Thanks, Phyllis, I am glad that you found the webinar helpful; it was certainly a great session to moderate, with some really good questions at the end. I agree - we often don't pay enough attention to the learning style and the impact that has on how information is absorbed. Paul Branch

I believe I found it. www.iaccm.com/resources/

Me too. I would be interested to hear what others have found in selection of a CLM.

Hello,

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.kaur@in.ey.com.

As for my tool the below features are available at extremely reasonable pricing and very easy to use format.

Integration with Clients' system
Standardization
Repository of Contracts
Templates uploading and downloading
Version Control
OCR File Scanning
User Levels
Renewals
Amendments
Requesting
Authoring
Negotiations
Approvals
ENoSignatures
Deviation Management
Risk Analysis
Obligation Management
Dashboards and Reports
Alert and Notifications
Multiple Filtering options
Selecting form Templates
Edit Fields
Download Reports/Export meta data to excel
Print
Legal Repository
Reset Passwords
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)
Family grouping
Compliance with other regulations

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.

I saw your post this morning and wanted to reach out about your question. I lead the consulting practice at BDO USA LLP that focuses on precisely the scenario you are asking about. We are solution/platform agnostic and seek to ensure the "right" solution - regardless of vendor - is selected so that something that is too big or too complex isn't inadvertently chosen from the many, many good solutions out there. Feel free to give me a call at 703-770-4453 or email at tfuchs@bdo.com. I'd be happy to share my thoughts with you. Thanks! Tom

Our experience is to stay away from the big overnight system implementation but to partner with a super flexible technology so that you can start small and then incrementally digitise the processes the way you want and your staff would like to work. This is a more incremental way and allow for the necessary change management to run parallel.
Flexibility is the key i.e. shape the software around your processes, framework, desired way of working and policies. Do not try to shape your work procedures to fit a certain software. A good example is getnimblex.com/case-studies/yvw-procurement-and-contract-management/

Hi Geoff,

I understand your requirement. I am a CCMAP, IACCM certified Contract Management professional and I work for the most innovative CLM tool pioneer organization.

Challenges faced by most organisation during the RFI/RFP phase can be understood as per below:
The client wanting the lowest price, the highest quality, access to innovation and new ideas and products, extensive audit rights, and the flexibility to renegotiate to get a better deal. In this kind of environment, it can be challenging to form a close, business partner relationship.

Challenges faced by most organisation during the Implementation/post deployment phase can be understood as per below:
Change of specifications, change of scope, change of marketplace dynamics, change of personnel, minimal joint planning and joint problem solving

The above problems are faced when you do not have an effective CLM management process and an alliance manager.

The major problem is that organisations tend to follow a positioned approach instead of principled approach and do not come up the relationship continuum pyramid.

You may want to contact us to provide you with a best CLM solution that will help you build good Supplier relationship management process and likewise.

Details below:
Organization - Sirion Labs - www.sirionlabs.com
Most Innovative truly digital CLM tool that provides insight driven granular Contract Authoring, Managing Commercial and legal aspects of the obligations, Provides trends powered with BI, Assists in Change variations, Helps develop a Price Book, Provides Financial Management support, Assures Efficiency and never ends

Contact Details - steeve.sebastian@sirionlabs.com

In the US, Texas or New York are largely considered "neutral territory" whereas in Europe, until very recently UK law was considered neutral. I think that may change with the recent political upheaval.

Or try international trade law?

www.jus.uio.no/lm/index.html

In the case of one party proposing Indian law and the other proposing Singapore law, the parties may well choose the law of England and Wales as both Indian law and Singapore law are based upon English and Welsh common law. (Note that there is no such concept as "UK law" as one commentator has suggested below).

However, a party should consider a wide range of factors before proposing a particular governing law and should weigh up the legal and commercial advantages and disadvantages of all the options.

One factor may be the degree of certainty that a contract will be interpreted in a particular way. English law adheres to the doctrine of binding precedence. Some legal systems do not. This could lead to significant uncertainty as to how the law will be applied.

In English law, it may be perceived that the courts allow a greater degree of freedom of contract. Subject to certain exceptions, freedom of contract in English law means that commercial parties are completely free to make disastrous bargains. This illustrates the comparative reluctance of the English courts to interfere on policy or other grounds to rewrite the parties' contracts for them.

For example, in English law it is possible, provided very clear wording is used, to include an exclusion clause that excludes any and all liability whatsoever, even for a deliberate breach of contract. And there is still no recognition of a duty of good faith being applied generally to commercial agreements (but watch this space!). This may or may not be an advantage to you but it remains the case that the courts are likely to give effect to the wording of the contract without imposing their opinions as to what does or does not amount to good faith.


And you may wish to consider the approach of a particular legal system to particular clauses.

For example, in English law, a liquidated damages clause will be subject to the clarification set out recently by the Supreme Court with a subsequent judgment, applying that test, indicating that a freely-negotiated LD clause is likely to be upheld subject to the requirements set out by the Supreme Court. Under UAE law, such a provision would be subject to Article 390(2) of the Civil Code and either party may apply to the court to adjust the agreed amount of compensation so it is equal to the loss. If Indian law were to apply, we would have to consider the effect of section 74 of the Indian Contracts Act 1872.

English law will also recognise an asymmetric jurisdiction clause.

And it may be that the choice of law clause will be reflected in the choice of jurisdiction. So, English law and the English courts. If the choice of courts is to reflect the choice of law, it may well be the consideration should be given to the efficacy of the court system and the technical expertise and other qualities of the judges.

Lots to consider.

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.

Hi - I'd suggest that you might want to have a look at this article. It gives you a good insight as to SAAS v on-premise solutions etc

www.workbenchcentral.com/blog/on-premise-cloud-hosted-saas-what-does-it-all-mean-and-what-is-right-for-me

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.

Hope that this is useful.

Recommend that you listen to DC Toedt's ATE, as if I remember correctly he touched upon this.

www.iaccm.com/resources/

If you use something like best efforts, you then need be clear about what they are, how do you measure best? It would be better to say what you intend to achieve instead.