Legal work consultation system

Abstract

To make assignment of a person responsible for legal work efficient.SOLUTION: A legal work consultation system according to the present invention includes a site-responsible-person terminal, a legal-work-responsible-person terminal, and a legal work consultation server, and includes the steps of: storing a consultation record between a site responsible person and a legal work responsible person; receiving a consultation request from the site responsible person; analysing the details of the consultation request; and identifying a legal work responsible person based on the analysis result.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 2

Description

[Technical field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a legal consultation system. [Background technology]

[0002] As so-called digital transformation (DX) technology in the legal field, technology that supports contract review work (for example, Patent Documents 1 to 3) has been disclosed. On the other hand, technology for smooth communication between legal personnel has also been disclosed (Patent Document 4). [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] JP 2020-013524 A [Patent Document 2] JP 2021-174474 A [Patent Document 3] Patent Publication No. 2021-117844 [Patent Document 4] JP 2020-166870 A Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] By the way, in a real company, it is important to streamline the interactions between legal staff and clients. For example, when a consultation request is received from a field staff member, it takes a long time to assign the case. The longer it takes to assign the case, the longer the lead time to complete the case.

[0005] Therefore, an object of the present invention is to improve the efficiency of the assignment of legal personnel. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] [Item 1] In a legal consultation system including a field staff terminal, a legal staff terminal, and a legal consultation server, A step of storing a consultation history between the on-site staff and the legal staff; A step of accepting a request from a field staff member; Analyzing the content of the request; identifying a legal representative based on results of the analysis; A legal consultation system including the above is obtained. Effect of the Invention

[0007] According to the present invention, it is possible to improve the efficiency of assigning legal personnel. [Brief description of the drawings]

[0008] [Figure 1] 1 is a diagram showing an example of the configuration of a legal consultation system according to an embodiment of the present invention; [Diagram 2] FIG. 1 is a process flow diagram of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

[0009] The present invention will be described below with reference to the preferred embodiments. [Item 2] In a legal consultation system including a field staff terminal, a legal staff terminal, and a legal consultation server, A step of storing a consultation history between the on-site staff and the legal staff; A step of accepting a request from a field staff member; Analyzing the content of the request; identifying a legal representative based on results of the analysis; Legal consultation system including.

[0010] <Details of the embodiment> Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0011] <Summary> As shown in FIG. 1, a legal consultation system (hereinafter referred to as the "system") according to an embodiment of the present invention includes a legal consultation server, a legal officer terminal (the primary legal officer terminal and the secondary legal officer terminal are collectively referred to as the "legal officer terminals"), and an on-site terminal. The client in this embodiment may be anyone in any department within the company who may make some kind of request. For example, it is not limited to the case where the development department requests the legal department to review the contract when concluding an outsourcing contract, but may also be the case where the marketing department consults on the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations, or all employees may make labor-related requests to the human resources department.

[0012] The present invention is intended to solve the problem of assigning legal personnel in legal consultation systems. Specifically, it provides a technology that automatically assigns the most suitable legal personnel based on past consultation trends. In current legal consultation services, it takes time to find and assign a legal personnel suitable for the content of the consultation. By reducing this time, the efficiency of the entire legal consultation can be significantly improved, and problems can be resolved quickly.

[0013] The components of the present invention will be specifically described below.

[0014] <Step 1> This system is In the present invention, factors such as the case difficulty of each request, the ability of the legal staff, the deadline for the case, and the current case load of the legal staff are taken into consideration. Assignment is made based on a combination and balance of these factors. In other words, if the request is difficult or the deadline is short, it may be assigned to a legal staff with a higher ability or fewer current cases. The system stores past consultation history including these details. This consultation history includes various factors such as the subject of the consultation, the time required, the steps to resolution, and the legal staff's area of ​​expertise. This makes it possible to analyze past cases and understand their trends.

[0015] As a side effect, through this process, a case difficulty label is automatically assigned to each legal staff member for each request, and a performance score is calculated for each legal staff member. Therefore, this data can be used as the basis for automatically labeling the difficulty of cases, and at the same time, as the basic material for personnel evaluation of legal staff members. This has the potential to improve not only the efficiency of legal work, but also the fairness and transparency of personnel evaluations.

[0016] In the following, an example of storing a history of past consultations between a field staff member and a legal staff member will be described. Specifically, this consultation history includes various elements such as an overview of the consultation, the legal staff member's field of expertise, the time required for the consultation, the number of steps required to reach a resolution, and the resulting legal advice.

