01
Assembled from a controlled library
Wordings are composed from approved clause entries rather than from a previous document, so the starting point is always the sanctioned language.
WordingIQLive
Assembled from approved sources.
Checked before it leaves
Contract wordings built from a controlled clause library rather than from the last similar document someone could find — with every clause traceable to the approved entry it came from.
Approved sourcesevery clause traceable
Checked on assemblybefore it leaves the desk
Controlled libraryone governed set of wordings
The reality
What this looks like
in most firms today
- New wordings get built by copying the last similar document someone could find.
- Approved clause language and the version actually issued quietly diverge.
- Nobody can say with certainty which approved wording a issued document was built from.
The risk is not the drafting effort. It is that a non-standard clause reaches a counterparty without anyone having decided that it should — and that the decision trail to prove otherwise does not exist.
Where the existing tools stop
Where tools stop
A document assembly tool composes text. It does not know which clause library entry was approved, by whom, or when it was superseded.
A clause library nobody assembles from is a reference document, not a control.
What it takes
Assembly and approval have to be the same act, so the issued document is provably built from approved language.
How it delivers value
How WordingIQ earns its place
in the workflow
02
Every clause traced to its entry
Each clause in the finished document carries the library entry and version it came from, which is what makes the output auditable rather than merely tidy.
03
Deviations surfaced, not buried
Where drafting departs from approved language, the departure is reported explicitly for a decision rather than absorbed silently into the text.
04
Checked before it leaves
Completeness and consistency checks run on assembly, so gaps are found at the desk rather than by a counterparty.
Capabilities
The specification, without decoration
- Assembly from an approved, versioned clause library
- Every clause in the output linked to its source entry and version
- Explicit reporting of any departure from approved language
- Completeness and consistency checks run at assembly time
- A retained record of what was assembled, from what, and by whom
The approach
How it actually works
Written for the technical evaluator rather than the buyer. If you are going to put this in front of an architecture review board, this is the section they will read.
The library is the control, not the document
Approved language lives in a versioned library with its own ownership and approval trail. Documents are outputs of that library, which is the only arrangement where the control actually binds.
Assembly records provenance as it goes
Provenance is captured during assembly rather than reconstructed afterwards. Reconstructed provenance is an opinion; recorded provenance is evidence.
Deviation is a decision, not an accident
Departures from approved language are permitted — they are simply surfaced, attributed and retained, so someone owns each one.
Checks run before issue
Completeness and internal-consistency checks execute on assembly, so the failure mode is a flagged draft rather than an issued document with a gap in it.
Built to sit alongside existing systems
It works with the document and workflow tools already in use rather than asking teams to move somewhere new.
The breakthrough
What changes once it is running
Stated as commitments rather than percentages. WordingIQ is in live use; we will publish measured figures once we can evidence them from delivery.
Approvedlanguage by defaultAssembled from a controlled clause library
Traceableclause by clauseEvery clause linked to its library entry and version
Explicitdeviation reportingDepartures surfaced for a decision, not absorbed
Recordedfor auditWhat was assembled, from what, and by whom
