Skip to content
MALLICK/TECHAI systems for law firms
Start a conversation
Services

Start with a diagnosis, not a build.

Three services, one operating model: diagnose the environment, build the workflow and embed the capability.

01

AI Readiness Assessment

Two weeks

Your firm already has AI in it. The assessment maps where client information goes and sets the order of action.

Evidence comes from tracing the paths information actually takes, not from a software survey.

  • Every route client information can currently take out of the firm, drawn on one page
  • A register of sanctioned, embedded and unsanctioned AI use across the firm
  • How that sits against the guidance that applies in your jurisdiction
  • What to address first, sequenced
The report answers, in this order
  1. Where is client information going today?
  2. Does that hold up against the guidance that applies to us?
  3. What should we build first?
02

AI Systems for Law Firms

Scoped per workflow

Built inside the matter lifecycle. Designed for review. Measured against known answers.

One workflow taken all the way, rather than a pilot spread across five.

See the approach
  • Tenancy, sub-processors and identity decided before any tool is chosen
  • Source citation on every output, and a named review gate before anything leaves
  • Escalation below a confidence threshold, so the system stops rather than guessing
  • Scored against known answers — a number a risk committee can act on
03

AI Fluency for Lawyers

Briefing to six-week cohort

From occasional prompting to confident, responsible AI use across everyday legal work.

Participants practise on their own legal material and leave with repeatable methods, not a prototype.

See the approach
  • Task judgment — where AI belongs, where it does not and who remains accountable
  • Precise instruction, source checking and verification against the underlying material
  • Confidentiality, tenancy, retention and conduct covered directly, not waved at
  • Small groups for candid practice, direct feedback and demonstrated fluency
Assessment boundary
  • Decision support and operating design, not legal advice
  • Workflow and information-path review, distinct from a full IT security audit
  • Vendor-neutral: the outcome is an action plan, not a product recommendation
  • Training is scoped separately when capability, rather than exposure, is the need

It examines paths, not case files. No privileged material is ingested.

Who it fits
  • A firm of roughly 20–75 lawyers, or an in-house legal team of five or more
  • The decision-maker is on the kickoff call, and five or more staff can be interviewed across roles
  • There is already AI in the building, whether or not leadership knows where

Teams with no current AI use start with fluency. Teams with active use start with assessment.

Method

Five stages. One workflow at a time.

  1. 01

    Diagnose

    Workflow mapped to task level: input, decision, output, sign-off, and the consequence if it is wrong.

  2. 02

    Architect

    Whose tenancy, which sub-processors, whose identity model. Everything downstream follows.

  3. 03

    Build

    One workflow, fixed scope, review gate placed deliberately rather than added later.

  4. 04

    Prove

    Scored against known answers. A number your risk committee can act on.

  5. 05

    Govern

    Risk tiering, system register, review protocols, vendor assessment, incident runbook. Short enough to be adopted.

The right starting point becomes clear in the first conversation.

Bring the workflow and its current sign-off. You will leave with a clear recommendation: assess, build or train.