For firms built on billable time

Move new work forward without giving judgement away.

Choose the administrative bottleneck. See the intake record, validation steps, approval boundary, and system handoff your firm would control.

New-client intake file
Human approval required
New enquiry · NF-2048
Commercial advisory
Prospective client
Northline Components
Counterparties
Two entities supplied
Requested timing
Review before 18 September
Documents
3 uploaded · 1 missing
Workflow control
Pre-engagement checks
Intake team
Required facts collected
Contact, scope, parties, deadline
Conflict inputs prepared
Ready for authorised check
Missing document
Signed schedule requested
Engagement approval
Waiting for partner review
The firm decides whether the work is accepted.

Choose the pressure point

What is leaking time or revenue?

Pick the situation closest to yours. The live stage, proposed build, estimate sketch, and audit CTA update together.

Controlled client intake

Collect a complete file before a professional reviews it.

The intake path gathers approved facts and documents, checks completeness, and creates a review-ready record. It does not assess merit, provide advice, or approve the engagement.

Scope this workflow

The build

1Collect the firm-approved facts, parties, dates, and documents.
2Validate completeness and flag conflicts-check inputs.
3Create a review record without opening the matter automatically.

Boundaries

No advice or engagement decision is delegated.
Sensitive or ambiguous enquiries route to staff.
Matter creation waits for firm approval.

Use your numbers

What is the current workflow carrying?

This is simple arithmetic using the values you enter. It is not a forecast, ROI promise, or quote.

Staff cost represented by intake administration
$4,388/month
This values current intake time. It does not assume professional review can or should be removed.
Cost sketch for Professional services

Three-question brief

Make the first call useful.

Give us the minimum context now. The booking or message will carry the situation you selected.

Questions before you book?

Clear boundaries matter more than a long capability list.

No. It can collect facts, validate completeness, retrieve approved information, create drafts, and route work. Advice, conflicts decisions, engagement approval, and any judgement reserved for qualified staff remain with people.

That depends on the data, jurisdiction, vendor terms, and your firm’s controls. We map access, retention, audit, and human-review requirements before choosing the architecture. Sensitive data is not placed into a model by default.

It can where the system exposes a reliable interface and the firm approves the field and validation rules. High-risk changes can remain as reviewable drafts instead of writing directly.

Yes. A narrow workflow with measurable acceptance criteria is usually the safest start. The same integration and audit layer can support later workflows once the first is trusted.

Already know what you want built?

Bring us the idea