A couple of months ago, SI ran a short series on Why You Should Not Build Your Own e-Sourcing System, which also included pieces on Why You Should Not Build Your Own Spend Analysis, Why You Should Not Build Your Own e-Negotiation Platform, and Why You Should Not Build Your Own Decision Optimization because he heard that a
few public sector organizations have this crazy idea that they can build their own and that it can, somehow, compete with best-of-breed solutions on the market today.

As per that series, this is not the case.

And even though SI has said in the past not to put too much emphasis on traditional, first generation, contract management solutions compared to analysis and optimization when the organization is seeking efficiency and cost savings, because most first generation contract management solutions looked like they were built by a high school student in Microsoft Access (and offered no more functionality than such a solution would contain), this doesn’t mean you should build your own either.

First of all, newer contract management systems go beyond simple document management functionality, and, thus, contain significant functionality that cannot be built by a high school student with Microsoft Access.

Second, most users want a Microsoft Word experience for authoring or versioning, regardless of whether or not there is a better way, so you will have to spend countless hours on a seamless Word integration, and Microsoft integration is no piece of cake.

Third, you will be wasting a lot of time and money re-inventing the wheel that has already been reinvented about a dozen time. Talk about a big waste of (public) money!

Consider the core absolutes of contract management that everyone can agree on.

1. Authoring & Versioning

As we just said, everyone, and especially everyone in Legal, wants Microsoft Word authoring & versioning, so no matter what you do, this integration will be essential. And most CM vendors have this, so why reinvent the wheel?

2. e-Signature

Most people think this is a core part of contract management, and while it is not, since not all jurisdictions recognize e-Signatures and not all companies will allow them, but if they are jurisdictionally accepted, or even mandated, this is core. However, implementing a secure e-Signature (which is not the same as a digital signature by the way, see this piece on “e-signatures and digital signatures in procurement definitions and considerations” over on Spend Matters that was co-authored by the doctor for clarification) is not easy, and will require some serious development chops on your staff. Plus, how will you get it adopted and proved when there are about 40 global providers (even though the top 4 dominate most of the market)?

3. Document Management, Search & Discovery

There might be a few dozen free open-source content management systems, but that doesn’t mean you can re-purpose them as good contract management systems. First of all, contract management requires the management of contracts, amendments, schedules, work orders and related insurance certificates, regulatory approvals, and documentary deliverables. These all have to be related, indexed, cross-correlated, and chronologically ordered when a user is looking for current prices, terms, or schedules or prices, terms, or schedules when a work order was submitted. Secondly, meta-data will never be complete so full text search on various document, and image, formats will also be required along with seamless integration with meta data search. This is a fair amount of coding, which has already been perfected in a number of contract management systems.

4. Alerts & Reporting

Contract Management requires the accomplishment of necessary tasks on a scheduled basis, which often only happens when people are reminded. That’s why alerts are necessary. And status updates across contracts often require reports, as well as updates on all active contracts against a supplier, spend against a contract, etc. Across the organization, dozens of different reports will probably be required. Do you really want to waste countless hours developing dozens of reports with dozens of variations to please everyone when a number of packages not only contain a full library to start from and a report builder to alter existing and create new reports? Hopefully not!

Plus, today’s next generation contract management solutions, which do a lot more than initial contract management solutions did last decade, often cost less than their predecessors? So why waste what could amount to millions rebuilding a shoddier version of the wheel?

For more information on what next generation contract management systems can do, please refer to the ongoing series on CLM by the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet over on Spend Matters Pro (membership required):

• Part I: An Introduction
• Part II: Understanding the Platform Model
• Part III: Mapping the Upstream and Downstream Contract Phases
• Part IV: Traditional Solutions
• Part V: The Core Platform
• Part VI: The Standard Platform
• Part VII: The Extended Platform

In Part I of this series, we argued that CLM, short for Contract Lifecycle Management, while arguably one of the most humdrum acronyms in the Supply Management space, is also one of the most important. This is because, as summarized in Part III of this series, it overlaps S2C, P2P, and, as a result, S2S/S2P as well as intersecting with risk management, performance management, change management, and supplier (relationship) management. In other words, CLM touches almost every aspect of Supply Management and is taking a central place in your Supply Management organization.

