The CEO is the General Counsel’s most important client, but do we truly understand what they need from their lawyer? In this episode of the C-Suite Series, Evan Wong, CEO of legal tech firm Checkbox, joins The Legal Department to help lawyers understand what CEOs want. Evan shares insights on how lawyers can deliver value during “wartime” and “peacetime,” how to provide advice that supports the business, and why asking questions is crucial to demonstrating a genuine interest in the business. We also discuss what CEOs look for in prospective board members. This is a must-listen conversation you won’t want to miss.
—
Listen to the podcast here
C-Suite Series: What The CEO Wants In The Legal Department With Evan Wong, CEO Checkbox
My name is Evan Wong. I am the CEO and Co-founder of Checkbox, a software company that helps in-house legal departments better intake legal requests from the business, get visibility over legal work, and provide self-help tools to get that precious time back. A fun fact about me, I love karaoke. I’m not a good singer, I’m a fun singer. You’ll see me dancing around in the karaoke room and getting everyone to sing. If you are wondering what my go-to karaoke song is, it’s probably I Want It That Way by Backstreet Boys.
—
In this episode, I’m excited to welcome my first CEO guest in our C-Suite series, Evan Wong, who is the Co-founder and CEO of Checkbox AI. Hi, Evan. How are you?
I’m feeling great. Thanks for having me.
The Importance Of The CEO And General Counsel Relationship
I am excited for this conversation. As I mentioned in our prep and as we have been talking about this conversation, my goal in the show is to help lawyers, particularly in-house lawyers, be better at serving their clients. The CEO relationship, especially for a general counsel I was talking to my husband about, it’s such a key relationship. I’m interested in learning what that role means to you, what you need from that role, and how we can better serve you. I’m excited to jump in about that. For folks who may not know about Checkbox, can you tell us a little bit about the company? We’ll get into a little bit of why I’m very intrigued as to why you founded it, but tell us a little bit about the company.
Checkbox is a software company built for legal departments, and we primarily help with legal intake and workflow automation. What that means is a lot of GCs and CLOs come to us, and they will say, “We need better visibility over what is happening in the legal department, where work is coming from, how much, and how we are resourcing it.” It’d be great as well if we could provide some self-help tools so that we can get some time back as well for our lawyers, who are spending a lot of time perhaps on low-value, high-volume, or administrative tasks. That’s what we do.
We started the company in Australia. If you’re picking up on the accent, that’s where it comes from. I was born and raised in Sydney, Australia, built the company there, and moved here to New York in 2024 to grow the business in the US where it’s been a phenomenal journey, and I love working with the people here.
I’m excited to learn because I read a lot about you, and that you started the company right after college. I’m going to dive into it now because I can’t help myself. For you to have developed a tool for in-house legal departments for intake management, I’m curious how that was even an idea that you would think about as a new college grad.
I have spent my whole life as an entrepreneur. Funny, I’ve only been working for someone else for about eight weeks of my life when I did a summer internship with KPMG. When I speak to other founders who are looking to start their businesses, they always ask me, “How did you come up with this idea?” I often say, “You don’t come up with the magical idea straight away. You come up with some idea, and it’s through a process of speaking to the market that you figure out what is a meaningful idea and one that can add a lot of value.”
The reason why I started Checkbox in the way that it was is I went to law school in Australia, so I had some background in legal. I was never smart enough to become an actual lawyer like you, but I jumped into trying to understand the other side of it. I started a company called Hero before Checkbox, in fact, Hero Education. It wasn’t technology it was helping young-to-be adults your 16, 17, to 18-year-olds be more intentional about the careers that they would take as they finished up what we called high school.
When I was building that business, which I loved, I came across a lot of legal and compliance challenges myself as a small business owner. Having a legal background and trying to navigate that, I found it extremely challenging. I thought to myself, “If I find it so hard, everyone else must find it hard as well.” When I finished college, I thought there must be a better way to deliver legal and compliance content that’s more digital, more personalized, and more time-efficient. That was the inception of the Checkbox idea.
