Start with a specific task.
Compare who executes tasks, makes professional decisions and handles ongoing maintenance and rework. The agreed service matters more than the label agent or workforce.
According to the provider, Flank offers agents for recurring in-house legal work, such as intake, drafting, contract review and legal and compliance questions. The provider states features, references and integrations.
What matters for the comparison is which steps of your process are covered, who reviews results and how much rework remains.
Differentiation
What UNOY handles in your process.
Start with prepared capabilities, have your workforce adapted or buy defined processing as a Service. The agreed scope specifies results, approvals and evidence.
Category 01
Use beyond legal work
Use beyond legal work.
UNOY is used for legal, claims, receivables, compliance and administrative work. What matters is whether your specific task is covered.
Category 02
Clear responsibility for results
Clear responsibility for results.
With Self and CoBuild, your team reviews and is responsible for results. With Service, UNOY takes over the agreed processing; legal services are provided by Skribe attorneys where agreed.
Category 03
Traceable rules
Traceable rules.
UNOY works to your approved rules; changes are versioned and reviewed before use. For both offerings, check how changes are traced.
Category 04
Data processing and hosting
Data processing and hosting.
UNOY runs in EU data centres in Frankfurt and Vienna; the certificates are held by the data centre operators. Check the data flows and evidence of both providers for your deployment.
Category 05
Three approaches
Three approaches: Self, CoBuild, Service.
Self: your team uses and shapes the workforce. CoBuild: UNOY adapts it. Service: UNOY handles the agreed work.
Category 06
Price and scope
Price and scope.
UNOY is offered based on task and agreed scope, not per user. Prices and terms of both providers follow their current offers.
Who reviews, who approves.
With both offerings, people review the work. Clarify for your deployment who reviews, who approves and who is responsible for the result.
check Review queue with flagged points
check Escalation rules and approval thresholds
check Complex or high-risk requests are escalated
check Corrections flow back into agent behavior
help Question to check: who reviews the results?
help Question to check: who is responsible for the results?
help Question to check: how are behaviour changes traced?
check Your team reviews at the agreed points (Self, CoBuild)
check Service: legal services by Skribe attorneys where agreed
check Approval based on documented rules
check Workflows change only through versioned rule changes
check Traceable processing steps
check Self, CoBuild or Service per task
Which solution fits depends on who reviews, approves and is responsible for results in your deployment.
How workflows are maintained.
Compare how workflows are set up, changed and checked.
check Requests via Outlook, intranet portal or browser; work also in Teams and Slack
check Business teams use existing channels such as email
check Integrations with CLM, Jira, and Salesforce
check First agent usually within 2–4 weeks, according to the provider
help Question to check: how are changes traced?
help Question to check: how are rules documented?
help Question to check: how are results re-checked?
check Specialists shape review workflows with AI, without programming
check Rules versioned and reviewed before use
check Rules with basis and change history
check Approval workflow with the four-eyes principle
check Traceable processing steps
check For legal, claims, receivables, compliance and administration
Compare the scope in detail.
| Dimension | Flank | UNOY |
|---|---|---|
| Sector focus | Enterprise legal (contracting, legal Q&A, infosec) | Legal, insurance, receivables, compliance, administration |
| Approach | Agents for legal work, end-to-end according to the provider | AI workforce for recurring expert work |
| Review | Review by the customer's team, according to the provider | Your team reviews; with Service, legal services by Skribe attorneys where agreed |
| Responsibility for results | Check offer and contract | With Service, for the agreed processing |
| Processing | Check with the provider | Your rules, versioned, supported by AI |
| Traceability | Check with the provider | Versioned rules, traceable processing |
| Workflow design | According to the provider: agents are set up and corrected | Specialists shape rules with AI; changes versioned |
| Audit trail | According to the provider: review queue and logs | Processing steps with rule reference, version and approval |
| Access | Outlook/email, Teams, Slack, browser; CLM, Jira, Salesforce | Structured tasks via portals and interfaces |
| Data residency & certificates | According to the provider: dedicated regional tenant per customer; SOC 2 Type II, ISO 42001 | EU data centres in Frankfurt and Vienna; certificates held by the operators |
| Onboarding & pricing | According to the provider's current offer | Based on task and agreed scope |
| Target group | Legal departments in enterprises, banks and governments | Organisations with recurring expert work |
Evaluate your actual task.
