts to them.

The principle is to allow legal professionals to communicate via the apps they already use, while ensuring the conversation is securely synchronised with the marketplace platform. This is the approach taken by platforms like Jely, which can mirror a conversation from a marketplace portal directly into a lawyer's preferred chat app.

This means:

• The lawyer gets instant notifications and can reply immediately, improving responsiveness.

• The marketplace maintains a complete, auditable record of the conversation, ensuring compliance with data retention policies required by bodies like the SRA.

• The system can be designed to be fully compliant with a solicitor's absolute duty to keep client affairs confidential , all while preventing the platform leakage that is especially tempting given the high lifetime value of legal clients.

Conclusion: The Real Strategic Choice

The choice is no longer between being a low-cost Connector or a high-friction Orchestrator. The real strategic decision for a modern legal marketplace is whether to invest in the infrastructure that adapts to a lawyer's real-world behaviour.

By building a system that offers both convenience for your legal professionals and the compliance and control your platform requires, you can solve the responsiveness problem and build a truly defensible business.

👉 Interested in building a Modern Orchestrator model for your legal marketplace? Let's have a chat.