However, as noted in previous posts, up until now, CLM has not been well defined and the best definition, which could arguably be that given by Gartner (see Part I), has been, more or less useless, because you already know proper CLM is a good process supported by a great platform. What you need to know is what that platform is as vendors, analysts, peers, and even professional organizations don’t, or won’t, tell you. That’s why, in a landmark effort, Sourcing Innovation and Spend Matters, as the two leading independent authorities on Supply Management, led by the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet, have joined forces to define, publicly and openly, the core Supply Management platforms, starting with CLM.

In prior posts we elucidated the need for a core CM (Contract Management) platform because traditional Supply Management platforms aren’t enough, in Part V we outlined the must-have core capabilities of a CM platform, and in Part VI we discussed the should-have capabilities that should be mostly present in any market-leading contract management platform.

Today we are going to outline all of the nice-to-have capabilities of a contract management platform, discuss a couple of them, and then refer you to “The Extended Contract Management Platform”, part seven of the landmark ten-part series co-authored by the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required], for an in-depth discussion of each nice-to-have capability.

To make sure there is no confusion, a nice-to-have capability is a capability that, while not present in most solutions, can greatly increase the power, usefulness, and even the value of a Contract Management solution to your organization.

The following capabilities are defined as nice-to-have:

• Contract Negotiation with Complex Pricing Support
• Budget Management
• Asset & Resource Management Tracking
• License Management
• Discrepancy & Sanity Checks
• Violation Detection
• Full Analytics
• Contract-Based Project Management
• Multi-Tier Contract Management
• Process Integration with Sourcing, SRM, & GRC Platforms

As with the set of core and should-have capabilities listed in our previous posts, most of these you probably expect, and for some of these you probably have a fairly good idea why (even if you are not sure exactly what functionality is required for a proper implementation), but one or two of these are probably unexpected, including budget management and integration to 3PM/SRM (Third-Party Management / Supplier Relationship Management) & GRC (Governance, Risk, and Compliance) platforms. We’ll discuss budget management in this post, but refer you to The Extended Contract Management Platform, part seven of the landmark ten-part series over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required] for complete details on the other capabilities.

Budget Management is important because while spending should be against, and is supposed to be measured against, budgets, budgets are typically entirely disconnected from the Sourcing and Procurement process as they are created in the Finance system and typically not captured in most Sourcing and Procurement systems. However, once a contract is created, all spending on that contract needs to be tracked against the budgets that are impacted. Performance from Finance’s view is that not only is all spending covered by the contract made on contract at contracted rates, but that the impacted budget categories are also respected. If the contract is for office supplies, computing equipment, consulting services, etc., then just because all of the orders and invoices are compliant against the contract, it does not mean that the budget is being adhered to. If a department’s budget for office supplies is $10,000 and the department orders $20,000, it doesn’t matter if the savings was 20% if the department spent 100% more than they were supposed to. And since Contract Management naturally overlaps Finance, it’s a perfect place for budget management capability.

However, every other nice-to-have capability listed above could be just as valuable to an organization, and to understand why, and what the platform has to support with respect to those nice-to-have capabilities, check out The Extended Contract Management Platform over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required], part seven of the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet‘s landmark ten-part series fully defining CLM.

In Part I of this series, we argued that CLM, short for Contract Lifecycle Management, while seemingly one of the most bromidic acronyms in the Supply Management space, is also one of the most important. This is because, as summarized in Part III of this series, it overlaps S2C, P2P, and, as a result, S2S/S2P as well as intersecting with risk management, performance management, change management, and supplier (relationship) management. In other words, CLM touches almost every aspect of Supply Management and is taking a central place in your Supply Management organization.

However, as noted in previous posts, up until now, CLM has not been well defined and the best definition, which could arguably be that given by Gartner (see Part I), has been, more or less useless, because you already know it’s a good process supported by a great platform. What you need to know is what that platform is as vendors, analysts, peers, and even professional organizations don’t, or won’t tell you. That’s why, in a landmark effort, Sourcing Innovation and Spend Matters, as the two leading independent authorities on Supply Management, led by the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet, have joined forces to define, publicly and openly, the core Supply Management platforms, starting with CLM.