As I said, the first idea is never the right one, so that one was targeted at small business owners and helping them navigate compliance challenges. I realized that the way to make the biggest impact with the biggest problem was to serve the legal department and the lawyers there, who are doing it as a day job. That’s how we landed on building legal tech from a college grad.
That’s cool, and thank you for seeing us. I am looking at an intake solution, which is how we were connected. I describe the GC’s office as being pummeled with inbounds. It is very difficult to get your arms around everybody’s needs. You hear this from other GCs and CLOs. A lot of times, I will have the same question go to multiple people on my team, and we are wasting time researching and looking into the same issue. It would be so great to have a dashboard to know what everybody’s working on and to have data to say, “We get these questions. Can we develop a self-help solution?” Kudos for seeing the need in the market.
It comes with a lot of empathy. It’s having an open mind and an open ear listening, finding patterns, and trying to solve problems in a genuine way. The unique thing about legal departments as well is a lot of the work I love the word inbound because it’s not that we have full control over our workloads. The workload piles on top, yes, and some things are going to come hard and fast, and it jumps its way to the top of the queue. It is a queue, and if we are not looking at better ways of work, it’s why, as well, a lot of attorneys can burn out. I can appreciate that.
Again, thanks for seeing us well. I don’t describe it as a startup. You’ve been working on this for quite a while but you have been through a startup phase. The type of lawyer you need at different stages of the business probably is different. I’d like to understand how you’ve used lawyers in your business. You said you had some awareness and some familiarity with law from going to law school. How and at what stages did you use lawyers?
The Evolving Legal Needs Of A Growing Business
All the way through a company-building lifecycle. You might start as early as incorporation, and then you might be engaging with a specific lawyer for intellectual property, things like registering your trademark. If you are in more technical spaces, there are patents and things like that as well. We went through that process. Then you go through, for example, milestone events like fundraising. In a business like ours, we are a SaaS company. Fundraising is a key part of our company-building growth journey, and fundraising is one of those things where it is deeply legal, alongside commercial. You want to have a lawyer who has had that experience in taking companies at that stage, negotiating with VCs and their lawyers, and their people doing due diligence.
There are also times when you might need to tap a lawyer on the shoulder for labor disputes. As we know, navigating that is very important, and balancing the legal risk with some of the practical human elements of managing people when there are disputes. There are probably a handful of other examples, but that’s where a lot of lawyers will come in commercial negotiating, and buy-sell contracts, which is a more day-to-day type of activity as well. I worked with different lawyers and at different degrees throughout the journey.
Your needs are evolving as the company is growing and getting more mature. I share a story about when I was developing this show, I’m a lawyer, and I know a ton of lawyers. I was getting a lot of advice about developing an email list. You should get data on your audience. I’m not selling anything. I don’t have a course or coaching or anything I’m selling but I was interested in that advice. I asked a friend who’s a privacy lawyer, and she told me, “Why would you do that? You are going to expose yourself to all these regulatory requirements about maintaining the data.”
It was helpful feedback, but I’m sharing this example because it was like pouring cold water on something I was excited about. It gave me a glimpse into what it must be like to be building a business. I wonder, in any of your travels working with counsel on those different issues, were there interactions that made you feel the way I did?
That example resonates a lot. As someone who is receiving legal advice, I would say that I appreciate, first of all, that all of the risks are laid out on the table. I don’t want people to think that you need to make judgment calls and almost pre-vet and pre-filter. It’s important to have all of it laid on the table. That’s important but then it’s important to put a layer of practicality and enable the business to make a business decision and accept the risk as they see fit in the situation. I will give you an example that I faced, which is around there was a person who was exiting the business here at Checkbox, and we were getting some advice around that. The advice was, “Don’t say these things and don’t share these things because it opens up risk for legal action later on.”
