Legal client intake and conflict-of-interest screening system
The team gathers information from a new client and related parties and checks for potential conflicts of interest. The responsible employee makes the decision based on the data allowed to him.
Client data, related parties, need, jurisdiction, documents and urgency are collected by email, calls and free-form files. The beginning of the case is delayed, information duplicates, and important facts or parties may be omitted.
How the solution works
- Obtain sufficient customer and party scope for verification
- To concur identity and significant connections
- Submit potential overlaps to an authorized assessor
- Perform applicable admission checks and make a decision
- Pass the order status and repeat the check when circumstances change
Key challenges
- Acceptance of the client and legal issue takes place manually
- Lack of uniform and detailed data to verify conflicts of interest
Solution capabilities
Minimum Start Information
Before all material is opened, the scope of parties and question required for verification is collected. The collection of sensitive data is combined with the course of acceptance.
Identity and Communications
The name variant, previous name or related company is checked by proper identifiers. The mere similarity of the text neither confirms nor negates the conflict.
Limited access to conflict of interest information
The recipient of the check gets the information necessary for the decision. The contents of the confidential file of the other team do not become the search result visible to everyone.
Authorised Decision
Real conflict and permissible follow-up are assessed according to the applicable professional rules. The general consent of the client or the manager button does not exclude any prohibition.
Recheck
A new country, a changed scope or a significant relationship creates a need for review. Previous acceptance is not an eternal permission for all new issues.
Business context
- Acceptance of the client and legal issue takes place manually
- Client data, related parties, need, jurisdiction, documents and urgency are collected by email, calls and free-form files. The beginning of the case is delayed, information duplicates, and important facts or parties may be omitted.
- Lack of uniform and detailed data to verify conflicts of interest
- Communications between customers, related parties, previous cases and employees are checked in multiple registers and in the memory of employees. An inappropriate task may be accepted or the check takes too long and stops the urgent work.
- Making a new customer has a clear basis for the decision
- It is important for a potential client to get an answer as to whether the firm can take up his or her question. Consistently collected party data allows the authorized employee to make the required review. The course of admission may be planned more accurately without disclosing confidential information to other clients.
Core features
- Minimum Start Information
- Identity and Communications
- Limited access to conflict of interest information
- Authorised Decision
- Recheck
Key integrations
- Customer and previous task registers
- The parties' data submitted under access rights and their communications are important for evaluation.
- Source of Admissions and Powers
- Checks, professional decider and scope of commissioning are applied.
Potential impact (%)
The ranges indicate an illustrative relative change in the metric under the stated assumptions. Results depend on the starting position and actual use of the solution. Percentages for different metrics must not be added together.
Coordination work for admissions checks
16–42%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 40-70% of information searches and repeated cross-checks can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 40-60%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable workload and the resulting change.
Measure employee minutes for the preparation and alignment of a comparable scope for admission verification.
A pre-determined conflict found after the start
2–12%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that the controls described can address 10-30% of discrepancies. That share is assumed to fall by 20-40%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
To calculate the task started, for which a conflict is later detected from pre-acceptance data.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- Before accepting a customer, the parties involved in it and the commission must be checked in several sources of information.
- When a new party emerges during the delegation, the verification of conflict of interest is not always re-executed.
Implementation requirements
The team determines which sources verify the client and related parties and who makes the decision. There is consensus on how the co-names and subsequent changes of parties are checked. The urgent request is clearly noted before the adoption is confirmed.
Further development options
- Additional sources of search for parties and communications after verification of access rights, personal matching and relevance of data