Page 19 – Integreon

Understanding Generative AI in Contract Lifecycle Management

A comprehensive, disciplined approach to contract lifecycle management (CLM) is critical to navigating the volume and complexities of business agreements today. According to the 2025 CLOC State of the Industry Report, 62% of organizations are using CLM technology to achieve this. While CLM solutions can streamline and add structure to some or all aspects of the contract lifecycle, the game and opportunity to improve processes has changed significantly in this age of generative AI. Just over half (54%) of the CLOC report respondents plan to implement AI and 33% plan to adopt workflow tools within the next one to two years. It’s with good reason – generative AI promises unprecedented efficiency, accuracy, and scalability. But achieving those benefits requires a strong understanding of the CLM solution landscape and the use cases and approach for applying this technology. 5 Ways Generative AI is Advancing Innovation in CLM Generative AI is just beginning to fully integrate across the contracting lifecycle, from pre- to post-execution. Many of today’s providers specialize in niche processes only. Here are five examples of where generative AI is boosting the capabilities of CLM tools. Metadata abstraction Instead of manually entering key information (like payment terms, deadlines, or parties involved), generative AI automatically extracts these data points from uploaded contracts and populates them within the system. Benefit: Streamlined data entry. Review and redlining Traditional CLM platforms rely on pre-configured clause libraries for drafting and reviewing. Generative AI eliminates this dependency by analyzing legacy contracts, creating a repository of fallback clauses, and suggesting replacements or edits during the review process. Benefit: Faster negotiations. Clause libraries Generative AI can build a clause library dynamically in real time. When drafting or reviewing contracts, users can pick clauses and fallback options directly informed by historical patterns. Benefit: Compliance and consistency. Language support Generative AI solutions now support processing contracts in up to six or seven languages. This helps global organizations efficiently manage multilingual agreements without the burden of translation efforts. Benefit: Global capabilities. Search and query Some advanced CLM platforms are embedding AI-powered search capabilities through integration with platforms like ChatGPT. Users can query systems for specific contract-related information, and the AI pulls relevant clauses, obligations, or details instantly. Benefit: Time savings. The Biggest Misconception of Generative AI and CLM It’s important to note that the use of generative AI and CLM tools doesn’t have to be mutually exclusive. Some CLM platforms have started embedding generative AI features into their workflows. If you already have a CLM system, oftentimes a generative AI module can be seamlessly added. Taking Advantage of Service Providers in the CLM Space There are two main ways to partner with a service provider to optimize the use of generative AI-enabled CLM technology. Organizations can take a tech-as-a-service approach. This strategy allows businesses to partner with service providers who already have an AI tech stack – like Integreon – to pilot AI solutions before committing to licenses or infrastructure. Benefits: Lower costs, reduced risk, and access to expert guidance. For those who do take on the investment and implementation of CLM tools, service providers can help in several ways: Expert configuration of generative AI modules Playbook development and iterative updates Modular AI deployment that aligns with specific use cases End-to-end support for contract abstraction, redlining, and review The result of this level of support: faster return on tech investment. And a greater certainty of long-term success. Whether you’re working with an existing CLM or exploring a standalone AI solution, understanding your organization’s needs and future goals is key to success. The innovation of generative AI within the CLM space is far from over, and organizations will need to continually evolve their strategies to drive ongoing ROI from their CLM tools.

