INITIALIZING_INTERFACE...
AI changed the work. Now price the change.
See how work and economics changed on a matter, what evidence links that change to AI, and how to price the next one. From your firm's own data.
Illustrative matter review
observed
Recorded drafting time ran below the firm's historical reference for comparable matters.
Linked signals
128
Comparables
4
Needs review
2
Connects to the tools you already run, no rip and replace
Microsoft 365/
Harvey/
Clio Manage/
Elite 3E/CSV upload/
REST API/
Microsoft 365/Harvey/Clio Manage/Elite 3E/CSV upload/
REST API/
The problem
Your AI data is scattered across a dozen tools.None of them speak the same language.
M365 telemetryVendor APIs
PMS time entriesBilling dataHarvey sessionsCSV uploads
One matter-level view
Signals can be grouped into legal work units and compared with available historical references. Evidence coverage and known gaps should be reviewed in context.
The evidence chain
From raw telemetry to a defensible decision.
Evidence links depend on the connected sources and available records. Assumptions and coverage limits matter alongside any headline number.
Comparisons can use a firm's available historical matter data. Data access, processing, and storage depend on the agreed deployment and connected sources.
01
Link
Where source data permits, relate activity from AI tools and work systems to matter and billing context.
02
Review
Distinguish recorded activity, estimates, and human-reviewed attribution, with gaps visible.
03
Inform
Use the available evidence as one input to pricing and matter review decisions.
The product
Four decisions, one evidence layer.
Each answers a different buyer question, all traceable to the same firm data.
Matter economics review
The matter, end to end
Delivery, AI contribution, recorded time and billing on one review. Confidence is shown on every signal: observed, estimated, or confirmed.
See it on a sample matterComparable analysis4 matches
Comparable match found
Matched to firm historical corpus
Rate variance detected
Above comparable median range
Pricing signal generated
Evidence trail export-ready
Matter value proof
A document, not a platform
A review document can bring available AI activity, work, and billing context together. It supports discussion and does not prove that AI caused a fee outcome.
See it on a sample matterMatter value proof · PDF
Reference
£30,000
Proposed fee
£21,000
Below reference
30%
Reference is an observation from comparables, not an AI-free control. The gap is an observation, not a confirmed AI saving.
License posture audit
Which tools earn their keep
Compare license and activity evidence from supported sources, with coverage limits and unresolved signals visible.
See it on a sample matterVendor portfolioactive spend
Document drafting78%
Legal research31%
Contract review58%
Decision support
Human sign-off, built in
Proactive nudges for defensible human validation on high-impact signals, before any claim reaches a client.
See it on a sample matterAwaiting validation
Attribution conflict on 2 work units
Missing PMS entry for 14 Mar
No claim leaves the firm until it is signed off
For your role
What actually happened on this matter, and does our pricing still hold?
You hold the billing numbers but not what AI was doing during the matter. Alpodo puts the evidence behind the fee.
Independence is a claim until it is proven.
These are evidence categories, not customer performance statistics.
Observed
Signals directly recorded by a connected source.
Evidence label
Estimated
A value inferred from available records and stated assumptions.
Evidence label
Reviewed
Attribution checked by a person, with its basis recorded.
Evidence label
Security
Built for the confidentiality demands of a law firm.
Data access, processing, and storage depend on the agreed deployment and connected sources. Before any customer data is connected, review the permissions, fields, and handling arrangements for that deployment.
Scoped access
Requested permissions and data flows should be reviewed for each source and deployment before connection.
Documented signals
Fields collected depend on the connected source and configuration. Agree the signal scope before any customer data is connected.
Human review
Treat estimates and attribution as decision support. Review the supporting evidence before relying on a signal.
Common questions
How is Alpodo different from a vendor dashboard?+
A vendor dashboard reports activity within its own product. Alpodo is designed to bring available evidence from multiple connected sources into a common matter-level review. What can be linked, and with what confidence, depends on the data available.
How long does it take to deploy?+
Timing depends on the deployment approach, permissions, source availability, and validation required. We scope those dependencies before agreeing a timeline; data does not necessarily flow immediately after authorization.
Is it secure enough for a law firm?+
Security suitability depends on your requirements and the deployment design. Before connecting customer data, review the requested permissions, fields collected, processing locations, retention, and subprocessors with us. We will clarify the applicable data handling and security materials for the proposed deployment.
Will it work with our existing tools?+
We are developing and validating integrations for selected legal, AI, and Microsoft 365 sources. Availability and signal coverage vary by connector, configuration, and access. CSV or API-based approaches may be possible for other sources after scoping.
What does a demo cover?+
We review your questions and walk through how Alpodo brings activity, matter context, and economic evidence together. Connecting your environment or showing live data is not part of every demo; we will scope that with you in advance.
Can we try it before committing?+
We can discuss a sample-data walkthrough or a scoped pilot. Whether customer data can be used, and what approvals and setup are needed, depends on the proposed deployment.
How do you assess impact across multiple AI tools?+
Where source data supports it, activity from different tools can be related to matters and work units. We show available economic context, confidence, and unresolved gaps; tool activity alone does not establish economic impact.
How do you avoid overclaiming?+
We distinguish recorded observations, estimates, and human-reviewed attribution. A link between AI activity and a matter is not, by itself, proof that AI caused an economic outcome.
Discuss a working session
Examine the evidence around AI activity on your matters.
Start with a conversation about your sources and questions. We can walk through a sample matter and discuss what a scoped review would require.
01
Scope
Identify relevant sources, access requirements, and data handling for the proposed deployment.
02
Review
Explore a sample matter and assess what the available evidence can and cannot support.
03
Inform
Use reviewed evidence as an input to pricing and matter decisions.