Solutions
Legal automation solutions for law firms and in-house legal teams
Select the solution path that matches your operating model, then roll out with measurable controls from day one.
Choose your buyer path
Legal automation solutions should map to how your team is structured and how decisions are approved. Use these paths to align product scope, ownership, and KPI expectations before rollout.
Law Firms
Increase drafting throughput while keeping partner time focused on material risk and client-critical decisions.
- Associate drafting consistency
- Partner review focus
- Faster client-ready turnaround
In-House Legal
Reduce contract-cycle delays by improving intake quality, policy adherence, and escalation packet completeness.
- Better requester alignment
- Predictable escalation response
- Lower policy exception drift
Legal Ops
Operate legal workflows as a measurable system with intake controls, quality gates, and KPI-driven governance.
- Standardized workflow ownership
- Audit-ready quality controls
- Decision-grade KPI reporting
What changes after deployment
Days 1-30
Lock one contract family, enforce mandatory intake fields, and define escalation triggers by risk and confidence.
Days 31-60
Calibrate reviewer rationale quality, monitor false-high-risk rate, and convert repeated objections into fallback updates.
Days 61-90
Scale to additional templates only after throughput, quality, and escalation metrics remain stable across operating cycles.
Need capability-level detail first? Review the features hub before choosing a rollout track.
Solution selection FAQ
Should a team choose one solution page only?
Start with the page matching your primary buyer role, then review adjacent pages to align legal, legal ops, and business stakeholders.
How should teams evaluate readiness before expansion?
Use KPI stability and escalation quality as gates. Do not expand template scope when rationale quality is inconsistent.
Is the rollout model different for firms and in-house teams?
The sequence is similar, but ownership differs: firms optimize partner leverage while in-house teams optimize cross-functional alignment.