Cybersecurity, Wire Fraud, and Attorney Liability: The Growing Risk Landscape

Wire transfer fraud is on the rise, and attorneys are increasingly becoming prime targets for cybercriminals. With billions lost annually to fraudulent transactions, legal professionals who fail to implement robust cybersecurity measures can face negligence and legal malpractice claims from clients. At the same time, not all cyber insurance policies provide coverage for money held on behalf of others such as IOLTA escrow accounts used for transactional purposes, leaving law firms exposed to significant financial and legal repercussions. Even worse, when firms sue their insurers over denied claims, courts generally side with the insurer rather than the policyholder. Wire Fraud and the Targeting of Attorneys Wire fraud involves business email compromise (BEC), where cybercriminals use phishing tactics or infiltrate email systems to impersonate attorneys, clients, or third parties involved in financial transactions. According to the FBI’s 2023 Internet Crime Report, cybercriminals stole approximately $2.9 billion through BEC scams, with law firms among the most common targets. A recent case, DeLuca et al. v. SutterWilliams LLC et al. (2025), illustrates how devastating wire fraud can be for attorneys. A cybercriminal impersonated attorneys via email and tricked a law firm into wiring $442,600 from a decedent’s estate to a fraudulent account. The firms much later discovered the deception when discussing (of all things) – not accepting wire transfers, but by then, the money was gone. The estate’s executor sued the attorneys for negligence, legal malpractice, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty, claiming that their failure to verify transactions directly caused financial harm (Law360, 2025). This case, while still pending, highlights how law firms, acting as fiduciaries, can face direct legal liability when failing to implement basic verification and cybersecurity protocols. Even if a firm is also a victim, clients can still hold attorneys accountable for failing to protect entrusted funds. Legal Liability: Negligence and Legal Malpractice Attorneys have a duty of care to safeguard client funds and confidential information. If attorneys fail to implement cybersecurity safeguards, it can result in disciplinary action, malpractice claims, and reputational damage. Negligence: Clients can claim that an attorney failed to implement reasonable cybersecurity measures, such as verifying wire instructions by phone, using multi-factor authentication, or securing email communications. Legal Malpractice: If an attorney’s failure to implement adequate cybersecurity measures results in financial harm to the client, they may face malpractice claims. The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, particularly Rule 1.1 (Competence) and Rule 1.6 (Confidentiality), require attorneys to take reasonable steps to protect sensitive client information. Even if an attorney did not knowingly facilitate a fraudulent transaction, failing to take preventive measures can expose them to liability. To mitigate these risks, attorneys must adopt proactive cybersecurity governance, including client data protection strategies and thorough verification protocols. Cyber Insurance Pitfalls: Why Many Claims Are Denied Many law firms assume that cyber insurance will cover wire fraud losses, but policies often contain exclusions that leave firms without coverage. There are several common gaps in policies, including: Custodial or Escrow Accounts Are Often Not Covered: Cyber insurance often only covers first-party coverage, which are direct losses suffered by the insured firm, not funds held in trust or escrow for clients. This means that in the case of DeLuca et al. v. SutterWilliams LLC et al. (2025), since one firm’s account was spoofed and the attorney at the other firm paid an incorrect account without proper verification, the insurer may deny coverage, leaving the firm responsible for the loss. Social Engineering Exclusions: Some policies explicitly exclude losses from fraud resulting from voluntary transfers, meaning that if an attorney is tricked into authorizing a fraudulent wire, the claim may not be covered. Failure to Follow Policy Terms: Insurers often require policyholders to implement specific cybersecurity protocols. If a firm fails to follow these requirements—such as verifying wire instructions by phone—the insurer may deny coverage based on non-compliance. Law Firms Struggle to Fight Denied Insurance Claims Even when firms sue their cyber insurers over denied claims, courts often side with the insurer. According to Frederick Fisher in The Dangers of Late Notice under Professional Liability Policies and Claims-Made Insurance: The Policy that Changed the Industry, attorneys are the most common profession to have claims-made policy denials upheld in court (58 out of 224 cases). Courts consistently uphold denials based on: Late Reporting of Incidents: Reporting after the policy period expires can result in denial of coverage, as many cyber insurance policies are claims-made and time-sensitive. Failure to Disclose Known Risks: If a firm fails to disclose known risks or past incidents during policy renewal, it may jeopardize coverage or lead to claim denial. Misreporting or Noncompliance: Misreporting claims or failing to comply with precise policy language—such as procedural requirements or security obligations—can also result in coverage denial. One common mistake is assuming a cyber event is not a claim-worthy incident and waiting too long to notify the insurer. Cyber policies generally require notice when an event is first discovered regardless of whether the insured decides of “claim worthiness.” A policy requires that the insured cooperate with the carrier to investigate any loss, and the carriers have the right to associate in an investigation to mitigate or recover a loss. Additionally, carriers have developed sophisticated relationships with law enforcement, including the FBI and Secret Service, to effectuate active recovery or “clawback” of misdirected funds. Delayed reporting significantly impairs the ability of carriers and their law enforcement partners to assist with active recovery. Given these requirements, law firms should immediately report suspected wire fraud, data breaches, or phishing incidents to preserve coverage. How Attorneys Can Protect Themselves Given these rising risks, law firms must take proactive measures to prevent cyber fraud and mitigate liability: Implement Strong Verification Protocols: Require multi-factor authentication (MFA) for financial transactions and verify all wire instructions by phone using a previously known number. Conduct Regular Cybersecurity Training: Ensure all attorneys and staff recognize phishing attempts, social engineering tactics, and best practices for secure communication. Secure Cyber Insurance with Explicit

