Network Leads

Group Charter: 

The purpose of the Negotiation Network is to grow the knowledge and performance of its members by providing insights to best practices, emerging practices and new trends in negotiations. Members will participate in open discussions and draw/share from knowledge and ideas that are current and relevant.

The objectives will be met by sharing ideas, discussing challenges, exploring new directions and, where appropriate, initiating research or inviting experts to present on key topics related to negotiations.

Meetings will be virtual (by phone or webinar) unless in specific cases there is an agreed wish to have physical meetings or workshops to develop specific initiatives.


Group Mission/Vision:

Provide fellow members with insights to best practices, emerging practices and new trends in negotiations in order to provide their companies with the most value possible.


Network Updates

Will Manufacturers Rule the Global Economy Once More?

We've been treated to various versions of manufacturing in the past couple of decades. There's manufacturing as an exercise in financial arbitrage - a link in a global supply chain that is reforged whenever and wherever people will do more work for less pay. There's the maker movement, populated by hordes of entrepreneurs laboring away in shared shops. There's Industry 4.0, where we inefficient humans need not apply. There's the revitalized rust belt, polished to a mirror's shine with tariffs. And now there's Tuck School of Business professor Richard D'Aveni's vision of manufacturing, detailed at length in The Pan-Industrial Revolution, a book that starts out strong but eventually bogs down in speculation.


2019 Benchmark Report: Contract & Commercial Management - Part One: Organization

Organizational design and reporting line are among the most frequent questions within any large corporation. Increasingly, there are also questions about the numbers of people - or indeed whether they are needed at all! The IACCM 2019 benchmarking survey provides invaluable insights to questions such as these for the contract and commercial management role and organization.



Bid Bond (Tender Bond) submission is one of the main requirements for most types of tenders, to assure the real interest of the bidders to participate on that bid. We seek to get the best practice and to share your experience for the below aspects related to the Bid Bond: - Amount of the Bid Bond (%)(For Turnkey projects also, for frame , unit rate scope ) - Time of verifying the Bid Bond, (With technical opening or with Commercial opening or when?) - How do you think about fixing a certain exact amount of BB for each Project; regardless of the bidders offers value. - Regarding the time of releasing the Bid Bonds for the winning bidders(After signing LOI/LOA/ Contract, after getting the Performance Bond, after expiry of the Contract, or When?) - Best practice for BB validity(6 month, 1 year, or open renewable).


Backdating a Contract

We are currently in Contract extension negotiations with our Customer. The existing IT Outsource Contract expires at the end of June 2019, but the Customer wants to extend a Contract "on new service terms and charging model". This we have just commercially agreed and are now in MSA and Schedule drafting and negotiating mode. However, as part of the deal to extend for 3 years the Customer has stipulated that the new contract and charging mechanism is to start from 1st September 2018. It will take 6 weeks to complete the drafting and negotiations to signature stage, so I would like to ask if anyone has experienced "backdating" a contract at signature stage? There are obvious considerations around liabilities and risk of accepting service terms that are better than being delivered at present. What caveats should I add into contract to protect us?


Sole Remedy for Performance & Default

Hi, If a contract has a sole remedy clause for performance (penalties applied in the event of late delivery up to a cap of 10%) are you also able have a termination right for cause which notes that if that cap is hit or delivery is not in accordance with the delivery schedule they are able to encash any performance guarantee? Also it notes that the provisions of that clause is in addition to any other rights the contractor has? I would be grateful for anyones thoughts? Many thanks


One contract, different billing entites

Hello. We have taken one order which requires billing certain services to more than one non-UK entity (due to EU VAT exemptions). Normally, our contracts only allow us to bill the entity that we are contracted with and no one else therefore an alternative is to novate selected services to the new entity where possible. This is the only fix we have without getting Sales involved post delivery of a contract. This is extremely time consuming, so I was wondering if other organisations have the same issue? I know that when on-boarding a customer the sales folk should maybe ask the question about who they want the invoice to go to, but due the nature of sales it's easier for them to put everything on one order (I totally understand that no one likes admin!). If there a more efficient way of dealing with this contract bill requirement?

Network Members