Novaplex: The multi-million-pound cost of fixing documents
Small, often overlooked frictions in legal document workflows quietly erode profitability, increase compliance exposure and compound into millions of pounds in lost time. Addressing this challenge requires more than new tools, it demands disciplined workflows supported by the right productivity technology, says Michelle Langton, CEO at Novaplex
The legal tech market offers no shortage of innovation, from AI-powered drafting and contract review tools to sophisticated document management systems. And yet, many firms continue to operate with document processes that have evolved organically rather than strategically, says Michelle Langton, CEO at Novaplex.
While law firms invest heavily in systems to store and retrieve documents, they rarely apply the same operational discipline to how those documents are created and managed throughout their lifecycle, she notes, a problem that has persisted for over a decade.
From her experience, lawyers frequently reuse and amend legacy clauses or entire contracts when creating new documents, rather than leveraging structured knowledge systems or controlled templates.“
While this can appear efficient, it often introduces avoidable risk. Without structured controls, firms increase the likelihood of outdated provisions, inconsistent drafting and unintended liability exposure, with potentially significant financial and reputational consequences,” Langton explains.
Compounding this problem is the lack of metadata management. Embedded document data, including authorship history, tracked changes and file origins, can inadvertently expose confidential information if not properly controlled, thus posing severe governance, financial and reputational risks for a law firm.
Langton notes: “During a precedent restyling project we did for a firm, our metadata analysis revealed files originating from another firm. We have also seen sensitive internal commentary left embedded in documents. These are not isolated incidents; they point to systemic governance weaknesses.”
Manual formatting is another hidden drain on productivity and margin. Some firms lack a clearly defined house style, while others impose a single house style across diverse practice areas despite differing regulatory and client requirements. “When standards do not reflect operational reality, lawyers compensate manually. That time is rarely visible, but it is commercially significant.”
This problem intensifies during what Langton calls the ‘document round-tripping’ stage. As files pass between internal teams and external parties, formatting inconsistencies multiply, version control weakens and further manual correction follows.
Small fixes, massive impact: the productivity multiplier effect
These inefficiencies are not new, but many firms have normalised them. And when multiplied across hundreds of lawyers and thousands of documents annually, even small inefficiencies become financially material.
Langton estimates that in a firm with 450 lawyers producing just one document per week per lawyer (which is a conservative assumption) saving 30 minutes per file equates to approximately 11,700 hours annually. At an average charge-out rate of £450 per hour, that represents more than £5m in recoverable time.
This article originally appeared in Briefing, click here to read the article in full.