Part of our culture at Checkbox as well is to be open and honest to have candor around things that are important, and to be able to help people understand the situation, particularly around something as important as someone moving on from the business. We listened to the advice. We understood the risks involved, and we pressure-tested some of the messaging with the lawyer to understand exactly how big the risk was and understood all of that as well. Ultimately, we made a decision and said, “We trust our people. We will take a slice of legal risk as a tradeoff in retaining our company culture and what we stand for as values in our company.” That was a moment as well, not so much pouring cold water, but rather us thinking about what is important to us as a business despite the legal risks.
The CEO’s Perspective: Seeking Legal Counsel And Opinions
That’s helpful to hear I have been a GC for many years, and a lot of my GC colleagues talk about knowing the company culture as something that we take into account when we are delivering advice. I want to pull on that a little bit. Laying out all the legal risks and minefields and all that is in our wheelhouse.
I interviewed Tracey Lesetar-Smith, who was the General Counsel for NASCAR. I tend to agree with her that, in my experience, clients want the lawyer to give an opinion. I want to hear from you if that is something the CEO is looking for because I can tell you, “You want to do this course of action, here’s the list of the parade of horribles that are going to keep you from doing it, or the things you should watch out for.” I could also say, “If it were me, I would think about this. If my goal was X, I might take this path.” I’m curious about whether you want us to give our opinion.
I do, and the reason why I say that is that the best lawyers aren’t just experts in the legal domain. They have also seen these situations or these scenarios many times before. That experience gives you an intuition as to perhaps what is the best course of action. It’s an opinion. It’s not a demand. It’s still up to the business client or the CEO to make their final judgment call, but that opinion does hold weight and the other thing is being able to provide an opinion also puts you in the frame of mind of your client. It helps you build empathy because if you stay at the black-and-white letter part of the law, then you are pushing from your direction, perhaps what you see as being your legal knowledge. Once you start to give an opinion, you start to put yourself in the shoes of the person who needs to make the decision, and then you can start to consider some of those important elements, like culture, practicality, and those softer elements.
The best lawyers are not just experts in law; they have also encountered similar situations many times before. This experience provides them with an intuition for determining the best course of action. Share on XI’m going to get on my soapbox about why GCs are so valuable because, as we learn the company, as we learn the culture, learn about the leadership, and what’s important to the CEO, we can tailor or frame our opinions around those things. I wonder, do you have a GC or an outside GC at Checkbox?
We do. We use outside counsel at the moment, and it’s exactly that. It’s being able to have them understand the business goals first, and any great lawyer will ask good questions. That’s so critical. There’s nothing that gives me more peace of mind when I go for legal counsel than them asking me good questions because then I am confident that they understand my problem before they start giving me advice.
It’s like if anyone’s ever had a mentor or an advisor, I’m always a bit dubious when people come out and give you blanket textbook answers without first understanding the nuances of your situation. Leading with good questions and then truly understanding the situation and the business context before giving that advice is what I have found to be the best counsel I have worked with.
I’m like you. I’m very suspicious of people that don’t ask questions. What do you know that I don’t? What about one of the other traps that lawyers struggle with? I’m going to call it being a perfectionist and making sure everything you do is complete. We have ethical obligations to communicate with clients and make sure they know all of the risks, and that can have the unintended consequence of overloading the client with a lot of technical legal jargon. I don’t know if you get big memos or emails that are single-spaced with a lot of “whereas” and all that. I’m interested in learning what the CEO is looking for in communications from lawyers.
We have talked about this, and you touched on it. First of all, all of the issues need to be laid on the table, but when it comes to communication as well, you want it to be concise. CEOs are very busy, and often, if they are getting advice. It’s probably important. They will take the time to digest it, but there’s that saying, “I didn’t have enough time to write you a short letter, so I wrote you a long one.” Lawyers can have maybe sometimes the tendency.
