Flexible resourcing with built-in control

Two market trends have elevated this topic. First, the legal services ecosystem is expanding. As ALSP usage grows, so does the importance of having a repeatable way to evaluate providers, individuals, and delivery models. Second, risk expectations are rising across industries, especially where information security, data protection, and operational resilience are concerned. Even outside regulated sectors, boards and audit committees increasingly expect clear answers to simple questions: Who has access to sensitive information, why, and under what controls?

A de-risked flexible resourcing model typically rests on three pillars: clarity of mandate, controlled access, and ongoing oversight.

Clarity of mandate means you define the outcome, not just the role title. Instead of "we need an interim counsel", you specify what the resource is there to deliver, how success is measured, and where decision rights sit. This reduces scope creep, prevents hidden escalations, and makes it easier to supervise work without micromanaging.

Controlled access is about aligning permissions with the task. In many legal teams, individuals gain access to all information for administrative ease. However, good third-party risk practice is the opposite: minimum necessary access, granted quickly, reviewed regularly, and removed cleanly at the end of an engagement. This becomes even more important where cyber incidents and data breaches can create material financial and reputational impact.

Ongoing oversight is the difference between "staff augmentation" and a governed delivery model. Oversight does not require daily reporting. It requires an agreed cadence that keeps priorities aligned, surfaces issues early, and protects the core team. For many clients, a weekly steering touchpoint combined with a short written status update is enough to keep control while moving fast. 

A practical starting point is to think in phases.

Before day one, align on conflicts and confidentiality expectations, define the scope and escalation paths, and confirm who approves what. This is also the moment to decide what the flexible resource should and should not touch - for example, sensitive investigations, board materials, or certain categories of personal data - unless there is an explicit need and control plan.

In the first week, focus on speed to productivity: tool access, templates, stakeholder map, and your preferred ways of working. The most common reason interim resources feel "slow" is not capability; it is missing context and unclear interfaces. A short onboarding pack and a named point of contact can prevent that.

During delivery, keep the governance light but visible. Capture the scope, priorities, and decisions in one place. If you can, track a small set of indicators that matter to the business, such as throughput, cycle times, backlog reduction, or stakeholder satisfaction. This helps you demonstrate value and makes resourcing decisions easier to justify internally. 

At exit, knowledge transfer must be a mandatory step. An engagement's value is diminished if the accumulated knowledge is not retained. A simple handover should be required, outlining what was delivered, what is pending, key risks, and the location of templates or playbooks. When done well, flexible resourcing leaves the legal function stronger than it was before.

At PwC Switzerland, Flexible Legal Resources (FLR) is designed to help clients build their in-house legal team on demand, matching projects with legal experts who have the exact skills and knowledge required, without the overhead of traditional hiring.

From a client perspective, the value is not only speed. It is also the ability to scale in a governed way. Because FLR resources are deployed with clear scoping, professional standards, and an integration mindset, clients can use them as a reliable capacity layer during peaks, for specialist workstreams, or to bridge temporary gaps - while keeping ownership and control inside the organisation.

Flexible resourcing works best when it is treated as an operating model, not an emergency measure. Investing a small amount of time in governance upfront enables faster movement during peak periods, protects the core team, and gives stakeholders confidence that quality, confidentiality, and risk are being managed deliberately.

In other words: the goal is not "more people". The goal is stable, predictable legal delivery - at speed - with the right controls.