Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
The working material is privileged advice or work product; the intended result is an internal summary. Recording that pair prevents a vague approval from spreading to other uses.
- 1Task and owner
- Legal team member wants to summarise a privileged legal document. The request needs an accountable owner for an internal summary, even when the tool prepares most of the first draft.
- 2Information involved
- Privileged advice or work product. Check uploads, history and connected systems before describing the request as low sensitivity.
- 3Tool and account
- An approved company account. The request should identify the exact account because product-level approval leaves important controls unknown.
- 4Intended result
- The expected result is an internal summary. Its destination matters: private working material creates a different consequence from a sent, published or automated result.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- The tool’s data handling may compromise confidentiality or privilege. That risk sets the level of review and the person who should receive an exception.
- 6Human review
- matter owner should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. A final glance after an automatic action would not give that owner meaningful control.
Possible policy routes
The task name alone cannot decide it.
A published workplace policy can return different answers for the same task. These are the practical branches worth encoding.
A routine policy route may be possible
A routine route is easier to justify when the exact account is approved, only the minimum privileged legal information is used, an internal summary remains within the stated purpose, and matter owner reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
A named reviewer should take over when the account or data handling is uncertain, the tool’s data handling may compromise confidentiality or privilege, or an internal summary reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
Do not continue unchanged when restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before matter owner can intervene, or use a specifically approved environment and preserve privilege markings and access limits cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Is the exact account approved for summarise a privileged legal document, including its plug-ins and connected sources?
- 02
Does the proposed input include more of privileged advice or work product than the result actually requires?
- 03
Does an internal summary create an external statement, a decision or an automated action?
- 04
Will matter owner review before the result is sent, published or acted upon?
- 05
Would another region, audience or frequency activate a different company rule?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- legal team member
- task
- Use AI to summarise a privileged legal document.
- information
- privileged advice or work product
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Analyse
- impact
- Internal work
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- matter owner
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Use a specifically approved environment and preserve privilege markings and access limits
- ✓
Separate source material from the request record and expose only what the tool needs for an internal summary.
- ✓
Reassess the request whenever its tool, information classification, frequency or consequence changes.
- ✓
Record the request and reviewer without copying unnecessary parts of privileged advice or work product into the audit trail.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to summarise a privileged legal document automatically allowed?
The company policy supplies the answer after it receives the real tool, data, purpose, impact and review plan. This page only prepares those facts.
Which facts should be submitted before work begins?
Describe an internal summary, identify privileged advice or work product, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how matter owner will review it.
Which evidence makes the answer reproducible?
Record the request and reviewer without copying unnecessary parts of privileged advice or work product into the audit trail. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying privileged advice or work product would create unnecessary risk.