In our previous posts we elucidated the need for a core CM (Contract Management) platform because existing Supply Management systems weren’t enough, and then, in our last post (Part V), we outlined the must-have core capabilities of a CM platform, as discussed at great length in “Core Contract Management” over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required], Part V of the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet‘s landmark ten-part series fully defining CLM.

Today we are going to outline all of the important should-have capabilities of a contract management platform, discuss a couple of them, and then refer you to “The Standard Contract Management Platform”, part six of the landmark ten-part series co-authored by the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required], for an in-depth discussion of each should-have capability.

To make sure there is no confusion, a should-have capability is a capability that, while not absolutely required, significantly impacts usability and performance by the absence of these features and most industry leading contract management solutions will support the majority of these capabilities to some extent.

The following capabilities are should-have:

• Clause Library
• Full Text Search & (Legacy Contract) Discovery
• Collaborative Creation
• (Fine-Grained) Roles Based Security
• Contract Workflows
• Rules Management
• Contract Authoring via Rules-Based Contract Builder
• Schedule & Rate Card Support
• e-Signatures
• Task Management / Tracking
• Event Monitoring & Issue Escalation
• Corrective Action Management
• Dashboards and Contract Analytics
• Native Integration to MDM Platforms

As with the set of core capabilities, most of these you probably expect, and for some of these you probably have a fairly good idea why (even if you are not sure exactly what functionality is required for a proper implementation), but a few of these are probably unexpected, including Corrective Action Management and Native Integration to MDM Platforms. We’ll discuss these two capabilities, but refer you to our in-depth piece on “The Standard Contract Management Platform” over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required] for coverage of the rest. (But the must-have, should-have, and nice-to-have function lists will be made, and remain, public as they are the common measuring stick that both Spend Matters and Sourcing Innovation will be reviewing and measuring vendors against going forward.)

Corrective Action Management is critical because issues will always arise during contract execution and they will not always resolve themselves or be resolved by the supplier. And while the organization may have a process for dealing with issues, and even a platform for doing so, those actions have to relate to, and be mapped back, to a contract to not only insure that both parties meet their obligations and performance hits necessary levels, but that resolutions are tracked and performance, pre-and-post issue resolution, is tracked and measured appropriately. After all, not all value in a contract is in the price list — sometimes it’s in the value-add, sometimes it’s in the staff augmentation, and sometimes it’s in the innovation.

Native Integration to Master Data Management (MDM) platforms is important because contracts are with approved suppliers on approved items and services under a well-defined categorization for agreed upon prices and delivery dates. All of this data is defined in existing systems, and much of it (with the exception of agreed upon prices and delivery dates) can come from the Master Data Management [MDM] system (which is generally the ERP, but could be a Sourcing or SRM platform with MDM capabilities). If the integration is not there, then a lot of information has to be manually rekeyed, which introduces considerable opportunity for error that can result in agreements for higher-than-negotiated pricing, slack delivery arrangements, or data miscategorizations that will result in erroneous spend analysis down the road. (Approximately one in one hundred keystrokes is erroneous, and this is one of the reasons that 88% of Your Spreadsheets are Garbage.)

However, every other should-have capability listed above is just as critical to usability and performance, and to understand why, and what the platform has to support with respect to those should-have capabilities, check out “The Standard Contract Management Platform” over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required], part six of the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet‘s landmark ten-part series fully defining CLM.

In Part I of this series, we argued that CLM, short for Contract Lifecycle Management, while arguably one of the most tedious acronyms in the Supply Management space, is also one of the most important. This is because, as summarized in Part III of this series, it overlaps S2C, P2P, and, as a result, S2S/S2P as well as intersecting with risk management, performance management, change management, and supplier (relationship) management. In other words, CLM touches almost every aspect of Supply Management and is taking a central place in your Supply Management organization.