Transforming Operating Models for the Future

Driving Legal Transformation: Insights from Legal Operations Leaders Legal departments today face mounting pressure to evolve. In a landscape shaped by rising workloads, tighter budgets, and disruptive technologies like generative AI, legal teams are expected to operate with ever greater agility, efficiency, and strategic foresight. To explore how leading organizations are navigating this transformation, Integreon’s EVP of Legal and Compliance Solutions, Gabriel Buigas, hosted a webinar, Transforming Operating Models for the Future, for The Lawyer’s Legal Transformation Week. Joined by senior legal operations leaders from Robert Walters, Equinix, Vodafone, and Lloyds Banking Group, the panel offered a multifaceted look at how legal functions are embracing change and preparing for the future. From Lone Operators to Global Teams: Legal Ops at Every Scale Panelists represented a diverse range of legal operations structures, from single-person departments to mature teams of 40+. Despite these differences, a consistent message emerged: legal transformation is less about size and more about structure, strategy, and cultural buy-in. Isabel Young, Head of Legal Operations at Robert Walters, spoke candidly about leading change as a team of one. “Transformation can’t happen at the side of your desk,” she noted. Young described how she revived a previously stalled initiative by establishing clear roles, timelines, and project accountability, while also using the project to create leadership opportunities for her support staff. Marcelo Peviani, VP of Legal Operations and Strategic Services at Equinix, emphasized the importance of anchoring transformation in a well-defined value framework. “Start with the why,” he advised. “Understand the business priorities and align legal capabilities accordingly.” For Equinix, that meant reassessing how legal services were cataloged and delivered, optimizing resourcing, and embedding continuous improvement into their operating model. Change Management as a Cornerstone All panelists agreed: the success or failure of transformation hinges on how well change is managed. At Vodafone, Hazel Butler’s team has leaned into co-creation and experimentation, particularly around new technologies. “We got everyone involved and made everyone a little bit ops-y,” she said, describing how open workshops and peer-to-peer learning helped drive adoption of Microsoft Copilot. “The excitement is contagious when people are empowered to explore new tools.” Sophie Pearn of Lloyds Banking Group stressed the importance of ownership and early involvement. “Strategy isn’t something that happens ‘over there’, we’re all part of it.” She highlighted how engaging end-users in designing and testing a legal front door solution helped foster alignment and drive usage. Peviani underscored the need to tailor change management to the unique characteristics of legal professionals, who are often skeptical, autonomous, and risk-averse. “You need to meet your team where they are,” he said. Make the change relevant to them, and hold people accountable for the journey.” Legal Ops as a Strategic Enabler of the Future So, what does the legal function of the future look like? According to the panel, it’s a data-driven, customer-centric, and strategically embedded partner to the business. Legal will need to measure its impact more rigorously, focusing on efficiency, effectiveness, and value delivery. “Legal teams will have to run more like law firms,” Butler said, “knowing what they do, who they do it for, and proving the value.” She noted that that doesn’t mean commoditizing legal advice, but instead building the infrastructure processes, data, and technology that allows teams to scale their impact and focus on higher-value work. Young echoed the importance of internal business partnering: “We’re in a great position to embed in the business and help it grow. Legal ops can connect the dots across functions and be a strategic multiplier.” Gen AI: Learning, Experimenting, and Preparing Unsurprisingly, generative AI featured prominently in the discussion. While most panelists acknowledged that in-house adoption still lags behind law firms, there was unanimous agreement on its transformative potential. “We’ve moved from exploration to active experimentation,” said Butler, whose team has used Copilot for nearly two years. “Now, we’re looking at building use cases that are specific to legal and our business needs.” Peviani advised focusing on experimenting with tools and building the underlying datasets and knowledge assets that will power future AI capabilities. Equinix has launched a Legal Asset Management initiative to standardize and document legal deliverables, supporting current efficiency and future AI integration. “AI is more than a technology, it’s a catalyst for behavioral change,” he added. “The best thing you can do now is jump in, learn, and get your team comfortable with this new muscle.” Metrics Matter—but So Does Meaning A closing Q&A explored a perennial question: how do you measure performance when legal work is inherently qualitative? Panelists agreed that while not everything is easily quantifiable, more can be measured than many teams assume. Whether tracking time to resolution, risk avoidance, stakeholder satisfaction, or alignment to strategic goals, metrics should reflect what matters most to the business. “You need to tie your metrics to outcomes,” Young said. “It’s not just about showing efficiency—it’s about showing impact.” Conclusion: Legal Transformation Is a Team Sport From solo operators to global departments, today’s legal functions are under pressure to transform. But as this panel demonstrated, successful transformation isn’t just about technology or process, it’s about leadership, alignment, and culture.

