Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Legal document drafting in law firms depends on the accurate transfer of information from the client-handling team to the drafting team. At JJC & Associates Law Office (JJC&A), these roles are performed by different individuals, so client information is prone to distortion and misscommunication that may affect document substance, service quality, and the firm's credibility. This study aims to analyze how internal communication between the client-handling team and the drafting team is carried out to prevent and address the risk of misscommunication in the legal document drafting process at JJC&A. The study employed a qualitative approach within a constructivist paradigm and a single case study method. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews with two purposively selected key informants, non-participant observation, and documentation, analyzed through thematic coding followed by pattern matching, and validated through method triangulation and member checking. The results reveal eight interrelated internal communication mechanisms: internal meetings after client meetings with a same-day update norm and written documentation, the appointment of a Person in Charge (PIC), open clarification of differing interpretations, a combination of informal and digital channels, information verification before and during client consultations, two-way feedback, management of points vulnerable to distortion, and SOP compliance with periodic evaluation. These mechanisms respond to the triggers of misscommunication, namely unclear information structure, perceptual differences, and media limitations, and show that the shared meaning of client information is continuously negotiated among team members before it is written into legal documents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sheila et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: