// Case study · Delivered; intake checklist still open
Bringing a small practice's client knowledge into one system
One notebook per client, a shared set of instructions, a written rule for which source wins, and the tools around it to keep work moving.

- My role
- Independent consultant; designed the system, set up the tools, trained the team
- Worked with
- The firm's two partners
- Type
- Case study
- Status
- Delivered; the intake checklist for new clients is still open
- NotebookLM
- Claude
- ChatGPT
- Attio
- Linear
Overview
A two-partner professional-services practice needed a reliable way to answer questions about a client's history without digging through years of documents and correspondence each time, and a way to keep follow-ups from depending on memory. I designed a dossier system in NotebookLM: one notebook per client, each holding only that client's source pack, all of them running on the same shared instructions and the same shared knowledge base. Around it I set up the firm's working tools on its own accounts: Claude for project work and documentation, ChatGPT for research, Attio for contacts and relationships, Linear for tasks and follow-ups, and an AI-ready file system for the whole firm. Then I trained the team to run it day to day.
The problem
Questions about a client's history meant digging: prior documents, past correspondence, notices. The answer existed somewhere in the files, and finding it depended on who remembered where. Follow-ups lived in people's heads. With more than one person working and more than one client, mixing people, entities or years up was the real risk.
The work
- Shared instructions. One set of chat instructions used by every client notebook, so every notebook behaves the same way: cite the document, separate facts from inferences from open questions, and recommend professional review when the evidence is thin.
- A shared knowledge base with a written source hierarchy. When sources disagree, the order is fixed: the official current source first, then the client's own source pack, then the shared knowledge base, then general heuristics. The shared layer is written as a maintenance layer with refresh and retirement rules, not as a frozen authority.
- A reference layer. A compact reference on the recurring topics the practice handles, each anchored to its official source, with a refresh cadence.
- One client per notebook, on a firm-wide file system. An AI-ready folder structure for the whole practice, with a source pack per client, and the first client's source area set up to show the pattern.
- The tools around it. Claude for project workflows and document work, ChatGPT for research, Attio for contact and relationship tracking, Linear for tasks and follow-ups, all set up inside the firm on its own accounts. I documented the structure and trained the two partners on daily use.
Step 1 of 6
Record summary
Step 2 of 6
Chronology
Step 3 of 6
Prior-year comparison
Step 4 of 6
Conflict check
Step 5 of 6
Missing-facts check
Step 6 of 6
Current-rule check
Step 1 of 6
Record summary
Step 2 of 6
Chronology
Step 3 of 6
Prior-year comparison
Step 4 of 6
Conflict check
Step 5 of 6
Missing-facts check
Step 6 of 6
Current-rule check
Tools
- NotebookLM: the client notebooks, the shared instructions and the shared knowledge base.
- Official primary sources: the top of the hierarchy, linked from the reference layer.
- Claude: project workflows and document work.
- ChatGPT: research assistance.
- Attio: contact and relationship tracking.
- Linear: tasks and follow-ups.
Results
- Delivered: The shared instructions, the shared knowledge base with its source hierarchy, and the reference layer.
- Delivered: The one-client-per-notebook structure, the firm-wide file system and the first client source pack.
- Delivered: Claude, ChatGPT, Attio and Linear set up on the firm's accounts, with the team trained.
- Still open: A repeatable intake checklist for each new client notebook. It was the piece that would make the system scale past the first client, and it was not finished when the engagement closed.
No efficiency or accuracy gains are claimed.