Checklist: How to Evaluate a Specialty Legal Staffing Partner

Law firms and corporate legal departments increasingly turn to legal staffing partners, including alternative legal services providers (ALSPs), to manage workload fluctuations, support new initiatives, and access specialized expertise. However, not all staffing partners are created equal. Choosing the right one can make the difference between a seamless engagement and a frustrating experience. Use this checklist to evaluate potential legal staffing partners and ensure you find a provider who meets your needs today and can scale with you tomorrow. Industry Expertise and Focus Do they specialize in legal staffing, or is legal a small part of a broader staffing offering? Who is recruiting, and do they understand the nuances of legal work? Can they demonstrate experience placing talent in your specific practice areas (e.g., litigation, compliance, contracts, cyber incident response)? Tip: Look for partners with a proven track record supporting organizations like yours. Talent Quality and Vetting Process How do they source candidates? What screening processes are in place (e.g., skills assessments, reference checks, background verification)? Do they offer access to a diverse and credentialed talent pool (e.g., attorneys, paralegals, contract managers)? Tip: Ask for details on their vetting methodology — and don’t be afraid to request sample profiles. Flexibility and Scalability Can they quickly scale teams up or down based on your needs? Do they offer flexible engagement models (e.g., project-based, contract-to-hire, direct hire)? How do they manage urgent requests or specialized staffing needs? Tip: Flexibility is crucial, especially for unpredictable case demands or internal project timelines. Technology and Operational Efficiency Do they leverage technology to streamline hiring, onboarding, and workforce management? Can they integrate with your internal systems (e.g., document management, billing)? What reporting and communication tools do they provide? Tip: A tech-enabled partner can enhance transparency and reduce the administrative burden on your team. Compliance and Risk Management Are they well-versed in labor laws, independent contractor compliance, and industry-specific regulations? How do they protect client confidentiality and ensure data security? What insurance coverage do they carry (e.g., professional liability, workers’ compensation)? Tip: A knowledgeable partner reduces your legal and operational risk, not adds to it. Cultural Alignment and Client Service Do they take time to understand your organization’s culture, values, and work style? How do they approach client relationship management? What is their average response time for inquiries or escalations? Tip: A staffing partner should feel like an extension of your team, not just a vendor. Pricing Transparency Is their pricing structure clear and competitive? Are there hidden fees (e.g., conversion fees if you hire someone full-time)? Do they offer flexible pricing options for different engagement types? Tip: Clear pricing upfront avoids unpleasant surprises later. Partnering with a specialty legal staffing service provider should empower your organization to respond confidently to changing workloads, evolving client expectations, and growing demands for efficiency. A thoughtful evaluation process helps ensure you choose a provider that delivers qualified talent and aligns with your operational goals, culture, and long-term strategy. With the right partner, your legal team gains the agility and support needed to thrive in a fast-moving legal environment.

The Future of Specialty Legal Staffing: How Flexibility and On-Demand Talent are Reshaping Legal Teams

