CASE STUDY CANVAS

Note: Submit to save progress and enable collaboration. Submission alone does not release the Case Study Canvas. Details on submission, saving, and authorization appear in Section 6 of the Acknowledgment at the bottom of the Case Study Canvas as well as in the answer to Question 9 of the FAQ on the L.E.G.A.L. website.

Organization:

Primary Point of Contact. The primary contact is responsible for coordinating the organization’s L.E.G.A.L. profile, managing internal collaborators, and serving as the point of contact for follow-up, including receipt of client-specific release requests as explained in the Acknowledgment at the end of the Case Study Canvas as well as in theL.E.G.A.L. Nondisclosure Policy FAQ on the L.E.G.A.L. website.

Name

Title

Email

Optional Collaborators. Internal collaborators may also contribute input to the live Case Study Canvas. To add internal collaborators, enter their email addresses in the field below, separated by a comma.

Important: To enable collaboration, responses must be submitted to be saved. Submission alone does not authorize release to any client. Submission, saving, and authorization are explained in detail in Section 6 of the Acknowledgment at the bottom of the Case Study Canvas and in the answer to Question 9 of the FAQ on the L.E.G.A.L. website.

Collaborator email(s):

(Example: collaborator1@example.com, collaborator2@example.com, collaborator3@example.com…)

1. Use-case Name. What is the best available shorthand for referring to the use case? [ANNOTATION]

2. Deployment Date. When was the use case first rolled out? [ANNOTATION]

3. Updates. When was the last material upgrade or update? [ANNOTATION]

4. Brief Description. Please provide a concise description (three to six sentences) of the use case. [ANNOTATION]

5. Operation. Where in the workflow (e.g., stage of matter) does the use case operate? Which concrete tasks are being automated or augmented? [ANNOTATION]

6. Objective(s). Which objectives does this use case advance? (check all that apply) [ANNOTATION]

7. Impact on Objective(s). Please explain how the use case advances the objective(s) checked directly above. Where possible, include specific examples or directional metrics (e.g. throughput, turnaround time, predictability scores). [ANNOTATION]

8. Client Value. What specific and visible value does this initiative deliver to clients? What about this use case should influence their commercial decisions (e.g., work allocation, fee structures) or deliver demonstrable benefits (e.g., measurable savings, tangible improvements)? [ANNOTATION]

9. Commercial Impact. What has been the commercial impact of this use case? Please describe how it has changed your client relationships (e.g. generated new work, reduced costs, altered fee models). Where possible, include specific examples or directional metrics (e.g.percentage cost reduction, new matter types, volume of work retained). [ANNOTATION]

10. Matters. Which matter types does this use case primarily apply to (e.g. general M&A, litigation, compliance, IP)? Please specify practice areas or categories not client names. [ANNOTATION]

11. Users. Who are the primary users (e.g. associates, partners, paralegals, project managers, technical staff, clients)? Please specify roles or functions, not individuals. [ANNOTATION]

12. Adoption Metrics. What are your best available adoption indicators? Please include quantitative metrics where possible (e.g. percentage of matters covered, number of active users, frequency of use) and qualitative signals (e.g. user feedback, repeat usage). [ANNOTATION]

13. Target. What would an optimal adoption footprint look like (e.g. proportion of matters, user penetration, business units)? What specific actions are you taking to drive adoption toward that goal? [ANNOTATION]

14. Models. Which GenAI models does this use case rely on (e.g. GPT-5, Gemini, Claude, Llama)? Please specify version(s) if relevant. [ANNOTATION]

15. Buy. Which commercially available tools are part of the stack (e.g. Legora, Harvey, CoCounsel, Microsoft Copilot)? Please list primary tools and their function in this use case. [ANNOTATION]

16. Build. Which components have you built, configured, or customized (e.g. connectors, fine-tuning, UI)? Why was this approach chosen instead of using off-the-shelf solutions? [ANNOTATION]

17. Data Sources. Which data sources (e.g. DMS, matter management, precedent libraries) are required for this use case? What steps were taken to prepare or clean data to achieve AI readiness? [ANNOTATION]

18. Selection. How did you evaluate and select models, tools, and integrations for this use case? What criteria (e.g. accuracy, cost, security, vendor reputation) were most decisive? [ANNOTATION]

19. Evaluation. How did you test full-stack performance before rollout (e.g. pilots, benchmarks, feedback)? What factors (e.g. accuracy, efficiency, user adoption) ultimately drove your decision to proceed? [ANNOTATION]

20. Opt-in/Opt-out. Do you offer clients the ability to opt-in or opt-out of these GenAI-enabled services? If yes, please describe when and how you present these options. [ANNOTATION]

21. Accuracy. What accuracy threshold do you consider acceptable for this use case? How do you measure it (e.g. benchmarks, user validation, error rates), and what safeguards (e.g. human-in-the-loop, escalation protocols) ensure it is consistently achieved? [ANNOTATION]

22. Ethical Use. What practices or guidelines did you adopt to ensure ethical and responsible use of AI in this project (e.g. bias testing, transparency measures, restrictions on sensitive data use)? [ANNOTATION]

23. Controls. What technical or organizational controls are in place to address risks such as data segregation, model privacy, auditability, and bias mitigation? [ANNOTATION]

