Why the Scope of Work Conversation Is the Most Important Part of Any Abstracting Project
A client sends an email that says, "I need an abstract on this lease."
We get requests like this regularly. The language is clear. The intent seems straightforward. And yet, that single sentence is where the most consequential mistakes in abstracting projects usually begin.
The word "abstract" means different things to different people in this industry. To a landman, it might be shorthand for any kind of title research product. To an abstractor, it means a comprehensive chain-of-title document covering every filing from the inception of the lease through the present day. Those are very different products at very different price points.
When the person ordering and the person producing aren't using the same definitions, the potential for misalignment is real. Without a conversation to bridge that gap, a client could end up requesting a 1,500-page document that costs thousands of dollars more than their project required, or requesting something that doesn't go deep enough to serve their actual purpose. That's exactly why we treat the scope conversation as the most critical step in every engagement.
The Language Gap
There's a meaningful difference in lingo between landmen and abstractors. Both groups use the same terms, but they often mean different things by them. A landman might say "abstract" when they really need a runsheet. They might say "runsheet" when an ownership report would serve their purpose. They might request copies of a lease file when what they actually need is a complete chain-of-title analysis.
The disconnect happens because landmen and abstractors operate in different parts of the same process.
This isn't a knowledge gap. Landmen are sharp professionals who understand their own work deeply. The disconnect happens because landmen and abstractors operate in different parts of the same process. A landman thinks about the end use of the information. An abstractor thinks about the product being built. The terminology overlaps, but the frame of reference is different.
This comes up most often with first-time clients. Someone reaches out asking for a specific product by name, and through our intake conversation, we discover that what they're actually trying to accomplish calls for something different. That's why the first question we ask on every order is the same: what are you using this for?
Why We Generate the Scope, Not the Client
The answer to that question shapes the entire engagement. A company evaluating acquisition targets across 50 leases needs a different product than a company doing due diligence on a single lease ahead of closing. An attorney preparing a title opinion needs different documentation than a land manager screening for opportunities. The use case determines the right product, and the right product determines the scope of work.
We generate the scope internally rather than asking clients to define it for us. When clients generate their own scope, the result may be a request that's too broad (leading to unnecessary expense) or too narrow (leading to gaps that surface later in the process).
Clients know what they're trying to accomplish. We know which products accomplish it most efficiently.
Clients know what they're trying to accomplish. We know which products accomplish it most efficiently.
The scope of work should come from the people who understand the full range of what's available and how each product fits different situations.
This approach lets us do a few things that matter:
- We can steer clients toward a less expensive product when their use case doesn't require a comprehensive one.
- We can flag situations where a client is requesting less than they'll actually need.
- We can set accurate cost and timeline expectations before any work begins.
- We can make sure the deliverable matches the downstream use, whether that's legal review, acquisition analysis, or operational planning.
What Getting It Right Looks Like in Practice
Here's a common scenario: A company is looking to identify federal and state oil and gas leases where there are opportunities to purchase non-operating interests and overriding royalties. They have a target area with 50 leases they want to evaluate.
If that company contacts us and says "we need abstracts on 50 leases," we don't just start producing 50 abstracts. We ask what they're trying to accomplish first. In many cases, that conversation reveals a more efficient path forward.
For example, their goal may be to identify which of those 50 leases are worth pursuing further. An ownership report on each lease gives them that information quickly and at a fraction of the cost of a full abstract. They can review the ownership, identify the leases with real opportunities, and narrow their list.
Once they've identified the leases they want to move forward on, they come back for runsheets or abstracts on only those specific leases. They get the detailed documentation they need for due diligence on the deals that matter, without paying for full workups on the 30 or 40 leases that didn't pan out.
We credit the cost of the ownership report toward the runsheet on any lease where the client upgrades, so they're not paying twice for the same underlying research.
That sequenced approach saves the client significant money and time. It also means the detailed products they do order are focused on the right leases, which makes the downstream legal and operational work more efficient too.
That sequenced approach saves the client significant money and time. It also means the detailed products they do order are focused on the right leases, which makes the downstream legal and operational work more efficient too.
The Upfront Investment That Pays for Itself
The scope conversation usually takes five to ten minutes. For new clients, it might take a little longer because we're learning how they work and what their projects typically look like. We want to understand their process well enough that, the next time they reach out, we already know how they think and what's going to be a good fit for their situation.
That small investment at the front end prevents the expensive problems that happen when scope isn't defined carefully: products that overshoot the need, deliverables that don't match the downstream use case, and budget surprises that erode trust between the client and the vendor.
When we know exactly what we're producing and why, we can tell clients what it will cost and when they'll have it.
It also gives us the information we need to provide accurate cost and timeline estimates upfront. When we know exactly what we're producing and why, we can tell clients what it will cost and when they'll have it. That predictability matters for companies managing budgets and project timelines across multiple workstreams.
What to Bring to the Conversation
If you're preparing to reach out about an abstracting project, the most helpful thing you can provide is context about what you're trying to accomplish. You don't need to specify the exact product or define the technical scope. That's our job.
What helps us get to the right answer quickly is understanding the basics of your situation: the lease numbers or legal descriptions you're working with, what you're planning to do with the information (acquisition screening, due diligence, title opinion support, operational planning), and any timeline constraints that affect the engagement.
From there, we can recommend the right product, set accurate expectations on cost and delivery, and make sure the scope of work matches what your project actually requires.
We've spent decades refining this process because we've seen what happens when it gets skipped. Abstracting is all we do, and part of that specialization means making sure every client gets the right product for their situation. When the scope is right from the beginning, everything downstream works better.
When you're ready to talk through your next project, give us a call. We cover state and federal land records across New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Texas.