The traditional legal staffing model, built on rigid hierarchies, long-term employment, and fixed teams, is undergoing a profound transformation. This shift is being driven by evolving client expectations, economic pressures, and changing workforce values. As a result, both law firms and in-house legal departments are rethinking how they staff and deliver legal services. Flexibility and on-demand talent are now central, prompting leaders to revisit hiring strategies, resourcing models, and the overall structure of legal work. A New Era of Legal Talent Today’s legal landscape demands agility. Clients and internal business partners expect faster, more cost-effective service without compromising quality. At the same time, lawyers, especially the rising generation, seek flexibility, meaningful work, and better work-life balance. Enter the on-demand specialty legal workforce: highly skilled attorneys, paralegals, and other legal professionals. Third-parties, including alternative legal services providers (ALSPs), connecting freelance and contract lawyers to firms and legal departments are fast becoming a go-to strategy offering specialized talent for discrete projects, overflow work, or better cost management. Whether addressing a sudden surge in litigation, managing regulatory compliance projects, or handling complex transactions, organizations can access top-tier expertise without the overhead of permanent staffing. Flexibility as a Strategic Advantage For law firms, flexible staffing enables scaling teams up or down based on client demand, improving both responsiveness and profitability. For corporate legal departments, it offers a way to manage fluctuating workloads, special projects, or skills gaps without permanently expanding headcount. Need a cybersecurity expert for a data breach? A multilingual attorney for a cross-border deal? A regulatory specialist to navigate a new jurisdiction? Specialty legal staffing on-demand makes accessing skilled resources faster and more cost-effective than ever before. Moreover, flexibility strengthens resilience. Whether responding to economic shifts, litigation surges, or internal business demands, firms and legal departments with dynamic staffing strategies are better equipped to adapt and thrive. Technology: The Great Enabler Technology has made flexible legal staffing viable and effective. Cloud-based project management, secure collaboration platforms, and AI-driven legal research tools allow seamless integration of freelance professionals into firm or department workflows. Virtual teams can now operate with the same efficiency, security, and oversight once reserved for in-house teams. The rise of legal operations (legal ops) professionals is further driving this evolution. Legal ops teams help organizations optimize processes, integrate on-demand talent, ensure consistency, and maintain quality across distributed teams. Legal Staffing Challenges Transitioning to a more flexible staffing model isn’t without challenges. Organizations must establish vetting processes in collaboration with their third-party provider, They must also address cultural shifts, moving from traditional notions of “seat time” to results-driven models. Training and mentorship are critical to developing future legal leaders, and will also need to evolve. Innovative firms and legal departments are already experimenting with virtual mentorship, modular training programs, and collaborative knowledge-sharing initiatives to support talent development in a more flexible environment. What’s Next? The future of legal staffing will be defined by choice, agility, and specialization. Law firms and corporate legal departments that embrace flexible talent strategies and invest in third-party partnerships, technologies and processes to support them will lead the profession forward. Ultimately, this transformation offers exciting possibilities: for firms seeking to better serve their clients, for legal departments striving to support business goals more strategically, and for legal professionals seeking greater autonomy and fulfillment. Organizations willing to rethink traditional models today will set the standard for excellence in the legal industry tomorrow.

Optimizing Your Paralegal Workforce: Leveraging Third-Party Staffing to Balance Cost, Efficiency, and Quality

Legal firms are under constant pressure to deliver exceptional results faster and more cost-effectively. Nowhere is this more evident than in how paralegal resources are deployed. Senior firm leaders, especially COOs and administrators, have an opportunity to rethink their specialty staffing strategies, tapping into both in-house talent and third-party paralegal staffing providers to build more agile, cost-efficient, and expert-driven teams. So how do you achieve that balance between cost, efficiency, and expertise? A hybrid model may be the answer. Redefining the Paralegal Function with Flexibility in Mind The modern paralegal role has evolved far beyond administrative support. Today, they function as legal operations professionals, tech-savvy researchers, and workflow coordinators. However, not all specialized tasks need to live in-house. By partnering with third-party legal staffing providers, firms can access niche expertise on demand, without long-term overhead. Action step: Update your job descriptions and staffing strategy. Which tasks must be handled in-house? Which could be better served through on-demand, specialized staffing? Ensure responsibilities align with your firm’s evolving practice needs and client expectations. Right-Sizing Through Strategic Outsourcing Rather than overburdening associates or underutilizing your in-house team, consider a blended staffing model that includes both permanent paralegals and specialists sourced and vetted by a third-party. This approach allows firms to scale quickly during peak periods and shift resources based on matter complexity. Consider this tiered approach: Senior in-house paralegals manage high-complexity work, supervise workflows, and ensure quality control. Mid-level or contract-based paralegals, sourced via specialty staffing firms, tackle focused, time-bound projects like document review, due diligence, and legal document filing. Entry-level or temp roles can handle routine administrative tasks or volume spike; without increasing fixed costs. Action step: Conduct a workload audit to identify functions that could be outsourced without compromising quality or control. This ensures your internal team is focused on high-value work. Investing in Training: In-House and Through Partners Training is still critical, but it doesn’t have to fall solely on your shoulders. Many third-party legal staffing providers offer paralegals with pre-vetted skills, up-to-date certifications, and training in advanced tools like Relativity, CaseMap, or AI-driven platforms. This reduces ramp-up time and ensures your team can hit the ground running. Action step: Build a dual-path development program: invest in your in-house team while vetting external providers with proven training and quality assurance standards. This ensures consistency across all contributors. Embracing Legal Tech with Strategic Support Legal tech continues to reshape paralegal workflows, but the right people are needed to extract real value. Instead of over-automating, firms can use third-party paralegal partners who are already trained in key platforms, allowing for faster adoption and better ROI. Action step: Run a tech and talent alignment audit. Are your tools matched with team capabilities? Can outside experts fill gaps or train your in-house staff during transitions? Measuring What Matters Across Teams and Vendors Visibility is key. Whether internal or external, tracking the contributions of your paralegal resources helps quantify their impact and fine-tune your staffing mix. Metrics should apply equally to your full-time team and your third-party partners. Action step: Develop KPI dashboards that track: Utilization (billable and non-billable) Task turnaround times Cost savings from outsourcing Quality assurance and error rates This data can help justify staffing decisions and improve both accountability and outcomes. Strategic Paralegal Staffing Is the Future Optimizing your paralegal staffing workforce is not just about doing more with less; it’s about working smarter. By strategically blending in-house expertise with third-party specialty staffing, firms gain flexibility, control, and access to talent they might not otherwise afford or attract. Leveraging outside resources isn’t a stopgap; it’s a competitive advantage. This model enhances quality, improves efficiency, and positions your firm for long-term growth.

