Inputs became structured
The team stopped feeding contracts into AI with missing context.
Sample workflow
This example shows the kind of before/after story an engagement should produce: a specific department, a named workflow, clear bottlenecks, and concrete productivity gains.
Before
The firm handled commercial agreements across three practice groups. Associates reviewed every contract from scratch, copied issue notes into long email threads, and escalated too many low-risk clauses to partners because the review standard was buried in prior matters.
A typical review took 11 business days from intake to first redline. Partners spent time re-explaining known positions, clients waited for updates, and associates had no reliable way to compare a new contract against the firm's preferred fallback language.
After
The workflow captured intake facts, contract type, governing law, client position, risk tolerance, approved clause examples, and escalation rules before any AI draft was generated.
AI handled first-pass clause comparison, issue spotting, summary drafting, and fallback-language suggestions. Associates reviewed the output against a checklist, while partners only saw exceptions, unusual risk, and final redlines.
What changed
The team stopped feeding contracts into AI with missing context.
Partners focused on exceptions instead of repeating the same review from the beginning.
Cycle time, escalation rate, and revision quality were tracked after rollout.
Next step
The point is not to copy a law firm template. It is to build the same level of operational clarity around your highest-value knowledge work.