A prospective client calls on Friday. The lawyer has the message, the assistant has the attachments, and billing has no matter number. A law firm intake workflow must explain how those pieces come together. Start with the firm’s existing engagement requirements, then make each administrative handoff clear enough for a colleague to complete without chasing the history.
Follow a Recent Inquiry
Use an appropriate completed example with access authorized by the firm. Trace how contact details arrived, who requested more information, when the lawyer made the engagement decision, and how the assigned team received the file. Keep the firm’s conflict, identity, and engagement checks under its established attorney-approved process. The coordinator maps those checks; the diagram does not create new legal criteria.
Name the Record at Each Handoff
In a worked example, an Ohio litigation firm receives a prospective client’s inquiry by phone. The intake coordinator records the minimum information needed for the firm’s preliminary process. A lawyer determines whether and how the firm may proceed. Once the engagement steps are complete, the matter team receives the approved instructions and file reference. Those records need connections, but they do not all need the same access or status.
| Record | What the Next Person Needs |
|---|---|
| Inquiry | Contact route, request summary, and the next approved intake step. |
| Engagement Decision | The authorized decision and any conditions or open questions. |
| Matter Handoff | Assigned lawyer, agreed scope, approved documents, and next administrative action. |
Draw the Return Paths
Include an incomplete inquiry, a request the firm declines, and a client who provides new information after review. Show who receives a correction and whether an earlier decision needs to be revisited. Staff should not have to invent a route when the ordinary sequence stops. If a system helps classify requests, make the human check and the stop condition visible beside that automated action.
Test With the People Doing the Work
Walk an ordinary request and an exception through the proposed flow. Ask the receiving person to explain the next action using only the record they receive. Missing context is a design finding, not a reason to coach the person through a failed test. Record what must change in the form, permissions, or instructions before the process is introduced.
Review What the Trial Exposes
After the trial, compare the proposed workflow with the route staff actually followed. If an assistant still emails the lawyer to learn whether a matter may open, find out what information the record failed to show. Revise the relevant field or instruction, then test the same case again. Keep the lawyer’s acceptance decision distinct from the administrator’s setup work.
The ABA’s 2026 implementation guidance recommends involving the people who will use a system and introducing it through a pilot. That is directly relevant to intake: staff need to test the work they will perform, using their own permissions, before the firm relies on the new route.