24. Road Map. What enhancements or next steps are planned for this use case, and on what timeline (e.g., 3-6 months, 12 months, 24+ months)? Please include both technical improvements and adoption/rollout milestones. [ANNOTATION]

25. Lessons Learned. What are the most important lessons learned from this use case so far—whether technical, strategic, cultural, or commercial? [ANNOTATION]

26. [optional] Anything else? This optional catch-all question leaves space for (but does not require) information, observations, or opinions not elicited above that you consider important to share with respect to your organization’s usage of GenAI to deliver legal services. [ANNOTATION]

27. Areas of Law [ANNOTATION]

28. Areas of Application [ANNOTATION]

L.E.G.A.L. (Leaders Exploring Generative AI in Law) is a permissioned intelligence system designed by LexFusion Intelligence, an arm of Baretz+Brunelle LLC. This Acknowledgment applies to your submission of responses to the L.E.G.A.L. Case Study Canvas. The full L.E.G.A.L. Nondisclosure Policy is available here.

By authorizing release of responses to [REQUESTING CLIENT], you acknowledge and agree to the following:

Purpose and Design

L.E.G.A.L. is a standardized, reusable survey system designed to reduce duplicative client questionnaires while enabling longitudinal, behavior-grounded market intelligence and benchmarking.
Persistent Responses

Responses submitted through the Case Study Canvas are persistent. You may update responses and permissions over time as described below.
How Responses Are Used and Shared

This Acknowledgment is specific to [REQUESTING CLIENT]. By proceeding, you authorize LexFusion Intelligence to transmit the foregoing Case Study Canvas to [REQUESTING CLIENT].

In addition, a core objective of L.E.G.A.L. is to establish an industry-wide shared point of reference: market-level reporting that both you and clients, like [REQUESTING CLIENT], can rely on to ground informed, fact-based dialogue.

Such analysis is de-identified, aggregated, and commercially oriented. No firm-level specifics are disclosed or attributed without separate, express written consent—this includes case studies. That is, while this market-level analysis may reference broad themes, lessons, and trends distilled from submitted Case Study Canvases, we will not share the specifics of, let alone attribute, any case studies without express, separate, written consent.
Withdrawal of Authorization

You may withdraw this Acknowledgment at any time. Withdrawal applies prospectively. Withdrawal does not retract any prior transmissions to [REQUESTING CLIENT] while this Acknowledgment was active. Withdrawal on this form is specific to [REQUESTING CLIENT]—it does not affect withdrawal from the L.E.G.A.L. program as a whole.

If you wish to withdraw from program-wide composite benchmarking and reporting use, you may request program-level withdrawal by emailing LFIntel@baretzbrunelle.com. Such withdrawal applies prospectively and does not affect analysis already produced.
Client-Requested Fresh Release and Notice

From time to time, participating clients like [REQUESTING CLIENT] may request a fresh release of the Case Study Canvas. If a fresh release requested by [REQUESTING CLIENT] includes your data, you will receive advance notice and have an opportunity, but no obligation, to update responses before delivery or to withdraw this Acknowledgment. If you take no action, the then-current submitted responses and authorization state on file will govern what is released to [REQUESTING CLIENT] at the close of the response period.
Submission, Saving, Collaboration, and Client Authorization (Submit ≠ Release)

Responses must be submitted to be saved in the system and to enable collaboration.

Submission (saving). Clicking Submit saves the current state of your responses and makes them available for continued work, including by collaborators. You may submit multiple times as you refine your answers. Submitting does not, by itself, release any responses to any client.

Client authorization (release). Client visibility is controlled separately through the client-specific authorization checkbox below. Authorization applies to all responses—there is no question-by-question authorization. Authorization does not submit responses, and submission does not authorize release. Release is authorized only if the authorization box is checked. Only if the authorization box is checked, your submitted responses may be released to [REQUESTING CLIENT] after the response period closes. Client-specific authorization may be withdrawn at any time by unchecking the checkbox.
Contact Information

Contact information (including collaborator emails) entered in the Case Study Canvas will be retained solely for program administration, including notices related to client-requested fresh releases. Contact information will not be shared with clients or other third parties but may be used to facilitate coordination within your organization (e.g., routing subsequent registrations to your organization's established Primary Point of Contact) consistent with the original business purpose for which contact information was provided.

Any client-supplied contact information will be deleted following the close of the response period and related follow-up.

[ANNOTATION]

Authorize release to [REQUESTING CLIENT] as outlined in the Acknowledgment above

Email_Buffer

Internal Token

INTELLIGENCE SURVEY FOR: LEXFUSION INTELLIGENCE

STRATEGIC RATIONALE & IMPACT

USERS & ADOPTION

Tooling and Evaluation

Notice, Risk, Controls, and Ethical Use

Looking Back and Ahead

TAGS (check all that apply)

L.E.G.A.L. Case Study Canvas Acknowledgment

Purpose and Design

Persistent Responses

How Responses Are Used and Shared

Withdrawal of Authorization

Client-Requested Fresh Release and Notice

Submission, Saving, Collaboration, and Client Authorization (Submit ≠ Release)

Contact Information