Using AI Centaur Systems to Strengthen Professional Judgment

This article encourages dispute resolution practitioners to use artificial intelligence (AI) “centaur” systems, which may perform better than either humans or AI tools operating independently. Centaur systems combine human and AI capabilities so that each contributes complementary strengths in decision-making. This is particularly important in managing legal disputes, where practitioners should integrate analysis of legal issues, tangible and intangible costs, strategic judgment, and ethical considerations.<br><br>AI tools used in dispute resolution are part of an evolving ecosystem that vary in how they influence professional judgment. This includes coaching functions that help practitioners exercise judgment, advisory functions that recommend actions or strategies, and agentic functions that make decisions or take actions. As agentic functions become more prevalent, centaur systems may become particularly important in strengthening the role of professional judgment within the AI ecosystem. Because use of AI for coaching is private, low-risk, and readily available, it is an especially practical way to strengthen reflective decision-making. Repeated use of AI coaching may also help practitioners develop stronger habits of judgment that improve decision-making in contexts beyond direct AI use.<br><br>Real Practice Systems Theory helps explain how centaur systems can be implemented effectively in professional practice. This theory holds that practitioners develop unique practice systems shaped by their experience, values, habits, and recurring work demands. Practitioners can create centaur systems for themselves by selecting and using AI tools in ways that complement their own judgment. These systems can help practitioners organize complex information, identify questions that deserve closer examination, and explore alternative ways to understand disputes. Integrated into practitioners’ existing practice systems, centaur systems can promote intentional decision-making, reinforcing practitioners’ responsibility for professional judgment.