Me too. I would be interested to hear what others have found in selection of a CLM.
I am not a buyer of CLM solution but a seller. I work for EY and have developed a easy plug-in and use SharePoint based CLM solution. Would be happy to participate in the RFP/RFI process. My email ID is: Kulbir.firstname.lastname@example.org.
As for my tool the below features are available at extremely reasonable pricing and very easy to use format.
Integration with Clients' system
Repository of Contracts
Templates uploading and downloading
OCR File Scanning
Dashboards and Reports
Alert and Notifications
Multiple Filtering options
Selecting form Templates
Download Reports/Export meta data to excel
Upload templates to a selected workspace
Create new user accounts
Reset user accounts
Edit access to users
create new workspace
upload templates to a master database
Easily Customizable App UI
Contract Clause Library
Intake form that can integrate with single sign on (SSO)
Compliance with other regulations
• Fire and Emergency NZ
Hi Geoff. We found a lot of the systems on the market, whilst all really good, focussed on workflow. Emails and notifications of moments and issues galore. I've always found that you don't need that if you have the right team, this isn't needed. They know what thy have to do, what stage in the process and when. So that for me was a major issue.
The second thing is a lot of them have lots of functionality around the back and forth and negotiation of clauses. I'd suggest again if you have really good templates and good early engagement, you reduce the back and forth required and can get the benefits of quicker turnaround and e-signatures without a bigger system.
I would flag that you should not underestimate the work required to get your current information into the new system. It's probably going to be more than the annual fees to set up. In the RFP / RFI - get them to tell you their plans and costs for getting the records in the system. It's not just the scanning of records, but also the information in the contracts (milestones, conditions) that need to come in.
Finally, I'd really recommend that you bring in as many people as possible into this process, especially in the procurement team. The users and the team are the ones that will have to use this solution going forward and keep your records in that format for all of those wonderful visuals and reports that the new system spits out. I've seen and heard of many instances where the new CLM has failed because the team and users haven't brought into the solution.
We've been lucky with our solution (it's a simple one that we developed in house) because :
(a) it wasn't an all at once deployment. People have had time to think about the system and what it could do
(b) the team have then been able to take the system to an even higher level than anything I had in mind. Templates for contracts, evaluation and issues registers - all really awesome stuff that went way beyond my initial ideas.
I hope this aids your thinking, and if you want to talk further, please message me.
Seplat Petroleum Development Company Plc
yes, we are following soft copies of contract, but we use pdf format for the transfer of documents, not any contracting software. We are using it for few years now, and it works good. We have reduced the filing storage requirements to 10%. If you have any specific question, feel free to ask.
• Mythics Inc.
Yes - we complete over 90% of our contracts with electronic signature and delivery unless mandated by our customer. It allows for a shorter turnaround times and and a significant reduction in physical storage requirements.
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.
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.
Hi Mark, Happy to discuss. Send me an email via email@example.com and I can talk about the principles I use.
In my view I don't believe, as a community, we have fully bottomed out all the risks associated with these types of engagement.
• Nokia Solutions and Networks Australia Limited
For a very good, concise review of the principles and issues of cloud agreements generally, covering most of your points above (my view anyway), you might also check out David W. Tollen's book "The Tech Contracts Handbook" online or via this website:
I like this idea. 15 years ago(!) a colleague tried to introduce 'plain English' contracts to a UK Aerospace manufacturer. It had some success, but ultimately didn't take hold. I am guilty of saying "execute" instead of "sign" and "pursuant to" instead of, er, well nothing really.
Highly appreciated initiative. Increasing the user friendliness of contracts are, in my view, not prioritized. But you are up against a tradition and practice that is hard to change, even through graphic illustrations are proven to have multiple benefits.
Camilla Andersen gave a presentation on Comic Contracts in the last local DK IACCM meeting facilitated by Ramboll. Where you place yourself in the scale of using graphics (visulisations supporting the text or a full blown comic contract) may depend on the case, audience and "environment" you are operating in..
Camilla also provided this link: www.comicbookcontracts.com/
I´d strongly encourage you to raise this question also within the IACCM technology network, which is a micro-community, where you will be able to get insights to new trends in this specific field and where I am sure you´ll have the opportunity to share ideas regarding the topic you have brought:
Also, please check our library: www.iaccm.com/resources/ where, you will find some articles about 'escrow agreements' for the software arena and other topics associated with risk management in the hardware world as well. By analogy you will explore ideas regarding hardware coming from best practices and escrow programs with the goal of risk mitigation
Hi Michelle - saw your post. For hardware: having a refresh plan with your supplier following a bit of a mutual benchmark, to see how best to provision for your upcoming capacity needs, might give some assurance. For services or subscriptions-based tech: having a documented 'cookbook' of key players and tech needed to recreate the service, including a list of any solutions 'not commercially available' or not easily re-purchased in Canada updated, might also be helpful to gage the difficulty of transitioning off your current tech,if needs be.
Those two governance-type processes, along with the typical supplier obligation to reasonably cooperate with any successor and to provide some mutually-agreed orderly termination assistance, might serve you well (outside escrow for software). Hope that offers some ideas...good luck. Cheers, Robin