In the recent webinar, industry experts Preston Clark, Zach Abramowitz, and Daniel Lewis discussed the contract lifecycle management pitfalls. Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) systems are often touted as the ultimate solution for streamlining contract processes, eliminating bottlenecks, and unlocking substantial value. However, despite these promises, many organizations encounter significant implementation challenges and misaligned incentives, leading to prolonged, costly cycles that frequently fall short of expectations.
Common Implementation Issues with Contract Lifecycle Management
Contract Lifecycle Management aims to offer a solution for managing contracts from initiation through renewal or termination.
Yet, the ambition to be an all-encompassing system often results in several pitfalls:
- Long and Costly Implementation Cycles
A major issue with Contract Lifecycle Management systems is the extended time and financial resources required for successful implementation. Organizations may spend months or even years attempting to integrate these systems, only to find that they are not fully operational or optimized. This not only delays the realization of benefits but also exhausts resources that could be better utilized elsewhere.
- Misaligned Incentives of Consultants
Many organizations turn to consultants for guidance in selecting and implementing Contract Lifecycle Management systems. Unfortunately, these consultants often have financial incentives that do not align with the organization’s best interests. Relationships between consultants and Contract Lifecycle Management vendors can result in recommendations that prioritize profit over performance, leading to the adoption of systems that are ill-suited to the organization’s specific needs. This conflict of interest can result in underperforming solutions at excessive costs.
- Companies Overextending
In their quest to maximize the potential of Contract Lifecycle Management systems, companies frequently make the mistake of attempting to integrate with all existing systems and cover every possible contract type. This overextension can be counterproductive, as it spreads resources too thin and complicates processes to an unmanageable degree. Instead of addressing core issues and gradually expanding capabilities, organizations can become overwhelmed by the complexity of trying to do too much at once.
The Missteps in Contract Lifecycle Management Adoption
The challenges associated with Contract Lifecycle Management implementation are not isolated incidents.
Systemic issues contribute to the high failure rate of CLM projects:
Failure to Deliver Expected Value
Despite the lofty promises, many Contract Lifecycle Management implementations do not live up to expectations. According to industry forecasts, up to 50% of Contract Lifecycle Management implementations are predicted to fail in delivering the anticipated value by 2024. This statistic highlights the need for a more strategic approach to Contract Lifecycle Management adoption.
Pressure to Be All Things to All People
Organizations often fall into the trap of adopting a Contract Lifecycle Management system that tries to be a one-size-fits-all solution. This approach frequently leads to convoluted systems that are ineffective at addressing specific pain points. As a result, companies end up with fragmented implementations that fail to meet both immediate needs and long-term objectives.
A Strategic Path Forward
The discourse around Contract Lifecycle Management is gradually shifting from broad, ambitious implementations to more focused, manageable solutions.
Industry leaders advise organizations to take a more targeted approach to contract management:
- Define Clear Goals
Before embarking on Contract Lifecycle Management implementation, it is crucial to define clear, specific goals. Understanding what the organization aims to achieve and aligning the Contract Lifecycle Management system with those objectives can prevent overextension and ensure that resources are allocated efficiently.
- Evaluate Consultant Relationships
Organizations should critically assess their relationships with consultants, ensuring that recommendations are made based on the best fit for their needs rather than financial incentives. Transparent, performance-based partnerships can help align objectives and improve the chances of successful Contract Lifecycle Management implementation.
- Focus on Core Issues
Rather than attempting to integrate Contract Lifecycle Management with every system and address every contract type from the outset, organizations should start by focusing on the core contracting issues that present the highest pain points. By resolving these issues first and gradually expanding functionality, companies can achieve more manageable and effective results.
Implementing Contract Lifecycle Management systems comes with a host of challenges, from lengthy implementation cycles to misaligned incentives and the dangers of overextension. As the field of Contract Lifecycle Management continues to evolve, adopting a strategic and measured approach to CLM can help organizations unlock the true potential of these powerful tools, ultimately achieving greater efficiency and value in their contract processes.
Missed The Webinar? You can watch it now via IHC On-Demand!
