A fixed legal deadline can turn a manageable quality question into a commitment decision.
Speed matters most when evidence must still withstand close human review.
Who you’d be doing this for
“We get one policy window a year—if the sources aren’t trustworthy, I’m not sending it out.”
Yu Kimura · Deputy General Counsel, Commercial
Owns a company-wide annual policy refresh and must distribute defensible updates to regional legal teams.
What is at stake
Reviewers disagree on 14% of citations pulled from legacy policy documents, and the customer cannot move its refresh cycle. You have to sequence the rollout and set review gates so nothing unverified reaches legal work.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- fixed launch date vs. verification depth
- broad corpus coverage vs. defensible citations
- automation speed vs. human review capacity
- customer commitment vs. configuration control
Why Harvey
At Harvey, this often matters where legal teams need source-linked work to remain reviewable under immovable timelines.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 17 more at Harvey, or browse every organization.
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.