# Mayne Wetherell rationalises its legal tech stack with legal engineering
Tilt Legal helped Mayne Wetherell assess its legal tech stack and shape a consolidation roadmap based on workflow discovery and capability mapping.
- Category: Customers
- Published: 17 Apr 2026
- Authors: Tilt Legal
- Canonical URL: /updates/case-study-legal-tech-stack-rationalisation
## Content
**Tilt Legal** was engaged, through a strategic consulting partner, to assess the legal technology landscape of **Mayne Wetherell**. The firm needed a clear view of its current systems, the gaps across key capabilities, and the opportunities to rationalise a growing technology environment. **Tilt Legal** delivered a structured assessment that combined stakeholder discovery, current and future state capability analysis, systems architecture mapping, and competitive parity assessment.
## **The challenge**
Mayne Wetherell is a large commercial law firm with a substantial and evolving technology environment. Over time, the firm had adopted a range of systems across legal and operational work. Some were well aligned to the firm’s needs. Others overlapped, were underused, or created uncertainty about how the broader environment should evolve.
The firm needed a practical assessment of its existing stack and a clearer way to make future decisions. That included identifying capability gaps, understanding where consolidation could reduce sprawl, and evaluating future options through the lens of broader systems fit. Integration was a central concern. Any new investment needed to strengthen the overall environment and support the way the firm actually delivered legal services.
## **How we worked together**
**Tilt Legal** approached the engagement as a legal engineering exercise grounded in the firm’s real operating context. We worked closely with key stakeholders and legal teams across the business to understand how work moved through the firm, where friction appeared in practice, and how existing systems supported or constrained service delivery.
That level of discovery shaped the quality of the recommendations. We were not applying a generic market template. We were assessing the firm’s technology environment in context, with close attention to how the business operated and how its lawyers used the systems already in place.
The work included extensive engagement with stakeholders to understand pain points, patterns of adoption, areas of overlap, and the practical considerations that would affect any future technology decision.
## **Navigating complexity**
**Tilt Legal** delivered several connected artefacts to help the firm understand its current position and make better future decisions.
The first was a current and future state capability assessment that mapped technologies against the capabilities they supported and identified where the firm could consolidate, expand, or improve capability over time. This helped translate broad strategy into a more practical roadmap for action.
The second was a systems architecture assessment that documented the current state of the environment, including dependencies, process and data flows, integrations, isolated systems, bottlenecks, and areas of redundancy. This gave the firm a clearer view of how the broader ecosystem functioned as a whole.
The third was a competitive parity assessment that mapped the firm’s current and desired future position across ten capability areas relevant to legal practice. This gave stakeholders a structured way to evaluate strategic importance and relative strength across the technology environment.
## **What was delivered**
**Tilt Legal** delivered a structured legal technology assessment through a set of practical decision-making artefacts: a competitive parity framework, current and future state capability maps, and systems architecture diagrams with supporting documentation. Together, these outputs helped the firm understand its existing environment, identify capability gaps, and assess options for consolidation and future adoption.
The deliverables were designed to be useful beyond the assessment itself. They gave stakeholders a shared language for discussing priorities, clarified where the current environment was helping or hindering the business, and made the recommendations easier to evaluate and act on.
## **Impact**
The immediate impact of the engagement was clarity. Mayne Wetherell moved from a broad set of systems and scattered technology decisions to a more structured understanding of its current state and a more coherent view of its future state.
**Tilt Legal**’s work helped the firm identify where capabilities could be strengthened, where overlapping functionality could be reduced, and where future investment should be assessed against the needs of the broader environment. Some of those recommendations were then put into action. More importantly, the firm gained a practical framework for making better technology decisions over time, grounded in legal service delivery rather than abstract procurement logic.
> We worked with TILT on a systems architecture redesign for a law firm client. They advised the client on how to get more out of their existing systems alongside options for complementary new systems. Isaac and the team are a rare bunch—they're brilliant engineers who are also great with people.
— Laura Collins
## **Our capability**
This engagement reflects how **Tilt Legal** supports law firms through advisory and enablement work. We combine stakeholder discovery, legal workflow understanding, capability assessment, and systems thinking to help firms assess what they have, identify what they need, and make decisions that hold together across the broader environment.