I have worked with lawyers who are fantastic at being concise. I want to make that super clear. Most of the ones I work with are very concise but we can also have the tendency, because of knowledge overload, to be fair, like knowledge overload to send these massive emails that are hard to digest. It’s like reading through prose.
There’s a technique that’s used in consulting companies where you state the outcome or the fact first and then cascade into the reasons, breaking that into hopefully parts of parts as well. Even simple stylistic things we are talking about in an email, like bolding the topic before we hit the paragraph will help people sift through information and digest it a lot more easily. Bullet points keep you concise. Even if you like writing in sentences, sometimes that bullet point gets you to write and get straight to the point. There are a lot of techniques there.
I would say, as well. The other thing is, back to what we were talking about. You can lay everything on the table, but not everything is weighted the same. You still can have an opinion. Understanding how to weigh risks prioritize them, and carve out what must be done versus what should be done and what could be done. It’s a pretty simple framework. The must, should, could framework probably helps you communicate a lot better with executives.
Moving Beyond The “Cost Center” Mindset For Legal Departments
I want to also talk about how, and it sounds like you have outside GC, one of the pressures and constant refrains that we get and you probably hear about this through your work with the company, supporting other GCs is how do we show value? There can be an adage about the legal department as a cost center. We always need more resources, et cetera, and I’m curious, as again in your CEO role, how do lawyers show value?
I’m just going to call out that legal departments are no longer a cost center than any other department that all carries costs. That is, hopefully, I do hope that CEOs and management teams have evolved past that concept for the legal department. I can see why it may have started that way because, if you go back in time, we were all using external counsel, and law firms are expensive. We thought, “Let’s bring it all in-house to save some costs.”
The first attitude towards legal departments is cost because that was why we created the legal department in the first place. In the modern legal department, we are an enablement for so many parts of business processes. When you buy something from procurement, it comes through legal. If the commercial team goes out and sells something, it comes through legal. When there’s an HR dispute, it comes through legal. We are almost at the center of many organizational processes, like all these spokes coming out of the core that is legal. I do urge people to think about legal not as a cost center but as an enablement center for the business.
In the modern legal department, we play a crucial role in enabling many parts of business processes. For example, when you buy something through procurement, it goes through legal. Share on XHow do you then add value to that narrative? How do you help your executives and CEOs see that it’s value and not cost? I like to think about it in maybe two frames, wartime and peacetime. It makes a lot of sense for legal departments because we do operate in both those environments, sometimes almost daily if not one hour.
Yes. You see me. I love it.
One hour, you could be doing a very peaceful BAU thing, and then the next hour, all of a sudden, you are pulled into a room, and you are in wartime. The way you add value is going to be different in each of those contexts. In wartime, it’s about being present, being responsive, giving good advice, and being supportive. It’s very much like you are hyper-focused on being that person the business or the CEO can rely on to make important decisions and quick ones in a time of criticality. Lawyers are probably going to be naturally, hopefully, I would assume naturally good at adding value in those environments. That’s the crux of it.
Where it gets a little bit more tricky is during peacetime. How do we add value during peacetime? It’s about taking a step back from the actual depth of being a lawyer and being a good business corporate citizen and being able to align with corporate goals. During peacetime, you have to switch your mind to thinking, “I’m not putting out fires right now. How do I add value?” As a lawyer, what does my GC care about? If I’m a GC, what does my CEO care about? What are the company goals? What are we trying to achieve this quarter? How do I see around the corner so that I can minimize the number of fires that might start so I can spend more time in peacetime helping build the company rather than putting out the fire in the corner?
Here’s another framework I will share with you. It’s like you think of work in terms of urgency on one axis. If you are thinking about this visually, let’s say the Y-axis is urgency, and the X-axis is importance. There are things that can be urgent and important. That’s the wartime stuff urgent, important, got to get to it but then there are also things that are important but not urgent, and those are usually the strategic initiatives, the things that need you to invest time or money to get a future return to manage risk in the future.
