A new inquiry arrives in the morning and is routed the same day. The conflicts clerk receives every name to search on the first pass. The responsible attorney decides with the facts on one page. The matter opens complete, and the first invoice goes to the right person in the format the client asked for. That is an intake desk running at full power: the same five people, with 10X the preparation behind every handoff.
Getting there starts with the handoffs, before any AI is added. This worked example follows one invented inquiry from the web form to an open matter and shows, step by step, what AI prepares and where a person decides.
One inquiry, five roles.
The firm is an invented 40-person litigation and employment firm. On a Monday morning, Client A, a regional equipment distributor, fills in the web form about a contract dispute with Party B, a former supplier. The intake coordinator calls back and spends 12 minutes on the phone. Client A’s operations director emails the supply contract afterward.
Five roles touch this inquiry before it becomes billable work: the intake coordinator, the conflicts clerk, the responsible attorney, the firm administrator and the billing coordinator. Each needs something different from the same conversation.
The call notes hold what the intake coordinator thought to ask. Client A mentioned that Party B belongs to a larger group but did not name the parent company. The contract’s signature page is hard to read, and nobody asked for the names of the two individuals who signed it. Nobody asked who receives invoices, or whether Client A has insurance that may respond. Each gap surfaces later, at the handoff that needs it, and someone goes back to the client.
The shared workflow map.
The map puts the whole path on one page. Each row is a step with its owner. Read across a row to see what that person needs, what AI prepares for them, who decides and what moves to the next desk.
Illustrative example with invented data. Inquiry to open matter at an invented 40-person firm.
| Step and owner | What they need | What AI prepares | Who decides | What is handed on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Log the inquiry. Intake coordinator | The web form and call notes | An inquiry packet: parties, matter type, facts as stated, missing items | The intake coordinator confirms the packet | The packet, to the conflicts clerk with the party list marked incomplete |
| 2. Ask for missing items. Intake coordinator | The missing-items list | One draft request to Client A, grouped by who needs each answer | The intake coordinator edits and sends it | The answers, added to the packet |
| 3. Conflict review. Conflicts clerk | Every party, related company and individual | The list of names to search, each with its source | The conflicts clerk runs the firm’s search; the attorney resolves any potential conflict | The conflict result, to the attorney |
| 4. Accept or decline. Responsible attorney | The packet and the conflict result | The completed packet: the facts as stated, the open questions and anything the attorney must see | The responsible attorney | Acceptance and the engagement letter terms, to the firm administrator |
| 5. Open the matter. Firm administrator | The acceptance, the engagement letter and billing details | A matter-opening checklist with gaps flagged | The firm administrator opens the matter | The matter record, to the billing coordinator |
| 6. Set up billing. Billing coordinator | Billing contact, rate arrangement, retainer and e-billing preference | The billing items from the checklist, with anything still missing | The billing coordinator completes setup | A matter ready for its first invoice |
Where the information goes missing.
Every gap in this inquiry has an owner and a moment. The parent company and the two signatories matter to the conflicts clerk before the search, because a search on Party B alone leaves them out. Insurance matters to the responsible attorney before acceptance. The billing contact matters to the firm administrator and the billing coordinator before the matter opens.
A missing-items list grouped by the handoff that needs each answer tells the intake coordinator what to ask first. One request covers everything, in the order the next desks need it.
The map also shows what is never handed to AI. The conflicts clerk runs the firm’s conflict search, and the responsible attorney resolves any potential conflict under the firm’s procedure. The responsible attorney decides whether the firm accepts Client A and on what terms. Legal advice, and any legal deadline, belong to the attorney. The intake coordinator sends every message the client receives.
The prepared inquiry packet.
This is what the intake coordinator reviews after the call, before anything goes to the conflicts clerk.
Illustrative example with invented data. Prepared output from the inquiry handoff.
Inquiry packet: Client A
- Received
- Monday. Web form, then a 12-minute call with the intake coordinator. Supply contract by email after the call.
- Prospective client
- Client A, a regional equipment distributor. Contact: the operations director who completed the web form.
- Matter type
- Commercial contract dispute. Litigation practice.
- Other party
- Party B, a former supplier to Client A.
- Facts as stated
- Client A says Party B ended the supply agreement and is holding credits Client A disputes. Source: web form and call notes.
- Names to search
- Client A; Party B. Source: web form.
- For the responsible attorney
- A recent letter from Party B, as the caller described it. No deadline has been worked out from it; the attorney assesses timing.
- Missing before conflict review
- The name of Party B’s parent company, mentioned on the call but not named. The names of the two individuals who signed the supply contract; the signature page is hard to read.
- Missing before acceptance
- Whether Client A has insurance that may respond.
- Missing before matter opening
- Client A’s billing contact.
- Next step
- Intake coordinator sends Client A one request for all four missing items. The packet goes to the conflicts clerk with the party list marked incomplete.
Prepared for the intake coordinator to review. Nothing has been sent, searched or decided. The conflicts clerk runs the conflict search; the responsible attorney decides whether the firm accepts the matter.
Where the two capabilities fit.
Steps 1 to 4 are the inquiry handoff: the packet, the request for what is missing, the names to search and what the attorney must see. Steps 5 and 6 are matter-opening checklist preparation: the firm administrator’s check of the accepted matter against the engagement letter and the firm’s required fields.
In this example the checklist catches what intake left open. Client A’s operations director supplies the parent company, the two signatories and the insurance answer, but not the billing contact. After the conflicts clerk’s review and the attorney’s acceptance, the inquiry becomes Matter 26-0412, hourly, with a retainer the engagement letter states. The checklist reads the acceptance record, the engagement letter and the packet and lists two open items, each blocking billing setup. The billing contact is still missing, and the responsible attorney raises it with the operations director. The e-billing preference was never recorded, and the billing coordinator gets it once the contact is named. Whether work starts before both close is the firm administrator’s call under the firm’s own rule.
We build both capabilities in the AI the firm already uses, whether that is ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini, on the firm’s own intake and matter-opening procedures. The five people in the map keep every decision they hold today.
What the firm changes before first use.
- Required fields by matter type.Agree what a complete packet contains for a commercial dispute and for an employment matter. The intake form asks for the same list.
- An owner for every handoff.Name the role that receives each step, and what that role does with an incomplete packet.
- The conflict procedure, as it stands.The packet feeds the firm’s existing search and review. The conflicts clerk says which names, related companies and individuals the search needs.
- The matter-opening checklist.Make the billing contact and the e-billing preference required fields, and decide whether work may start while either is missing and who makes that exception.
- The workspace.The IT director confirms which workspace may hold prospective-client information.
- The awkward cases.Write the expected packet for an inquiry with no parent company named, one with two spellings of the same party, and one outside the firm’s practice areas. Review the first runs against them.
Most of these changes write down a rule the firm already follows. Intake is one of four areas in an AI adoption plan for the business side of your law firm, which maps finance, client service and people operations the same way and scores where to start. An AI org chart should show the work between teams shows how one workflow looks from each team that touches it.
Bring your intake form and one recent inquiry that took too long to open, and we will map its handoffs with you.