[0017] Furthermore, the consultation history may include not only the specific content but also the legal personnel's skill set, experience, and ability to handle consultations, such as knowledge of specific laws and regulations, understanding of a particular industry or business sector, and approaches to legal problem solving. Indicators reflecting the quality of the consultation, such as the client's satisfaction and feedback, and the speed at which the consultation was resolved, may also be recorded.

[0018] This system includes a legal officer terminal and a legal consultation server. As a result, all consultations between the on-site staff and the legal officer are recorded via the legal officer terminal and stored in the legal consultation server. Specifically, the legal officer terminal may be an electronic device used by each legal officer, including a PC, tablet, smartphone, etc. Through this terminal, the legal officer records the consultation process in real time, and the information is stored in the server. The recording format may be text-based, or may be audio or video recording.

[0019] On the other hand, the legal consultation server is a computer server for centralizing the data of recorded consultations. This server may be cloud-based, in which case appropriate security measures may be implemented. The server structures the consultation data and organizes it in a searchable format. This database serves as the source of information for analysis by machine learning algorithms.

[0020] <Step 2> In this step, the system accepts a request from a field worker, which includes necessary information such as the subject of the consultation, the specific problem currently being faced, the expected solution, and the time limit for the solution.

[0021] The solicitation request may also provide information about the complexity and urgency of the consultation, the skill set and experience of the field personnel, and legal knowledge. Additionally, the solicitation request may include information about previous attempts to resolve the issue and why those efforts were inadequate.

[0022] Field personnel create and submit solicitation requests through a dedicated user interface, which may be web-based or a dedicated application, and may be created by text input, voice input, or using appropriate templates and forms.

[0023] The legal consultation server collects and stores the information required to analyze the received legal consultation request. The server can store the request in its original form, or structure it if necessary, to facilitate analysis in later steps.

[0024] <Step 3> In this step, the system performs an in-depth analysis of the content of the legal request received by the system, which forms the basis for understanding the information contained in the legal request and identifying the most suitable legal representative.

[0025] Specifically, the analysis is performed on each element of the request, such as the subject matter, the complexity of the problem, the expected solution, the deadline, etc. It also takes into account any additional information the request may contain, such as the experience and skill set of the field personnel, previous attempts to solve the problem, and the reasons for their inadequacy.

[0026] The analysis may be partially or fully automated, leveraging techniques such as natural language processing (NLP), text mining and machine learning, and the results provide information to better understand the request and help identify the most suitable legal representative.

[0027] Specifically, the legal consultation server is equipped with the functionality to perform the analysis described above. The server may have advanced computing power and a large amount of storage capacity. The analysis of the legal consultation request may be performed using machine learning models or algorithms. In this case, the server selects the appropriate model or algorithm and uses the request information as input.

[0028] The legal practitioner's terminal may display the content of the solicitation request and allow the legal practitioner to manually complete or confirm the analysis. In particular, the terminal may have the ability to visualize the analysis results and highlight relevant information.

[0029] Step 4: Identify legal personnel based on the results of the analysis Finally, the system will use the analysis to identify the most suitable legal practitioner by matching past legal history with the nature of the request, taking into account factors such as area of ​​expertise, past success rate and time to resolution.

[0030] More specifically, in this step, the system identifies the most suitable legal practitioner based on the analysis of the content of the solicitation request, the legal practitioner who is identified is the one who is most capable of resolving the problem described in the solicitation request.

[0031] The basis for identification can take into account the case category, type of contract, position, template attribution, language used, type of legal consultation, department making the request, number of pages in the contract, desired delivery date, current caseload of members, etc. Each of these pieces of information is a factor that influences the suitability of a legal professional, and by considering all of them together, it is possible to identify the most suitable legal professional.

[0032] This system includes a legal officer terminal and a legal consultation server, making it possible to efficiently identify the most suitable legal officer based on the results of an analysis of a request.

[0033] In particular, the legal advice server identifies legal personnel using an algorithm that takes into account certain criteria, such as those discussed above, which may base the selection on information such as each legal personnel's skill set, experience, expertise, current workload, past performance, etc.

[0034] The legal officer device, in turn, notifies the identified legal officer, which may take the form of an email, an in-app notification, etc. Additionally, the device may display details of the request to the identified legal officer and prompt them to take any necessary action.

