The setting
is an AI platform for legal work, used by law firms and the legal teams of companies. is its software that uses AI agents to draft, negotiate, review, and manage contracts.
Falling repeat usage points toward a release problem and a changing mix of lawyers.
The weekly review needs a useful explanation without turning a shared timeline into proof of cause.
Who you’d be doing this for
“I tried it on Monday, then went back to my usual process for the next agreement.”
Diana Pokorny · In-House Counsel · a character in this brief
Uses contract review in Microsoft Word and depends on product decisions reflecting the needs of returning lawyers.
What is at stake
Fewer lawyers keep coming back to contract review in Word each week, even as more of them try it for the first time. You decide whether the AI may rank a release as the leading explanation when release exposure and user tenure point in different directions.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- aggregate movement vs cohort differences
- release timing vs actual exposure
- a concise explanation vs competing interpretations
- flexible investigation vs predictable query cost
Why Harvey
Harvey for Word depends on lawyers returning inside their document workflow, not merely trying a first review.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 52 more at Harvey, or browse every organization.
Where the organization context comes fromThe postings this brief was written from, and the reporting read before it.
The organization context comes from public information. The situation and characters are written for the brief.
Job postings it was written from
Public descriptions of the work at Harvey. They are listed as sources, not as openings. The lines under a posting are its own words, where it meets this brief.
- Senior Product Manager, Embedded Experiences (opens in a new tab)
- Own key embedded experiences in Harvey: Define the vision, strategy, and roadmap for Harvey for Word and the other drafting tools lawyers work in, taking problems from discovery through launch and iteration.
- You know adoption comes from meeting users where they are, inside the tools and habits they already have.
- Staff Product Manager, Agents (opens in a new tab)
- Users need to understand its sources, evaluate its accuracy, and shape it into something they can use.
- Keep the experience simple as Harvey’s capabilities expand, making deliberate decisions about what to surface, what to automate, and where users need control.
- Staff Product Manager (opens in a new tab)
- As we scale, our Enterprise Product organization sits at the center of this mission — connecting the systems our customers use, and scaling into new customer segments & verticals.
- API Product Lead (opens in a new tab)
- You'll define and drive the product vision and roadmap for Harvey's APIs, aligned with company strategy and grounded in evidence from customers, usage data, and the market.
- You'll work closely with engineering, solutions architects, and go-to-market teams to ship, and you'll own the outcomes: adoption and production usage.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.
Where similar work appears
Other live briefs connected to this one, and what connects them.
Similar problems at other organizations
Like this one, each of these is about figuring out which problem is actually worth solving.
Selected investigations must reach an engineer-confirmed cause within one business day in 70% of cases.
You decide who picks which event path to follow first when duplicated events, late arrival and a serving change all look alike: the embedded system's ranking or the engineer on the investigation.
Room-access investigations are taking too long to reach an engineer-confirmed cause.
You must decide where the system's ranking of candidate causes ends and where the on-call engineer's own confirmation of a cause begins.
Procurement-workflow feedback is recurring, but PMs cannot reliably see which complaints share the same cause.
You must decide where the clustering of Smart Import and Workflows feedback stops and where PMs start reading source items and framing the problem.
The same setting, from another role
Each is set around Harvey’s Contracts, written for a different role. They’re separate briefs, not the same scenario.
Discovery details from Gong and Salesforce conflict on active enterprise opportunities.
You have to decide where the system's drafted fields and next steps hand over to the seller, so the record that reaches a proposal matches what legal, procurement and finance discussed.
Legal sponsors want to evaluate contract review, but procurement cannot see a bounded path to a budget decision.
You have to weigh a simpler commercial entry point against enough evidence to earn conversion.
A procurement committee will decide whether a 250-review monthly commitment is credible after counsel questioned proposed redlines.
You must weigh a controlled rollout against the contract volume Finance needs to approve spend.