I would say in peacetime, think about what those initiatives might be for you and how that aligns with some of the corporate goals. Whether it’s growing the company we are expecting to grow by 50% next year, what does that mean in terms of the volume of work that will come into legal? Therefore, are we resourced accordingly? Are we handling things in an efficient manner to support that future growth? That’s how you add value.
Regarding your point about aligning around the strategic goals, I had a question from a GC who said they were being asked what the goals of the legal department were that were going to help move the company. They were asking me for advice on how to do that, and I said, “What are your company’s goals? Show how legal is part of moving them forward.” You are not going to necessarily be leading sales, but legal has to be tracking with the goal of accomplishing the sales goals.
One hundred percent. It’s exactly that. When we say that legal needs to align with the company’s goals, some people may take that to the extreme and say, “Do we now sit in sales calls and start generating leads for the business?” There’s a way to make it come to life. It’s easy to talk about concepts. Talking in examples will help a lot better. Let’s talk about a real example. If you wanted to support, let’s say, increased sales, the way I would think about the problem is, “What’s legal’s role right now in that workflow? Where can we either speed up the sales cycle or help reduce some of the bottlenecks that are happening at this point?”
Part of that might be very commercial. It’s probably contracting. The question is, “Can we accelerate the involvement in sales for that specific contract or sometimes it’s about reallocating time?” If a lawyer is spending all their time answering compliance questions and therefore takes longer to get to the sales piece, that opportunity costs. Even though it’s solving a non-sales, non-revenue-generating activity, if you can free up that time, that reallocation does then, for the business, equal faster velocity and more revenue. It doesn’t always have to be explicitly the thing you’re trying to solve. Sometimes it’s thinking about opportunity costs and where time is deployed for the legal department as well.
It’s what you said about being an enablement center. I interviewed Sterling Miller, who’s a three-time GC and has written a lot of books on in-house practice. His suggestion was to go to the sales meetings. Maybe you’re not going to be on sales calls, but go to the meetings and find out what their top three deals are. That way, when you have all that noise coming at you, you can say, “No. Important for us is closing these three deals this quarter.” Making that happen.
I want to shift a little bit. The other thing that many of us lawyers aspire to is being on a corporate board. It’s perceived as an easy job where you get paid to attend some meetings and give advice. I have been on some boards, and it’s a lot of work. One question is, there are a lot of training programs. Some universities offer certificates. There are a lot of bells and whistles about getting these corporate board seats. When I have a CEO in front of me, I want to know what you’re looking for in board candidates.
Seeking T-Shaped Individuals For Corporate Board Seats
Generally, not lawyers on the board, but board candidates. One thing I look for is, whether are they T-shaped. The reason why I say that is, that when you get to the board level, you can’t just be an expert in the profession you come from. You need to have a broad understanding of business. You need to be able to understand every function to some level, that’s happening in a business so that you can collaborate, make good judgment calls, and give good advice and counsel in that forum. Think of it as wanting T shapes. As a CEO, when I’m building a board, you’ll hear the advice before of wanting to hire people who make up for your weaknesses.
That’s the same thing for a board. You don’t want the same T-shaped person to keep being on your board. You want different Ts. If you can imagine a T, then shift horizontally and add another T, that horizontal bar at the top is the part that everyone can align on, speaking at the same level. Maybe that’s a very top base, but then you have all these thinner lines that come down. Eventually, you have a board that looks more like a filled-in square. When you’re compiling your board and looking for board members, you’re looking for different Ts to add together. As a CEO, you’re one of those Ts as well.
The Value Of Lawyers On Corporate Boards
That’s what I look for in board members. As to maybe for the audience thinking about being a lawyer and joining a board, what are the things you could be looking out for to make that happen? As a CEO, there are a lot of advantages to having lawyers on the board in the same way there are advantages to having, say, finance professionals on the board. That’s quite common. It’s especially so in businesses where you might be operating in highly regulated environments or you have a lot of legal activity by virtue of your business. Maybe you have a lot of litigation, or you might have a lot of M&A activity, in which case a lot of board conversations probably have a very strong legal aspect to them. I can see there is strong value there.
