Your Attorneys Have AI Ideas. Your Team Can’t Build All of Them.

An innovation team or technology group may receive ideas from across the firm. Common requests include:

• Automating contract review
• Building a research assistant
• Summarizing depositions
• Drafting client communications
• Creating knowledge retrieval tools
• Automating intake processes
• Analyzing regulatory changes
• Generating first drafts of standard documents

At the same time, internal capacity is limited. Common constraints include:

• Limited technical staff
• Budget uncertainty
• Unclear ownership of AI initiatives
• Competing priorities across practice groups
• No established evaluation framework
• Undetermined governance requirements
• Insufficient training capacity
• Lack of data readiness
• No established pilot methodology

The result is a growing list of good ideas with no clear way to decide which ones to pursue first.

The goal is not to remove attorneys from the innovation process. It is to give them a structured path from idea to action. The right framework moves each idea through a clear progression:

Idea → Understanding → Evaluation → Decision

This keeps attorneys engaged while ensuring that decisions are made with the right information. Ideas that are not selected are not rejected — they are understood, evaluated, and deferred with transparency.

Depending on where the organization stands, support may include:

• Intake process design
• Evaluation framework development
• Opportunity scoring and prioritization
• Portfolio management setup
• Capacity planning
• Stakeholder alignment
• Pilot design
• Governance integration
• Communications planning
• Ongoing pipeline management

Crestpoint does not apply a proprietary scoring model. The evaluation approach is designed to fit the organization’s decision-making culture and existing governance structures.