User experience (UX) is more than color palettes and buttons. It’s what turns features into solutions, and software into something people actually want to use. Yet, in the AI and legal tech space, many platforms still miss the mark and create tools that are powerful on paper, but frustrating in practice.
In their recent report, "Build Trust in Your AI Assistant With 3 Essential UX Elements," we feel Gartner® made a compelling case that user experience has become the make-or-break factor for AI adoption in enterprise software. In fact, they predict that “by 2028, more than half of buyers of GenAI-enabled enterprise software will cite ease of user experience as a primary reason for software provider selection.” As they put it: "There is currently a window of opportunity where small UI improvements can capture the majority of potential users who are not interested in becoming ‘prompt engineers’ and have been left behind by current AI solutions.”
Image source: Gartner, "Build Trust in Your AI Assistant With 3 Essential UX Elements"
The report identifies a three-element framework for building user trust in AI: starting context, guided suggestions, and explainers. The report also mentions our contract copilot, Saige Assist, which offers a suite of GenAI-based features to solve the toughest contract management challenges. Much like having a contract expert at your side, Saige Assist serves users across legal, procurement, and sales functions, including those without deep legal backgrounds. Its conversational interface cuts through complicated legal language, accelerating contract review and revision workflows while providing tailored recommendations that align with each company's distinct legal frameworks and operational needs.
Image source: Gartner, "Build Trust in Your AI Assistant With 3 Essential UX Elements"
We believe this recognition validates a philosophy we've long held: that in a world where AI capabilities are rapidly becoming commoditized, the differentiator isn't just what your AI can do — it's how naturally and confidently users can work with it. In the following interview, Marisa Flit, Senior Product Designer at IntelAgree, explains more about our unique design approach, how it keeps users first, and why that matters more than ever in an AI-driven world:
A Conversation with Marisa Flit, Senior Product Designer at IntelAgree
Question: What's something most CLM platforms get wrong about UX, and how does that misstep show up in the day-to-day work of legal and business teams?
Marisa: I think the biggest issue I see is platforms trying to cram too much information onto a single page without giving users visual breathing room. When you're dealing with complex contract data, it's tempting to show everything at once, but that creates cognitive overload. I've heard from users of other platforms that they feel overwhelmed just looking at their dashboard — there's no clear hierarchy of what's important or where to focus first.
What we've learned is that effective UX for contract management isn't about displaying more data; it's about displaying the right data in a digestible way. We use visual borders and sectioning so users can mentally block out what's not relevant to their current task. When you're focused on a data table, you can ignore the navigation elements because there's a clear visual separation.
The other piece is staying current with design patterns people are used to from consumer apps. Legal professionals don't suddenly forget how to use intuitive interfaces when they come to work. If your platform looks and feels like it's from 2010, users are going to unconsciously perceive it as less capable, regardless of its actual functionality.
Question: When we think about trust in AI, the conversation usually centers on data accuracy. But from a UX perspective, where does trust actually begin?
Marisa: Trust starts with comfort, and comfort comes from understanding. AI is still relatively new for many people in the workforce, and there's often this intimidation factor. Users are wondering, "Am I talking to a person? Is this a computer? How do I know if this is right?"
Our approach is to create a comfortable experience for what can feel like an uncomfortable function. We make it really clear when you're interacting with AI, what it's doing, and why it's suggesting what it's suggesting. There's no mystery or black box feeling.
But beyond that, trust builds through consistency. Every AI interaction in our platform has the same look and feel, the same clear labeling, the same type of explanatory text. If you learn how to use Saige Assist in one part of the platform, you'll immediately understand how it works everywhere else. That predictability is huge for building confidence.
Question: How do you design a feature like Saige Assist to feel powerful without being overwhelming, especially for users who may be hesitant to rely on AI?
Marisa: It's all about finding that sweet spot between functionality and simplicity. Saige Assist can deliver really robust analysis — various types of analysis can return completely different insights — so the challenge was creating a consistent feel across all those different AI touchpoints.
Every Saige Assist feature has the same look, the same layout, and the same clear labeling system. Whether you're using suggested edits, contract analysis, or redlining, the experience feels familiar. We provide descriptive text that explains exactly what each suggestion means and why we're recommending it.
We also make sure the experience is the same whether you're in contract details, our Word add-in, search, or anywhere else Saige Assist appears. Once you understand how it works in one place, you can navigate it confidently everywhere.
Question: If someone only spent five minutes inside IntelAgree, what would immediately tell them this platform was designed with them in mind?
Marisa: Accessibility is huge for me. That's been a passion project. I want anyone to be able to look at our interface and immediately see that they can navigate it, whether they have visual impairments, color blindness, or limited motor function. Good accessibility benefits everyone, not just users with specific needs.
But more broadly, I think users would notice that we've prioritized clarity over complexity. Yes, we have incredibly powerful and sophisticated features, but at its heart, IntelAgree is about getting contracts into the system and managing them effectively. A new user should be able to log in, click "add contract," and follow our step-by-step guidance to accomplish their main goal quickly.
Question: Some competitors require support tickets for basic changes. What's the real cost of that kind of friction, and how did we design around it?
Marisa: Every support ticket represents a broken workflow. When users have to stop what they're doing to ask for help with something basic, you're essentially training them to see your platform as an obstacle rather than a tool.
Our philosophy is that users should be able to accomplish their goals without having to become IT experts. We spend a lot of time understanding the actual use cases behind feature requests. Instead of just adding what people ask for, we dig deeper to understand what they're really trying to accomplish. Often, the solution isn't adding more features — it's making existing functionality more discoverable or intuitive.
We believe that good UX design eliminates most support tickets before they happen. If users are consistently confused about something, that's our design problem to solve, not their training problem to overcome.
Question: Risk scoring is a feature that’s gaining traction in CLM. From a UX standpoint, what makes our approach feel different?
Marisa: Risk scoring is naturally dense. It involves analysis, visualizations, and interpretation. Our job is to make all of that feel simple and insightful. We take extra care in how we present the data, using visual hierarchy and clean design to help users process complex information quickly. It’s about making something heavy feel light, so it supports decisions without slowing them down.
Question: If you had to sum up IntelAgree's UX philosophy in one sentence — or one question we always come back to — what would it be?
Marisa: It's always: "How is this going to feel for users?" We never want to add something just because we have the technical capability to build it. Every design decision comes back to whether it makes sense for the people who actually have to use it every day.
We're constantly asking ourselves: Are we putting users first? Does this make their work easier or just more complicated? Because at the end of the day, the most sophisticated feature in the world is worthless if people can't or won't use it effectively.
The Bottom Line: UX as Competitive Advantage
AI capabilities are rapidly becoming table stakes across the CLM market. What separates leaders from laggards is how naturally and confidently users can work with those capabilities.
At IntelAgree, our UX philosophy centers on psychology, workflow optimization, and building trust through thoughtful design decisions. We recognize that behind every contract management task is a person trying to get their job done efficiently and effectively.
Curious what makes user-first CLM software design different? Download the full Gartner report to learn more about building trust in AI assistants through UX, or subscribe to our blog for more insights.