Sign in
Set up for Law firms

AI for insights and analytics

AI analytics for law firms

A client the relationship partner calls solid paid 410,000 last year for one practice area, opened four matters instead of eleven, and has drifted from 91 to 78 percent realisation. AI analytics reads the practice management export and answers the managing partner's question: which relationships are fading, and where is the firm leaving fees.

Ask it in your own words

These are the questions law firms ask. Each one maps to a measure our tools compute from your files. The AI model chooses the measure and explains the result; the arithmetic is done by our code, and every total is checked.

The questionThe measure behind itWhat comes back
Which clients are going quiet?Dormant clients, by prior feesClients past their own matter-opening gap, by prior-year fees, with the relationship partner.
Which clients use one practice group where similar clients use four?Practice areas per client against normPractice groups per client against the norm for its size and sector, with the fee gap.
Where is realisation falling, and on whose matters?Realisation by clientFees billed over standard value by client and matter, with the write-offs listed.
Who owes us the most, for the longest?Lock-up by clientWork in progress and debtor days by client, with the ones above threshold and their trend.
How dependent are we on a few partners' books?Partner book concentrationFees by originating partner, top-five share and the effective number of partners.
Which clients came through a referral from another group?Cross-referralMatters opened by referral between practice groups, by referring and receiving group.

A conversation, with the figures

Every figure below was computed by a tool from the rows and checked before it was shown. The lines sum; the percentages match; each line opens to the rows that make it.

Where is fee income going quiet?

Prior-year fees from clients now past their own matter-opening gap total $4.9m across 3 practice groups. Employment group accounts for $2.1m, 43% of it.

Employment group$2.1m43% of the total
Corporate group$1.7m35% of the total
Real estate group$1.1m22% of the total
The 3 lines sum to$4.9m0 unexplained

Which employment clients?

3 clients hold $1.1m of the $2.1m in the Employment group, 51% of it. Each opened fewer matters this year than last, and two have realisation below 80 percent after write-offs.

Halden Manufacturing$410k4 matters against 11; realisation 78%
Brightwater Retail$380kno matter in 7 months; lock-up 164 days
Ashworth Logistics$290kone practice group; peers use four
These 3 are$1.1m51% of Employment group

What should the partners do?

A relationship conversation with each, owned by the relationship partner and joined by a partner from a group the client does not use. Finance chases the lock-up separately. The dormant list is reviewed monthly by the managing partner.

Relationship partnersMeet Halden, Brightwater and Ashworth with a second practice groupThis quarter
FinanceChase Brightwater's 164-day lock-upThis month
Managing partnerReview dormant clients by prior fees monthlyMonthly
Which clients are going quiet?Which clients use one practice group where similar clients use four?Where is realisation falling, and on whose matters?Who owes us the most, for the longest?

The measures behind the answers

Each measure has one formula, one source and one meaning. They are computed per partner and practice group and in total, and every one carries an identity that must hold before it is shown.

MeasureFormulaFromWhat it tells you
Practice areas per client against normPractice groups with fees in 24 months ÷ median for clients of the same type and sizePractice management systemThe cross-selling list, by client and practice
Dormant clients, by prior feesPrior-year fees of clients with no new matter in k × their own typical interval ÷ prior-year feesMatter intake records; billingClients who have begun instructing another firm
Realisation by clientBilled ÷ time at a fixed standard rate; collected ÷ billed; trend per clientTime and billing; cashDiscounts that grew without a decision
Lock-up by client(Unbilled work in progress + unpaid bills) ÷ average daily fees, per clientWork in progress and receivables ledgersClients the firm is financing
Partner book concentrationShare of each partner's fees from their largest client and top threeBilling by originating and responsible partnerBooks that depend on one client
Cross-referralMatters opened for a client by a partner other than the relationship partner, sent and received, per partnerMatter intake recordsWho shares clients and who keeps them
Matter profitability by leverageMargin per matter; hours by grade delivered against hours by grade pricedTime records; matter budgetsPartner time on work priced for associates
Client fee concentrationTop ten clients' share of fees; largest client share; effective number of clientsBillingDependence at firm level
Share of client legal spendFees from the client ÷ estimated external legal spend, by source gradeBilling; client disclosures and estimatesHow much of the panel spend the firm holds
New matter originationNew matters and first-year fees by source: existing client, referral, pitch, directoryMatter intake recordsWhere growth actually comes from

Each measure is worked through, with the export it comes from and what to drop, in Client and business development KPIs for law firms.

What the AI model does, and what our tools do

The AI model chooses the measure

From your question and the measures declared for law firms, the model picks the one that answers it, and the period and comparison the question implies.

Our tools do the arithmetic

Deterministic code reads the rows, computes the measure, and checks the identities below. The same question on the same data gives the same answer, every time.

The AI model explains, and cites

The AI model writes the sentence around the result, naming the partner or account behind it. It states no figure that is not in the result, and every figure links to its rows.

The identities that must hold

RealisationTime at standard = billed + written off + written down + open work in progress
Lock-upClient work in progress and debtors sum to the ledgers
Practice areasClient fees by practice sum to client total; client totals sum to firm fees
Cross-referralReferrals sent across all partners = referrals received

What it reads

The exports law firms already produce. Column names are mapped once and the mapping is reused. A file is the way in; scheduled delivery and connections to your systems come with the plan, and every source is listed here.

  • Practice management system
  • Matter intake records
  • Billing
  • Time and billing
  • Cash
  • Work in progress and receivables ledgers
  • Time records
  • Matter budgets
  • Client disclosures and estimates

Who owns each answer

An answer is a list with an owner and a cadence, or it is a chart nobody works.

MeasuresOwnerCadence
Dormant clients; lock-up by clientRelationship partners; financeMonthly
Practice area gaps; cross-referralManaging partner; practice headsQuarterly
Realisation by client; matter profitabilityPractice heads; financeQuarterly
Concentration; share of client spend; originationManaging partnerTwice a year

Questions law firms ask about AI analytics

What counts as dormant for a law firm?

A client past its own typical gap between new matters, not a fixed period. A client that opens a matter a month is dormant after three months of silence; one that opens two a year is not. The gap is computed per client from the practice management export, and the list is ranked by prior-year fees.

Can it show realisation without exposing time records?

It needs standard value and billed value by matter, which the practice management system exports without narrative. Realisation is billed over standard, by client and matter, with write-offs as their own line. Fee-earner names can be replaced with identifiers before upload.

How is the practice-area norm set?

From your own clients: the median number of practice groups used by clients of similar size and sector. A client using one group where similar clients use four is a gap worth the fees those groups earn from the peers, and the peer set is shown so the partner can judge it.

Does it replace the relationship partner's view?

It tests it. A partner who calls a client solid is shown the matter count, the realisation trend and the lock-up, and decides what they mean. The figures come from tools; the conversation with the client is still the partner's.

See it on your data

Bring a few thousand rows. The data map opens next, every column mapped once, and the first question is answered in minutes. Free, in your browser, no account.