Happy New year, and we are delighted to dig right in with the next installment of our 15-part blog series with partner Apttus.
We’ve shared the first part of the post below, and encourage you to click over to the Apttus blog to complete the read.
As we begin 2017, and aspirational resolutions abound, it felt appropriate to provide guidance around an aspirational process for selecting CLM software vendors.
Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) software is a relatively nascent market. There may be some that would argue this point, saying that software to automate the process of contract creation, negotiation, approval, execution and post execution obligation management has been available for over a decade. Further, companies have been combining workflow, repository and business rules engines to build CLM solutions in-house for even longer. Yes, that is all true. However, the recognition of Contract Management as an enterprise business process is a relatively new phenomenon and this drives the need for a holistic evaluation framework for CLM software that was not as relevant in the past.
Many companies today utilize tactical and traditional methods (translation: single threaded procurement led RFP’s) for CLM vendor selection. This article is meant to inspire these companies to aspire to a more relevant and holistic model for selecting a CLM software business partner.