GenAI in Global Legal: Three Considerations as You Prepare for CLOC 2025

As CLOC 2025 approaches, in-house legal leaders are bracing for a flood of insights, product demos, and strategic conversations centered on generative AI. With so much noise in the ecosystem—and real pressure to show progress—it can be difficult to know where to begin or how to evaluate what’s worth your time. The good news: you don’t need to figure it all out at once. Below are three practical considerations to help you cut through the buzz, avoid common missteps, and identify meaningful, manageable ways to move forward with GenAI. Step One Consider a whiteboarding session. It seems like every part of the in-house role has a corresponding GenAI mountain to climb. Since joining Integreon, I’ve had in-house friends with clear directives to leverage GenAI who have inquired about the easiest way to get moving. Sorting out what is causing the legal team’s headaches and stealing valuable bandwidth can be tricky. Bringing in a third-party team who is well versed in GenAI use cases to conduct a whiteboarding exercise can help you to get out of the blocks. This exercise will identify places where GenAI can be applied to improve processes, efficiency and save time/money. Consider these common spots where GenAI has a proven track record: Commercial contracting process efficiency: playbook creation, automated template generation, redlining against standards, smart repositories, risk analysis, data migration, etc. Template harmonization and consistency of approval workflows. Third-party due diligence, conflicts, and other corporate compliance tasks. AI-assisted workflow for government/regulatory reporting or initial drafts of discovery responses. This exercise can help you gain incredible insights relatively quickly by drawing from process expertise with real-world client experience, without undertaking a costly consulting project. Step Two Do look at the shiny new technology and understand the landscape, but don’t be blinded –consider whether your legal team needs to buy it to reap the benefits. Don’t build tech—and in many cases, your legal team need not even license it directly. Why? Tech RFP processes are cumbersome and often lead to delays in using newer technologies. Ask yourself: Do I want to run the RFP, get stakeholder approval, and then deal with change management, training, and adoption? Do I really want to implement a solution, or do I just want the corresponding benefits? Technology and GenAI solutions are strong and improving all the time, but they’re not actually magic. They’re more like a garden. Whatever the GenAI-enabled LegalTech solution, company data only becomes insightful once someone has provided the water and sunlight (namely, good data sets) on a continual basis. Nothing is static, and ALSPs are well-positioned to help you tend the garden and reap the benefits without undertaking a full implementation. Step Three Make sure each of your service partners are in the right lane for success. At the end of the day, the goal is to lift the administrative burden so all parties within and supporting the legal department can be effective. Outside counsel has—and will always have—a critical place to provide needed expertise. Consultants, too, have an important place. Staffing providers can be an excellent resource for temporary help. And ALSPs have an increasingly unique and special lane by combining domain knowledge with process and technology experts to transform routine workloads. The trick is ensuring that each type of partner is performing the correct work, for sensible rates. As we see law firms create captive ALSPs and staffing companies create captive law firms, the landscape is getting fuzzy. In my experience, law departments will be best served by delineating these swim lanes deliberately and carefully. It’s an exciting time, to be certain. I’ll be at CLOC with my Integreon colleagues. Let’s meet and talk about the smartest way for you to begin.