The counterpoint to that, something to be careful of and we’ve been talking about this throughout this session, is balancing legal risk and advice at the board level with business practicality and risk as well. Overemphasizing legal risk, especially in that forum where you probably do have a bit more say in decision-making power is to make sure that you’re still, it’s going to be tricky. You’re trying to help the board make good decisions around legal risk, but you also need to split your brain to think about how to not stifle innovation.
We want to grow. That’s helpful. It’s like a brass ring like it’s the next achievement for folks who have landed in an executive role. I feel like the boards that I’m on, I am connected with the business. I feel like I can make an impact. I don’t want to go on the auto parts board because it’s a corporate, public company and I’m going to get some stock. I want to be on a board where I feel like I can add value, so that’s helpful.
I want to go back and talk a little bit more about Checkbox. As you are building the business and learning about the legal teams, how do you see I’m going to go into a little bit on the legal tech front I don’t know if you hear this from any of your clients, but I feel like I get bombarded by legal tech vendors especially going to conferences or a lot of outreach through LinkedIn, people trying to sell stuff. I hear the corporate values around empathy, fun, transparency, and all that. How are you looking at the legal industry now after having been in the legal tech business for a couple of years? What are you seeing as what’s most important, or what do we need?
Every business is at a different stage in this journey, and therefore the needs will vary. From where I’m sitting, there’s been a big drive in the last few years around visibility. This is what you are seeing, the ability to wrap your arms around what is happening in the legal department. I wonder if that comes from evolution. We were talking about the evolution of the legal department over time. We are getting to this maturity now where the legal department, hopefully for most, isn’t still fighting the cost center narrative. Now, we are a peer in the corporate structure. If you look at any other one of your peers, whether it’s your commercial teams, HR teams, or finance teams, they have a lot of data and visibility and they operate and report their performance. We talked about how to add value. We didn’t talk about demonstrating value. Legal still one of the key challenges is even if we add value how do we demonstrate it?
It is very difficult. I don’t always get asked about that. For many years, I would put it together in manual, no Checkbox, no tech. We put together, “Here’s what we did this year.” I didn’t necessarily get a lot of uptake or interest in it. It’s important for me as a leader to know what our output is and how we have delivered value. I wonder if it’s different in different companies that people care about that, but keep talking. I want to hear more about how we can demonstrate what we are doing.
It does vary. Some organizations have. It’s a cultural thing. It might be a very good GC like yourself who is a representative for the department, and so when people trust the GC, they trust the department. I have spoken to organizations where there’s been such a big mistrust between the business and legal that legal then puts in so many more cycles, so many more hours to frame, position, and put the materials together to even try to explain to the business that they are adding value. That’s such a waste of everyone’s time to be doing that instead of actual legal work. Value can be a perception piece, but it can also be how you allocate resources. Someone telling you, patting you on your back, and saying, “You are doing a great job,” is nice but someone saying, “I trust you with more budget,” is putting their money where their mouth is.
Demonstrating value is also about how we justify resources and justify the need for more resources. I do find that to be a big mega-trend at the moment for legal departments. We are so busy, the business is growing, and the regulatory environment is getting more complex. There’s more legal work coming in and lawyers are expensive, whether it’s external or internal. When we need more help, the business case for the CFO or CEO sometimes is not well received. The question is, how do we show that?
Demonstrating value is about justifying resources and the need for additional resources. Share on XA big part of that at some point has to be reporting and technology, because you are not going to have a mega spreadsheet some people do have a mega spreadsheet but at some point, it’s very difficult. The ability to have that data, to have the metrics, to tell those stories, to allow you to not only demonstrate value but to justify resources. Why are we spending that much on outside counsel? If we bought this technology, this is how much we could save the company or bring it back in-house. This is why I need that additional commercial attorney because the amount of commercial work has doubled in the last few years, and our headcount has increased by one. Those are the stories you can tell rather than an anecdote of “We are busy. We are overworked,” which probably is what they hear from everyone.
