Legal client self-service portal
The client's representative receives the case documents and lawyer's questions addressed to him. The answers given are saved to a specific document and forwarded to the specialist responsible.
Decisions are made in meetings, email or messages and are not always tied to a specific document, risk or deadline. Later, it is difficult to prove what information was provided to the customer and what he chose.
How the solution works
- To prepare a question for the client and the necessary information
- Check the right and visibility of a specific representative
- Present the document, the meaning of the choice, and the deadline for the action
- Get an answer or a need for clarification
- To refer the decision to the case and show further action
Key challenges
- Customer issues, endorsements and strategic decisions are difficult to trace
Solution capabilities
Right of the recipient
The contact of the organization, the account recipient and the authorized decider may differ. Everyone sees the scope proper to its function and right.
Explanation of the question
The choice explained by the lawyer is associated with specific circumstances and document. A difficult question leaves a discussion, not just an approval button.
Version response
The decision specifies what material the person received and what scope they chose. A later version does not alter the content of the previous decision.
Documents and states
Content intended for the client is provided by law and stage of the case. The limits of internal or other persons' information are determined specifically, not solely by the overall role of the client account.
Transfer of the order
Answer, decision or request made at the meeting reaches the lawyer responsible. The client is provided with agreed scope of service and confirmed billing information.
Business context
- Customer issues, endorsements and strategic decisions are difficult to trace
- Decisions are made in meetings, email or messages and are not always tied to a specific document, risk or deadline. Later, it is difficult to prove what information was provided to the customer and what he chose.
- Customer confirmation is associated with a specific document
- The legal services developer needs to understand what question to answer and which editorial to review. A visible history of the document and answer helps avoid different interpretations of the agreement. The team can proceed with the order according to a clearly recorded client decision.
Core features
- Right of the recipient
- Explanation of the question
- Version response
- Documents and states
- Transfer of the order
Key integrations
- Proceedings and Documents
- A question for the client, a specific version and the responsible recipient.
- Representation and contract details
- Right of decision, agreed scope and sound financial states.
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.
Client Decision Coordination Work
12–36%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 30-60% of manual data entry and handover work 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 a comparable type of solution to explain, receive and transmit.
The unclear scope of the repeated decision
12–42%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 30-60% of errors can be addressed through the data and rule checks described. That share is assumed to fall by 40-70%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
Count decisions re-matched due to unclear version, representative's right or scope of choice.
Part of negative feedback on co-operation with a lawyer
4–15%Decreasing
Indicative assumption: 15-30% of negative reviews relate to unclear issues of matching lawyer's documents. The decision could reduce this proportion by 25-50%. This is a scenario of potential; the assumptions need to be verified by feedback collected by the company.
When a company starts collecting reviews, negative feedback about cooperation with a lawyer is counted from all evaluations received on the topic. The same method of evaluation is applied before and after installation and similar groups of clients are compared. Without initial data, the actual change is not determined.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- The client provides documents on a regular basis, coordinates their versions and makes decisions related to the assignment.
- In correspondence, it is difficult to trace what document or action the client has approved and what information has been given to him.
Project scope and implementation
The portal is designed for repetitive document matching and client actions. A one-time consultation may be sufficient for a secure transfer of the conclusion without a separate account. Complex choices are discussed with the lawyer, and endorsements are linked to information provided to the client.
Further development options
- Additional client documents and solutions after their visibility, explanation and transfer verification.