Legal,
in real life.
A recurring question, an exchange to follow, a document that evolves. Here are three situations that show Exadvize’s place in a legal team’s day-to-day work.
Illustrative scenarios, not customer case studies.
The same question comes up again
Find an answer without starting from scratch
A business user asks how to apply an internal process the legal team has already handled. CLEM can bring in the corresponding approved knowledge; if the context requires a new assessment, the legal professional steps in.
What is reused is approved expertise—not an old email removed from its context.
A matter continues across multiple exchanges
Keep the thread of the matter
A question calls for clarification, an answer, and an additional intervention. The need is to recover context and understand where the request stands without rebuilding its entire history every time.
Core’s manual follow-up and Flow’s planned reminders address different scopes. Their detailed presentation remains tied to the relevant offering.
A document enters negotiation
Connect document work to the matter
A team needs to work on a document and continue its exchanges. Flow keeps that work connected to the matter, with the legal team’s involvement and validation.
With Flow, document work stays connected to the matter’s conversation. The legal team prepares the negotiation and reviews the material to be used, within the scope described in the offering. This is not a promise of autonomous negotiation.
A useful case stays specific
Industry alone does not define the need. The request, available knowledge, responsibilities, and expected outcome reveal whether a workflow is appropriate.
Explore the scope of Core and Flow on the Pricing page, or talk with Exadvize about your needs.