Measure accepted completions and total human effort. Include intake, follow-up, review, approval and handover. A good draft alone is not a completed process.
Agent handles review and redlining in the email channel
Flagged points land in the review queue
Review and approval: check with the provider
Question to check: how are behaviour changes traced?
Proposed changes based on your clause catalogue, rules versioned
Word document based on your template
With Service: legal review by Skribe attorneys where agreed
Traceable processing, reference SKW Schwarz
Question to check: is processing of high case volumes intended?
Question to check: is there a data model for flight data?
Question to check: how is enforcement organised?
Question to check: who is responsible for the results?
Enter flight data → check based on the approved EU 261/2004 rules
Delay + distance + cause = traceable result
Demand letter as a Word document, ready for approval
100,000+ cases per year, reference FairPlane
Answers legal and compliance questions in the chat channel
Question to check: is there a structured assessment?
Question to check: how is the report created?
Question to check: does the offer suit your company size?
Guided dialog → structured assessment
Every question with its legal basis and reasoning
Report as a Word document from the template
Reference WKO
Who reviews and who is responsible.
AI work needs human oversight. Clarify for your deployment who reviews and who is responsible for the result.
Flank
Review by the customer's team, according to the provider
Intake, drafting, redlining, negotiation rounds
Legal and compliance Q&A, infosec questionnaires
Review queue with flagged points
Escalation rules and approval thresholds
Principle according to the provider: agents work, the customer's team reviews.
UNOY
Review and approval by approach
Versioned rules and workflows
Traceable processing steps
Service: legal services by Skribe attorneys where agreed
Self and CoBuild when your team reviews itself
Principle: your rules guide the processing. Your team reviews and approves at the agreed points; with Service, UNOY handles the agreed work.
Viewed Fairly
Different focus areas, tested against your task.
Flank can fit legal departments that want recurring contract work handled in their existing channels. UNOY is also used for claims, receivables, compliance and administrative work. A test on your task shows which solution fits.
Find the right solution.
Flank and UNOY get work done under human oversight. The differences lie in the areas of use, how workflows are maintained and who is responsible for results.
Compare both against your task: with identical inputs, clear quality standards and the total effort up to completion.
Flank and UNOY, the most common questions.
What is Flank? expand_more
According to the provider, Flank offers agents for recurring in-house legal work, such as contract review, drafting and questions to the legal department. The provider states current features and terms.
What is the main difference between Flank and UNOY? expand_more
Flank focuses on in-house legal work. UNOY processes defined tasks in legal, claims, receivables, compliance and administration following your rules – used yourself, adapted or as a Service.
How are review and responsibility arranged? expand_more
With Self and CoBuild, your team reviews and is responsible for results. With Service, UNOY takes over the agreed processing; legal services are provided by Skribe attorneys where agreed.
How are changes to workflows handled? expand_more
At UNOY, changes to rules and workflows are versioned and reviewed before use. How other providers handle changes is best checked directly with them.
Which tasks is UNOY suited for? expand_more
UNOY suits recurring tasks with clear rules, such as intake, review, letters and handovers in legal, claims, receivables and compliance. We check with an example whether a task fits.
How do Flank and UNOY differ on data protection and security? expand_more
UNOY runs in EU data centres in Frankfurt and Vienna; the certificates are held by the data centre operators. Access and data use follow the agreed terms. The provider states its own details for Flank.
Shape it yourself. Have it adapted. Have it done.
Self: your team uses and shapes the workforce. CoBuild: UNOY adapts it. Service: UNOY handles the agreed work. Choose according to your task and desired involvement.