When the answer is in the documents, and nobody can find it
Reports, correspondence, disclosure bundles and records on unconnected reference systems, turned into one navigable view you can make a decision from.
Scoped after a first look at the material · a fictional demo shows the method · All prices
Let’s talkWhen the answer is in there somewhere
- A dispute, a claim or a complaint, with the evidence spread across hundreds of documents.
- Thousands of emails, and nobody can say who said what, or when.
- Different reports describe the same issue in different ways.
- Someone senior is paying for hours of reading that should be minutes of checking.
A dispute, a disclosure exercise, a regulatory response, a diligence process. The information you need exists, across professional reports, correspondence, disclosure bundles, records and recordings, each using its own reference system, none of them speaking to the others. Somebody senior is being paid to read it all, and they are running out of time before they run out of documents.
What I build: A single navigable view that can tell you, for any one of hundreds of issues: what it is, when it was first raised, by whom, through what channel, to which party, what happened next, and where it stands now. The output supports review by the people responsible for the work; it does not replace their professional judgement.
The contradictions between sources surface as a by-product, which is usually where the value turns out to be. And the view runs backwards as well as forwards, once the connections exist, you can ask questions of the material that nobody thought to ask of the original documents.
Checks and limitations
We agree the questions, source material and checks before processing begins. Findings should link back to their sources, with gaps and uncertainty made visible. AI-assisted extraction needs human verification, particularly where legal, regulatory or commercial decisions depend on it.
Data handling agreed in writing
This work involves sensitive commercial and legal material. I agree in writing where data goes, which tools are used, what is retained, and what happens at the end before anything is shared.
A fictional case, sixteen documents, one view
Issues, a timeline and the contradictions between sources, with every line traced back to the passage it came from.
How the work runs
A first look
Describe what you’re holding. Nothing needs to be shared at this stage.
Agree the method
Questions, sources, checks and data handling, agreed in writing.
Build the view
Every item traced to its source, duplicates merged, contradictions surfaced.
Verify and hand over
Checked with the people responsible, in a form they can work from.