my suggestion would be to have editable "visual templates" (e.g. in PowerPoint) in use already during negotiation. Depending on the topic, they could be owned by business or legal negotiators. You can use these in presentations and outside of contract documents to facilitate reaching the meeting of the minds about key topics for your relationship/transaction, and modify them collaboratively with the client. At the end, you just add the static version of the diagram (exported e.g. as jpg or png) to the contract, like a snapshop documenting what was agreed together.
In order to minimize effort, create negotiable visualizations only for topics that are crucial and would actually benefit from increased clarity and shared understanding.
If you want an example of such a use case, you may want to have a look at this article that appeared on JSCAN (it is part of your IACCM Membership): journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2055563616669739
Let me know if this helps, and feel free to reach out again!
• Passera Design
just wondering if you would be willing and able to submit your example on the IACCM Contract Design Pattern Library (even in a partial/edited/anonymized form if you so wish). We have a section on timelines, and your example would be in good company: contract-design.iaccm.com/timeline
Submissions can be made here: contract-design.iaccm.com/contribute
I am available for any question regarding the submission and publishing process. :)
• Novo Nordisk
Thanks Stefania, very practical suggestion! I found the article and look forward to reading it.
You should contact Rob Waller, he did some great work for us in this vein as well as simplifying complex contract legal language for use in Term Contracts or MSA's.
• Health Quest
Thank you, Gary, will do! I did check out the link you provided and definitely liked what I saw. It is exciting to know that there are folks out there who believe in revamping and freshening up the way we do business on paper.
Indeed. For example, there are consultants and researchers working on Contract visualizations. I happened to work on such developments for our company, and found it useful in governing the contractual activities of large and complex infrastructure proejcts.
In terms of the 8 different payment schemes I was specifically referring to what we call 'payment curves' (see attached graphic) as opposed to payment regimes such as cost+ (time and material), fixed price, cost + fixed fee, etc. In this light these are grouped into 5 main families with a couple of variations inside each. These are as follows:
- 'all or none' payment curves
- Linear payment curves
- Non-linear payment curves
- Alternative payment such as demerit point and visual payment curves
- Matrix payment curves
The intent of this discussion is to simply highlight that the choice of payment curve, similar to the choice of performance measure and level, can have a significant impact on the success (or otherwise) of the overall performance management framework. My blog (www.performancebasedcontracting.com) has 3 posts specifically on this topic including the graphics.
I hope this helps and answers your questions. However, please let me know if you have any further questions.
Whilst it's the way that a lot more suppliers seem to be going, if you think about this in with your procurement hat on - and that is what's going to happen at the end of 3-5 years - it's tough to see you doing anything but just rolling this over (and over and over again) as someone else has all of your data on their server.
At the risk of being awfully contentious, my own experience is that in a lot of circumstances, there's little consideration of whole of life costs - especially with that thinking about what's to happen in 3-5 years. Right now, many of these purchases done right now are flying under the radar of procurement teams because they're below procurement limits or just being called operational expenditure within business delegated authorities.
That said, one of the benefits that I've also seen is that upgrades happen automatically on the server of the host without the business having to create teams to do this, especially where there was a major upgrade - which were previously a big financial impact on many businesses.