[0035] Additionally, the legal representative terminal may have the functionality to verify the availability of a particular legal representative, thereby ensuring that the assigned legal representative is available to immediately respond to a request.

[0036] The assignment of legal personnel according to this embodiment may involve learning the past performance of each legal personnel and the characteristics of each request, and predicting the most suitable legal personnel for each new request that comes in. This method may use supervised learning algorithms such as decision trees, random forests, support vector machines, etc.

[0037] It may also be possible to use a technique that looks at past legal requests and the legal staff's response history to determine who would best handle a similar request, a technique typically used in recommendation systems, but which could also be applied to this system.

[0038] Additionally, natural language processing (NLP) and semantic analysis may be performed, for example to extract keywords and phrases from the text of the request to determine the most suitable legal representative. This method may use vectorization techniques such as TF-IDF and word2vec, and semantic analysis techniques such as topic modeling.

[0039] The assignment may be based on operations research (OR) and optimization concepts, for example, to find the best legal resource allocation to optimize overall efficiency given multiple constraints (e.g., legal resource skills, expertise, current workload, etc.). The method may use optimization techniques such as linear programming or integer programming.

[0040] By combining the various methods described above, the system is able to identify legal personnel more precisely and intelligently, thereby improving overall efficiency.

[0041] As described above, this system analyzes the content of the request, takes various factors into consideration, identifies the most suitable legal professional, and notifies that person, thereby making legal consultations more efficient.

[0042] <Variation 1: Assignment of multiple legal personnel> This system is also applicable to cases where multiple legal practitioners work together to handle consultations. In such cases, the system can have the following components:

[0043] <Step 1> In this step, the system saves the consultation history between multiple legal staff and on-site staff, allowing the system to grasp the expertise of each legal staff and their performance in previous cases.

[0044] <Step 2> A request is received from a field staff member and registered in the system. The request may include detailed information about the consultation, an expected solution, a desired delivery date, etc.

[0045] <Step 3> Analyze the content of the request and identify the required skill set The system analyzes the content of the request and identifies the skill sets required to solve the problem, for example by using natural language processing (NLP) techniques to extract important keywords and phrases from the text.

[0046] <Step 4> In this step, multiple legal experts are identified based on the skill sets identified in step 3. In this process, multiple legal experts are selected to complement the required skill sets, allowing each expert to contribute in their own area of ​​expertise and ensuring efficient teamwork.

[0047] <Step 5> Stem will then notify the identified legal professionals of the details of the request and clarify their areas of responsibility. The above components make this system applicable even when multiple legal professionals work together to handle consultations.

[0048] <Variation 2: Change of assignment from primary to secondary person> The system may be configured to change the person in charge of a single consultation from a primary legal practitioner to a secondary legal practitioner. In this case, the system may have the following components:

[0049] <Step 1> Record consultation history between on-site personnel and primary and secondary legal personnel In this step, the system stores the consultation history between the on-site staff and the primary and secondary legal staff. This data is used to assign the most appropriate staff.

[0050] <Step 2> The request is accepted from the field representative and assigned by the system to the first suitable legal primary.

[0051] <Step 3> The system periodically analyzes the progress and content of requests to understand the progress of first level legal personnel, which may include progress on requests, progress achieved, and first level legal personnel feedback.

[0052] <Step 4> When the primary contact is deemed overwhelmed or new expertise is required as the case progresses, the system may determine that a secondary contact is needed, either based on feedback from the primary contact or based on automated analysis by the system.

[0053] <Step 5> Based on the determination in step 4, a second legal representative is identified and assigned the request. This process takes into account each legal representative's expertise, experience, and past experience in selecting a second legal representative. These components allow the system to efficiently transition from primary legal personnel to secondary legal personnel when the need arises.

[0054] <Variation 3: Assignment of external experts or other business department staff, etc.> The system may also change the person in charge (request for advice) to an outside expert or a person in charge of another business department, etc. In this case, the system may have the following components.

[0055] <Step 1> The consultation history between the field staff and the legal staff, as well as previous consultation history with external experts and staff from other business departments, are stored. The consultation history with external experts may include information such as the results of consultations with legal counsel, external consultants, specialized institutions and organizations, evaluations of the consultations, and costs incurred for the consultations. The consultation history with staff from other business departments may include the type of consultation, the results of the consultation, the response time and content of each staff member, and other related information.

