Your score suggests Legal is either reviewing too much, or not enough. Both create risk. The solution is not simply to review more or review less. It is to build a system where the right things get reviewed and the rest do not need to.
Book a free session →Most organisations sit in one of two places on Legal involvement, and both create risk, just in different ways.
Failure mode 1
Legal as bottleneck
Every contract requires Legal sign-off before it moves. Legal becomes reactive, spending its time on NDAs and standard contracts rather than complex, high-value work. Business teams start looking for workarounds.
Failure mode 2
Legal out of the loop
Business teams have learned to work around Legal because the process is too slow. Contracts go out with terms that have not been reviewed. Legal finds out after the fact, if at all.
Neither position is sustainable. The answer is not a policy change. It is a structural one.
The organisations that get this right have one thing in common: Legal defines the rules, and the system enforces them. Business teams operate within those rules without needing Legal's involvement for every transaction.
Hard-locked clauses
Legal defines which paragraphs and clauses cannot be changed. Those terms are protected at source. Business teams can customise what Legal has determined is customisable, and nothing else. The governance is architectural, not supervisory.
Conditional approval triggers
Legal sets the thresholds. A contract with standard terms below a set value routes directly to signing. A contract with modified terms, or above a certain value, routes to Legal automatically. These rules run without anyone making a judgement call each time.
Guardrails, not gatekeeping
Precisely is designed so that Legal's role shifts from reviewing individual contracts to maintaining the framework that governs all contracts. This is a fundamentally more scalable model for a mid-market Legal team.
Metadata validation
Before a contract reaches final approval or signing, Precisely can require users to validate that metadata is accurate and consistent with the document content. This creates a structured quality check without Legal needing to intervene manually.
Legal teams that implement this model consistently report the same outcome: they stop being asked about contracts they should never have been involved in, and start being involved earlier in the contracts that matter. The volume of routine review work drops. Business teams move faster because they understand exactly what they can and cannot do.
If Legal involvement in contracts is creating friction, or if contracts are going out without sufficient oversight, a 30-minute session is the most direct way to see how this works for your organisation.
Book a free session →30 minutes · Free · No obligation