Let me ask you then, as the CEO, what would you want to see? That’s why your business is super interesting and you as a CEO are interesting because you are both the customer and the product. It’s so different. In your CEO chair, as you are thinking about this reporting or data technology, what would you want to see if your GC came to you? Like, what would that data look like?
That’s an interesting question. I have never been asked that before. Two things come straight to mind, and a soft third. The first thing I would probably think about is that every CEO will have different priorities. These are mine, so don’t read this to every CEO. The first thing is, how is legal helping the business grow? We talk about aligning to business goals. Some of those metrics that I might want to see are how fast or what the turnaround time for a lawyer jumping onto, say, a new contract that we are working on. What is the time spent before that first revision is taken? All of this needs to take into consideration the size of the work like pieces of legal work aren’t equal. Some will take longer than others.
Being able to see the velocity. Our commercial teams work hard, they work fast. They are always urgent. Lawyers who work with salespeople probably have a chuckle about that. Everything is always urgent. It needs to be done by the end of the day. Being able to have that mirror that same sense of urgency and that velocity and having the metrics to show that on the commercial front is important. Then there’s also the cost side, which is how are we able to stretch the legal department, again, without burnout. That’s stretching in an unsustainable way, but how do we stretch or get more productivity out of the existing resources that have been allocated to legal and be able to support the business further with less?
That’s the case with even, like, think about your peers over in your customer support teams, your customer success teams. They face the same dynamic. They also add value by helping customers retain and protect that revenue and grow but they also need to think about the COGS part of the business, the Cost Of Goods Sold, or the gross margin, which is the cost of supporting those customers. The further you can stretch the revenue or the customers that they can support, the more successful, the more efficient that business is. There are a lot of different ways that you could probably represent that and achieve that as well as a legal department that a CEO would appreciate.
I don’t know if you are looking at developing that as a part of Checkbox or if it is already in the solution, but you might talk to more CFOs and CEOs and see what they want to see.
That’s an interesting point. That’s true.
You could get lawyers, and GCs that buy into the tech, and then the CEO’s like, “Why are you giving me this?”
Very true. That’s great advice.
I have enjoyed getting to know you. I have said maybe four times. It’s like you see me. I feel like you get what this job is all about. I feel like you have an appreciation of what GCs and lawyers do. To wrap up, I ask everybody the same final question, which I hope is a fun one What is your pump-up song?
Evan Wong’s Pump-Up Song: Living On A Prayer By Bon Jovi
My pump-up song would probably be Livin’ on a Prayer by Bon Jovi.
It’s got a good build from the get-go too.
It does. It’s such a good pop song.
Evan, thanks so much for being here. I have enjoyed getting to know you.
Thank you. It’s been a great conversation, and thanks for having me. I’m honored to be your first CEO on the show as part of this series. That means a lot.
Thank you. Take care.
You too.
Important Links
About Evan Wong
Evan Wong is the CEO and co-founder of Checkbox, a multi-award-winning no code workflow automation platform.
Wong, is on the Forbes “30 Under 30” list and has worked with many legal teams globally on their digital transformation projects by leveraging the power of no code automation. He has helped redefine how lawyers conduct intake and triage, generate documents, provide advice and facilitate workflows.
Checkbox is the leading “no-code” legal automation platform that empowers corporate legal teams and law firms automate their manual processes and knowledge for intake & triage, contract generation and approval workflows. Because Checkbox requires no technical knowledge and is truly no-code, workflows can be built and maintained without relying on IT, consultants or Checkbox as a vendor, providing greater control, flexibility and time-savings. This empowers business teams to enable digital transformation in a matter of days, not years. Checkbox’s customers include companies like Allianz, Coca-Cola Europacific Partners and PwC.