[0056] <Step 2> Receives request from field personnel. This request may be sent not only to the primary legal personnel but also to corporate lawyers or other experts, or to other business department personnel, etc., as necessary at this point.

[0057] <Step 3> Analyze the request to determine whether it is something that can be resolved by our internal legal staff or whether it requires outside expertise or other resources.

[0058] <Step 4> Identify legal personnel based on the results of the analysis, including outside legal experts and other business personnel as options, if necessary.

[0059] <Step 5> Notify any or all of your designated legal personnel, outside experts, and / or other business personnel of the solicitation request. This step distributes the solicitation request and its details to the relevant personnel.”

[0060] These adjustments will give the system the ability to address a broader range of complex legal issues by drawing on the knowledge and skills of external experts and the knowledge and experience of other business personnel.

[0061] <Modification 4: Client's independent response decision> The system may provide information to the effect that the client may handle the case consultation by himself / herself without the assistance of a legal representative (i.e., without assigning a legal representative). In this case, the system may have the following components:

[0062] <Step 1> Stores a history of consultations between field staff and legal staff, including information about previous cases that clients were able to resolve themselves.

[0063] <Step 2> It accepts request requests from field personnel, who then describe the details of the request in detail, and based on that description the system assesses the level of expertise required to resolve the request.

[0064] <Step 3> Analyze the content of the request to determine whether the request requires legal intervention or is something the client can resolve on their own.

[0065] <Step 4> Based on the results of the analysis, a legal representative is assigned or information is issued to the client to resolve the case themselves. This step is based on the contents of the request, past solutions to similar cases, the client's capabilities and knowledge, etc. In the case of leaving the case to the client to resolve the case themselves, the information may be provided, for example, with past cases dealing with similar legal issues or situations, general procedures or flow charts for dealing with legal claims, available internal and external human resources, relevant laws and regulations, and advice regarding the risks and possibilities of self-resolution.

[0066] <Step 5> Notify the assigned legal staff or the client of the decision to refer the case to themselves. During this step, the legal request, its details, and the appropriate action (assignment of legal staff or recommendation for self-resolution) are delivered to the relevant staff.”

[0067] In this way, the system makes the most of the capabilities and knowledge of potential clients and allows for optimal allocation of legal staff's time and resources. <Other Modifications> The system can also be employed when the content of the case changes. For example, the content of the request submitted by the field clerk may change as the case progresses. In that case, the system may analyze the newly changed content of the case and assign a new legal representative as necessary.

[0068] The system can also be used for urgent requests. Generally, not all requests have the same priority. Therefore, when there is a request with a high level of urgency, the system may determine the urgency of the request and assign a legal representative who can handle the request with priority.

[0069] <Hardware configuration example> This system comprises a legal case management server, a legal affairs terminal, and a contracting terminal, which are configured to be able to communicate with each other via the Internet. This system may be configured as a cloud / network type system provided by a specified business operator, or as an on-premise type system independently operated within the company that introduces the system.

[0070] Each of the above-mentioned functional blocks can be configured, for example, by hardware provided in a server device (terminal device), a DSP (Digital Signal Processor), or software. For example, when configured by software, each of the above-mentioned functional blocks is actually configured with a CPU, RAM, ROM, etc. of a computer, and is realized by the operation of a program stored in a recording medium such as the RAM, ROM, hard disk, or semiconductor memory.

[0071] <Industrial application field> The present invention is not limited to use between a client and a legal affairs officer. Examples of legal matters include contract review work, new contract creation work, and general consultation work on legal matters. The present invention may also be used to make requests for work or consultation specific to departments other than legal affairs (e.g., human resources, accounting, management, sales, development, marketing, etc.). Furthermore, the present invention may be used for requests for work or consultation between inside and outside the company (e.g., law offices, accounting offices, tax accountant offices, social insurance and labor offices, patent offices, etc.).

[0072] The above-described embodiment is merely an example for facilitating understanding of the present invention, and is not intended to limit the present invention. The present invention can be modified or improved without departing from the spirit of the present invention, and it goes without saying that the present invention includes equivalents thereof.

Claims

[Claim 1] In a legal consultation system including a field staff terminal, a legal staff terminal, and a legal consultation server, A step of storing a consultation history between the on-site staff and the legal staff; A step of accepting a request from a field staff member; Analyzing the content of the request; identifying a legal representative based on results of the analysis; Legal consultation system including.

Images