Client Experiences
What Firms Say After
Working With Vxieuxamis
The practices we have worked with are based across West Malaysia — ranging from four-partner boutiques to larger firms with specialist litigation departments. These are their words.
Back to HomeFrom the Firms
Practitioner Perspectives
What managing partners and senior associates say about the engagement experience.
Dato' Roslan Hamdan
Managing Partner · Kuala Lumpur
We had received three vendor proposals for AI drafting tools and had no clear way to assess them against our professional obligations. Vxieuxamis came in, read what we were actually doing, and wrote a brief that told us exactly which proposal was appropriate and why the other two were not suitable for a litigation practice. That was worth more than any demo we had attended.
Practice Workflow Review · April 2025
Tan Li Xin
Senior Associate · Petaling Jaya
I was one of the two fee earners who took part in the Drafting Companion pilot. What I appreciated was that the Vxieuxamis advisors sat with me and read the outputs themselves — they were not just checking boxes on a compliance list. When the system produced a summary that missed a key limitation clause, they flagged it before I had and explained how to set up the review step so it would catch that class of error going forward.
Drafting Companion Setup · March 2025
Norzaida Kamaruzaman
Practice Manager · Shah Alam
From a practice management perspective, the fixed fee was important. I had seen engagements with other technology advisors that started at one figure and grew into something much larger. With Vxieuxamis, the scope was defined in writing before we agreed and it did not move. The brief we received was something I could put in front of the managing partner without reservation.
Practice Workflow Review · February 2025
Syed Wahab Al-Attas
Partner, Corporate Practice · Johor Bahru
Our corporate due diligence practice handles a volume of documents that makes AI summarisation genuinely useful. What we needed was someone to tell us which of that volume is safe to feed into a system and which is not. Vxieuxamis drew that line clearly and explained the reasoning behind each category. The written brief has become our internal reference document on AI use in due diligence matters.
Practice Workflow Review · January 2025
Mastura Fairuz
Managing Partner · Kuala Lumpur
We have been on the stewardship retainer for six months. What it has given us is a monthly discipline — someone outside the firm reading our AI outputs with fresh eyes and noting anything worth attention before it compounds. The AGM reflection they wrote for our March meeting was genuinely useful for the committee to read. It made clear we were approaching this thoughtfully.
Practice Stewardship Retainer · Ongoing since Nov 2024
Rajendran Velayudhan
Partner, Litigation · Ipoh
I came to Vxieuxamis fairly sceptical. I was not convinced that AI had a useful role in litigation practice at this point. The workflow review did not persuade me otherwise — which is part of the reason I trust the work. They assessed our bundle preparation process and concluded, honestly, that the current state of AI summarisation introduces more risk than it removes for contested litigation files. They recommended a narrow, specific use case and were explicit about everything else. That is exactly what I needed to hear.
Practice Workflow Review · March 2025
In Depth
Three Engagement Summaries
Each engagement is different. These summaries give a sense of how the work develops in practice.
Case — Corporate Practice, Kuala Lumpur
Due Diligence Bundle Preparation
The Situation
A mid-size KL firm handling M&A due diligence at volume was spending significant associate time on first-pass document reviews. The managing partner had been approached by two AI vendors and wanted an independent view before committing.
What Vxieuxamis Did
We reviewed a sample of the firm's due diligence documentation, mapped privilege considerations, and assessed both vendor proposals against the firm's DMS environment and data processor obligations under PDPA. One proposal required data to leave Malaysia; we flagged this clearly.
Outcome
The firm proceeded with the compliant vendor proposal and used our written brief as the basis for their board-level approval process. Associate time on first-pass reviews reduced noticeably within two months of deployment, with all review steps remaining with qualified fee earners.
Case — Conveyancing Practice, Johor Bahru
Checklist Automation for Residential Transactions
The Situation
A conveyancing practice processing high volumes of residential transactions wanted to explore whether AI could assist in checklist preparation and standard form population. They had no existing AI tools and were starting from the beginning.
What Vxieuxamis Did
We ran a Practice Workflow Review and identified two specific points in the conveyancing workflow — initial checklist generation and standard purchaser correspondence templates — where AI assistance was appropriate with defined human review steps. We explicitly excluded the preparation of any correspondence that required legal judgement calls.
Outcome
The firm implemented a narrow AI assist for the two identified workflows within six weeks of the brief. The written brief was used to explain the firm's approach to a client who asked about their use of AI during a transaction in early 2025.
Case — Mixed Practice, Shah Alam
Ongoing AI Governance Under the Stewardship Retainer
The Situation
A mixed practice that had deployed an AI drafting assist one year earlier without external advisory support. They had grown uncertain about their PDPA compliance position as their use of the tool had expanded beyond the original scope.
What Vxieuxamis Did
We began with a privilege and PDPA audit of their current setup — assessing what the tool was accessing and whether data processor agreements remained appropriate. We identified two areas of concern, both of which were addressed within the first retainer month. Monthly briefs since then have been largely straightforward.
Outcome
The practice is now eight months into the retainer. The managing partner presented our quarterly summary at an internal partners meeting and described it as giving the firm confidence that their AI governance position could be explained and defended if required.
Reach Vxieuxamis
Contact Our Advisory Team
-
Telephone
+60 3 4291 7065 -
Email
[email protected] -
Office
Level 14, Wisma Goldhill,
Jalan Raja Chulan, 50200 KL -
Office Hours
Monday – Friday: 9:00 am – 5:30 pm
Saturday: 9:00 am – 1:00 pm
Trust Indicators
40+
Practices engaged
4.8
Average satisfaction
2023
Year founded
100%
Vendor independent
Your Firm, Next
See What a Workflow Review Finds for You
Send us a brief description of your practice and what you are currently considering. We will read it carefully and write back within two working days.
Begin the Conversation