Crafting collaborative searches
Shifting the paradigm of how users create, edit, and share search queries on Everlaw
Role: Sole designer
Type: Core workflow enhancement
Released: May 2024
Collaborators: PM, engineering
Impact at a glance
Fundamentally changed a core platform workflow used across litigation teams
Improved collaboration and iteration in search building, a task previously done via hacky workarounds
Early feedback signals strong resonance across litigation teams — “hugely impactful” and “better than Christmas” on launch day
Overview
Everlaw’s search workflow was powerful but siloed, forcing teams to rely on workarounds to collaborate at scale. I led design to rethink search collaboration, balancing performance, technical constraints, and usability trade-offs. The outcome was a shared, trustable search experience that reduced friction in a core daily workflow.
PROBLEM
It started with a cry for “dynamic binders”
Search is one of the most heavily used workflows in Everlaw, yet teams were struggling to build and refine queries together.
The initial signal came from users asking for “dynamic binders” to auto-add new, relevant search results to shared binders over time. At face value, this sounded like a request for automation.
Both search and binder cards open a document set, but searches are used to filter documents, while binders are meant to organize finalized results.
But through research and workflow analysis, it became clear that collaboration itself wasn’t the core issue.
The deeper problem was trust and iteration. Teams lacked:
Confidence that a shared search reflected the latest intent
Visibility into who changed what and why
Safe ways to explore and recover from mistakes
As a result, users relied on manual binders, screenshots of prior search queries, or written instructions to coordinate, fragmenting workflows and slowing down review.
USER RESEARCH
What users were really trying to do
Through interviews with reviewers, paralegals, and litigation support, we uncovered:
Search vs. binder confusion
Search and binder workflows felt similar but were conceptually different. Users wanted the flexibility and permanence of binders with the power and dynamism of search.
People make mistakes
Users traceability, easy recovery from mistakes, and consistent shared context across collaborators
Divergent mental models
Mental models around what constitutes a shared vs. personal search experience varied widely, suggesting the need for flexible interaction patterns
These insights reframed the challenge from “automating binders” to…how might we support safe, transparent, and iterative search building across teams without breaking existing mental models?
SOLUTION
Decimating friction in searches
Although there were minimal UI changes, we fundamentally altered how the search experience felt and behaved. These changes reduced friction in workflows that were previously solved with manual or external coordination—directly elevating the platform’s core utility.
Collaborate in real-time in a shared workspace
Users no longer need to constantly re-share new versions of searches to ensure everyone has the latest individual copy. Toasts keep users updated on each others’ changes.
Iterate with ease with flexible editing and save options
Tweaking a typo in your search query no longer creates a new search card that clutters the homepage and requires re-sharing.
Trace changes and easily recover from mistakes via version history
Users can now see how document sets evolved over time for reporting purposes, and can easily restore and create copies of prior versions of the search.
STRATEGIC DECISIONS & TRADE-OFFS
Respecting mental models
We made three key decisions to balance collaboration, usability, and technical constraints.
📒 Decision 1 : Preserve distinct identities of search & binder
Users naturally think of binders as static sets and searches as dynamic filters
Merging the two would violate established mental models
Decision: Keep them distinct and improve search collaboration without blurring that boundary.
Trade-off: Users benefit from improved coordination without disrupting familiar structures or core data models.
✏️ Decision 2: Live edits vs. manual saves (query changes)
Fully live edits risk confusing teammates
Fully manual saves slow iteration and create version conflicts.
Decision: Use a hybrid model: live updates for small tweaks (e.g., filter tweaks) + manual commit for larger query changes
Trade-off: Enables real-time collaboration while maintaining predictable, recoverable workflows, keeping teams aligned without disruption.
👀 Decision 3: Shared views vs. individual flexibility (layout / presentation)
Originally, we proposed to keep search result table views fully synced across collaborators so everyone sees the same layout in real time.
Constraint: Views include personal settings (e.g., column widths). Forcing full sync would introduce technical complexity, create noisy version history, and disrupt individual workflows.
Decision: Decouple views from the search and introduce a search-level default. Users maintain personal flexibility while collaborators have a shared starting point.
Trade-off: Collaborators might not always see identical views, but they gain control, stability, and clarity about what’s shared versus personal.
Users begin with the creator’s view, can make personal adjustments,
and reset to the default whenever needed.
This set of decisions shows not just design craft, but judgment about user workflows and collaboration norms.
RESULTS
Impact beyond metrics
Search is ubiquitous so measuring impact with traditional metrics (e.g., adoption or retention) was challenging. Instead, we measured success through ecosystem-level signals. Across power users, reviewers, and litigation teams, feedback has been overwhelmingly positive:
The update was “hugely impactful”
It “opens a significant level of differentiation between Everlaw and its main competitor.”
Launch day felt “better than Christmas” 🥳 🎁
These reactions confirm that the redesign meaningfully elevated precision, ease of use, and trust in one of the platform’s most critical workflows, strengthening both day-to-day efficiency and Everlaw’s broader competitive position.
TAKEAWAYS
Designing for how people think 🧠
This project reinforced a simple truth: great workflows emerge from respecting how people think, not from taking requests at face value or forcing behavior into rigid structures.
By questioning assumptions about collaboration and focusing on trust and iteration, we balanced automation with control to deliver a search experience teams confidently rely on every day.