SealbookComparison
Not another notetaker. The step after it.
If your firm already uses a notetaker, keep it. Sealbook takes its transcript and does the part it doesn't: getting the client to confirm what was decided.
| What a consulting firm needs | Notetakers | Client portals | E-signature | Sealbook |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Captures what was said | Yes | No | No | Yes, with exact quotes |
| Separates decisions from discussion | Summaries | No | No | Yes, checked by your lead |
| The client confirms each decision | No | Sometimes | Whole documents | Yes, each one |
| Both sides confirm the same words | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| Changes go through a change request | No | No | No | Yes |
| Tamper-evident record both sides keep | No | No | For signatures | Yes |
Typical behaviour of each category, not a review of any one product.
Why a summary isn't enough
A notetaker's summary is written for the person who recorded the meeting. It's a good memory aid, but it's one side's account, generated by a model, and nobody on the other side confirmed it. When a decision is disputed, it carries the same weight as a recap email.
Why e-signature isn't the answer either
E-signature is built for documents: a contract, a statement of work. Nobody sends a change-request-grade document for "twelve months is fine for release one", which is exactly the kind of decision that gets disputed later.
Use them together
Fireflies, Otter, Teams and Zoom transcripts all go straight into Sealbook. The notetaker hears the meeting; Sealbook makes sure both sides agree on what it decided.