Legal · Workflow pattern
How companies automate contract review
Evidence from JP Morgan, Arvato, LegalOn, and Preply. The workflow structure, what breaks when using general LLMs vs. purpose-built tools, and when automation is the right answer for legal review.
Common implementation pattern
- Contract uploaded or pulled from contract management system
- AI clause extraction: identify clause type, party obligations, dates, thresholds
- Comparison against company playbook or standard positions
- Risk flagging with clause-level annotations
- Lawyer review queue: review flags, accept or override
- Approval and countersign routing
Researched workflow structure
Reconstructed from public sources and documented patterns — not a guarantee any one team runs it exactly this way.
1
Contract in
Input
Upload or pull from CLM
→
2
AI extraction
AI extraction
Clause type, obligations, dates
→
3
Playbook check
Comparison
Match against company standards
→
4
Risk flags
Validation
Annotate deviations
→
5
Lawyer queue
Human review
Accept, override, or escalate