SE4 Legal Framework

Strength and Efficiency (“SE4”) Legal Framework for In-House Teams

Developed with over 100 years of GC experience

Explanatory note: In-house legal teams often face challenges in clearly demonstrating the value they bring to the business. This can make resourcing discussions difficult and limit opportunities for recognition. By implementing the SE4 Legal Framework, teams gain a single, clear metric that facilitates focused and meaningful internal conversations.

The goal of this framework is to provide in house legal teams with a set of specific product-enabled actions they can immediately take to ensure the team: a) is operating with optimal strength and efficiency given current resourcing and b) can demonstrate that fact to internal stakeholders in a clear and easy to understand way, i.e. by reference to a single-number performance score.

The SE4 Legal Framework assesses the overall performance of an in-house legal function, on a monthly basis, against two core dimensions: Strength and Efficiency. Each dimension contains two foundational pillars, addressing critical challenges and providing practical, measurable solutions.

Strength

Efficiency

1. Strategic Alignment

Summary

This measures the extent to which legal resource utilization is aligned with stated business objectives.

Explanatory note: While legal functions do perform a special role within a business, it is important to recognise that it is - ultimately - a resource which should be directed in furtherance of common business objectives. For this to occur, the objectives of the legal function must - at all times - align with those of the business.

Full description

Objective: To ensure prioritisation of legal resources directly aligns with business objectives.

Key focus areas:

Alignment: Legal objectives are directly mapped to business objectives.
Prioritization: Legal resources are allocated inline with legal objectives.
Reporting: Regular reporting on legal resource utilization is undertaken.

Assessment

1.1 Alignment:

1.1.1 Business objectives have been articulated.

1.1.2 Legal objectives have been defined and explicitly mapped to one or more business objectives.

1.2 Prioritization:

1.2.1 Legal objectives have been prioritised.

1.2.2 Actual time allocated to each legal objective aligns with stated prioritization.

1.3 Reporting:

1.3.1 Legal team workload and priorities are reported to the CEO at least monthly.

1.3.2 Material legal risks and mitigations are reviewed with senior leadership or a governance committee at a cadence aligned with risk appetite (e.g. quarterly or semi-annually).

Possible score: 0-6

2. Risk Management

Summary

This measures how effective the team is at maintaining legal risk at the accepted level.

Explanatory note: Risk management is a core role and obligation of a legal function. For this to be conducted effectively, a systematic approach to identification and mitigation is required.

Full description

Objective: To ensure relevant legal risks are identified, monitored, and mitigated inline with the business's risk tolerances.

Key focus areas:

Risk evaluation: Relevant legal risks are identified and evaluated.
Expertise: The team has the necessary combined expertise to mitigate each identified risk to the required level; or, where expertise gaps have been identified, has access to suitable external counsel.
Collaboration: Efficient systems are in place to ensure individual expertise (including that of external counsel) is accessible by the whole team.

Assessment

2.1 Risk evaluation:

2.1.1 Material legal risks are identified and documented.

2.1.2 Each risk is assessed as: (a) sufficiently managed internally; (b) additional internal expertise required; or (c) managed externally.

2.2 Expertise:

2.2.1 Where additional internal expertise is required, a development or hiring plan is in place.

2.2.2 Where a risk is managed externally, relevant counsel has been selected.

2.2.3 Progress against risk mitigation plans is reviewed at least quarterly.

2.3 Collaboration:

2.3.1 The team has shared visibility into matters, workflow, and risk status - with appropriate access controls.

2.3.2 Team workflows are reviewed regularly and updates are shared across the team at a suitable cadence (e.g. weekly).

Possible score: 0-7

3. Operational Efficiency

Summary

This measures how efficient the team is at being across matters requiring legal input and delivering value.

Explanatory note: Given the inherently limited nature of a legal function's resources, ensuring the efficient utilisation of those resources is critical not just to the function’s success but to the overall success of the business. Technology must not be a barrier.

Full description

Objective: To ensure processes remain streamlined to maximize efficiency.

Key focus areas:

Intake: Eliminate (through self-service resources and automation) work which does not require direct legal input and ensure engagements which do require direct legal input are both easy for the business to initiate and easy for the legal team to allocate to the most efficient legal resource.
Task management: Efficient systems are in place for managing tasks and actions relating to legal work.
Noise reduction: Eliminate notifications to team members about work which is not relevant to those team members.

Assessment

3.1 Intake:

3.1.1 Automation and self-service resources are in place for requests not requiring direct legal input.

3.1.2 Assignable work is routed directly to the most appropriate team member.

3.1.3 Unassigned work enters a shared triage process with transparent handoffs.

3.1.4 Intake and automation flows are reviewed quarterly, or sooner if business needs shift.

3.2 Task management:

3.2 Efficient systems are in place for managing tasks and actions relating to legal work.

3.3 Noise reduction:

3.3 Eliminate notifications to team members about work which is not relevant to those team members.

Possible score: 0-6

4. Knowledge Management

Summary

This measures how much individual legal and institutional knowledge is retained by the team, and how accessible it is.

Explanatory note: A large factor in the overall efficiency of a legal function is its ability to leverage past investment to minimise current workload. Teams should have an efficient way to tap into existing knowledge to eliminate duplication of efforts.

Full description

Objective: To consolidate legal knowledge for collaboration and long-term retention.

Key focus areas:

Centralization: Store all information relating to specific legal matters, material contracts, and any information of a general reusable nature, in a central repository.
Accessibility: Ensure centralised information is easily accessible by the broadest team audience possible, given the nature of the information.
Collaboration: Ensure team members have a maximally efficient pathway for in-context collaboration.

Assessment

4.1 Centralisation:

4.1.1 Matter communications and documents are stored in a centralized system.

4.1.2 Material contracts are stored centrally with key dates (e.g. renewals) tracked.

4.1.3 Reusable legal resources (e.g. templates, FAQs, playbooks) are tagged and stored accessibly.

4.2 Accessibility:

4.2 Unless necessary to preserve confidentiality, all legal matters and resources are accessible to all legal team members.

4.3 Collaboration:

4.3.1 Team members are able to communicate about a matter without forwarding context.

4.3.2 Important team communications about matters are linked to their corresponding digitial files (automation preferred where possible).

Possible score: 0-6

Performance Score

Total Score/25*100 (for example: 21/25*100 = 84% performance)

The SE4 Legal Framework is a community-led initiative intended to benefit all in-house teams of every size and in every industry.