However, up until now, CLM has not been well defined and the best definition, which could arguably be that given by Gartner (see Part I), has been, more or less useless, because you already know it’s a good process supported by a great platform. What you need to know is what that platform is as vendors, analysts, peers, and even professional organizations don’t, or won’t, tell you. That’s why, in a landmark effort, Sourcing Innovation and Spend Matters, as the two leading independent authorities on Supply Management, led by the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet, have joined forces to define, publicly and openly, the core Supply Management platforms, starting with CLM.

In our last post in this series we discussed that neither sourcing nor procurement were enough because Contract Management, the core platform powering CLM, is not (traditional) Sourcing, which is the process of identifying a source of supply. Nor is it (traditional) Procurement, which is the process of acquiring products and services that have, in many cases, already been contracted for. Contract Management is the end-to-end negotiation, execution, and implementation of contracts that also supports performance, compliance, relationship management, and, when it happens, dispute management and corrective actions. And as a result, it requires a platform with the right mix of core and supporting capabilities. In today’s post we’ll list the core capabilities and discuss a couple of them, but for the full picture, you’ll need to check out our in-depth piece on Core Contract Management over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required].

The following capabilities are core:

• • Contract Library (& Document Archival)

• • Template Management

• • Key Contractual Data Element Search & Discovery

• • Tamper Protection for Signed Documents

• • Security

• • Amendment Control / Change Management

• • Audit Trails

• • (XML) Data Import & Export

• • Contract / Document Authoring / Versioning

• • Obligation Management

• • Alerts

• • Reporting

• • Expiry & Renewal Management

Most of these you probably expect, and for some of these you probably have some idea why, but a few of these are probably unexpected, including expiry management and obligation management. We’ll discuss these, but refer you to our in-depth piece on “Core Contract Management” over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required] for coverage of the rest. (However, the must-have, should-have, and nice-to-have function lists will be made, and remain, public as they are the common measuring stick that both Spend Matters and Sourcing Innovation will be reviewing and measuring vendors against going forward.)

Most people overlook the importance of contract expiry and renewal management because they figure that once a contract is over, it’s over, and no longer needs to be managed. That’s only the case if the contract is truly over, there are no future obligations, and, most importantly, the contract doesn’t automatically renew unless explicitly cancelled in writing. Without a good contract management system with auto-renew detection and expiry management, many organizations suffer evergreen contracts that lock them into above-market rates for outdated and inferior products because they don’t realize an evergreen contract exists until after the final date for termination has passed and they are locked in for another one to three years. Maybe your buyer got tired of constantly negotiating the office supplies contract and believed that getting 20% off of MSRP was a smashing success and locked in an auto-renew clause that said, if not cancelled in writing by the buying organization within 30 days of contract expiry, the contract would auto-renew for another year, under the same terms and conditions, at the same rates. But if the buyer, who didn’t do his homework very well, didn’t realize that the MSRP rates were 40% more than the vendor’s cost, then the vendor is, of course, going to let this contract coast forever (especially since the organization is providing double his typical profit margin as compared to his big GPO clients that negotiated 30% off MSRP), and the organization will likely be automatically locked into a renewal that is costing it an extra 10% on office supplies.

Similarly, most buyers or category owners often feel that obligations are the responsibility of the supplier, so obligation management isn’t that important. But even if everything is the responsibility of the supplier under the contract, it is still up to the buyer to insure that the supplier meets their obligations. Specifically, if there are insurance requirements then the buyer has to make sure the right policies are in force (or risk opening his organization up to multi-million dollar lawsuits). If there are compliance requirements, the buyer has to make sure that the right tests, reviews, or approvals are in place before the products are shipped or sold (or risks goods being delayed, seized, or even destroyed at the border). And if the organization needs to acquire, or renew, licenses to meet its end of the contract, it has to make sure it does so at the right time (or risk losing access to critical IP or software tools).

And even though we only called out renewal and obligation management, each and every other core capability listed above is just as critical and to understand why, and what the platform has to support with respect to that core capability, check out
Core Contract Management over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required], Part V of the doctor, the maverick, and the prophet‘s landmark ten-part series fully defining CLM.