Your precedents are people. Keep the positions anyway.
The most dangerous phrase in a legal team is a confident answer to a question that was settled differently three counsels ago.
Read the film transcript
Narration from this original film. Soft instrumental music plays underneath.
The policy is approved. The reasoning behind the exception you granted last year is in an email thread.
When the reasoning behind reviews and exceptions can’t be traced, consistency suffers, and so does your position when asked.
Kept is a voice interview. June calls, asks about your work, and keeps what you say, in your words, in a jar that’s yours.
A new counsel gets the same redline and asks Kept. They get the threshold and the condition, cited to your review call.
Review reasoning is traceable, so decisions stay consistent. Kept. Keep the knowledge behind the work.
Legal teams accumulate positions: the clause you always strike and why, the regulator conversation that shaped a policy, the risk you accepted deliberately in 2023. That judgment leaves in resignation letters, and successors either re-derive it expensively or contradict it accidentally.
Kept captures institutional positions from the lawyers who hold them and links knowledge to available sources, behind access control your team defines. When the question returns, so does the reasoning. AI can still make mistakes. Inspect available sources and review important answers.
Keeping a knowledge item does not promise permanent access to its original transcript. Sources can become unavailable after retention or removal. Check what evidence is available before relying on an answer.
Read personal and workspace controls. The overview above is available as text; explore the guided text walkthrough for a step-by-step example.