Published: 17 October 2022
Summary
CLM vendors come from varied market segments, and their product functionality reflects their customers’ primary requirements, leading to uneven capabilities across the contract life cycle. Application leaders can use this report to compare vendors and their ability to support prioritized use cases.
Included in Full Research
Overview
Key Findings
Manual contracting processes can be inefficient and time-consuming. Often they create barriers to collaboration across departments and lack auditability.
Most organizations are early on their CLM maturity journey, and often prioritize specific parts of the CLM process when making a selection to address specific departmental pain points. For example, contract storage or repository and reporting to organize and track executed contracts.
Prolonged periods of market disruption and changing regulations increase pressure on organizations to improve efficiency and scalability in their contracting processes. More advanced CLM features, such as automated contract review, online negotiation and obligation management, help organizations increase efficiency
Clients can log in to view the entire
document.
- Agiloft
- CobbleStone Software
- Conga
- ContractPodAi
- Coupa
- DocuSign
- Evisort
- GEP
- Icertis
- Ironclad
- Ivalua
- JAGGAER
- Legal Suite
- Scanmarket
- SirionLabs
- Zycus
- Application Administration
- Contract Request
- Contract Creation
- Negotiation and Approval Workflow
- Contract Storage
- Contract Search
- Reporting
- Obligation and Compliance Tracking
- Contract Update/Renewal
- Contract Digitization
- Integration
- Scalability
- Presignature
- Presignature (Counterparty-Generated Contracts)
- Postsignature
- Postsignature (Advanced)
- Full Life Cycle
Gartner Recommended Reading
Critical Capabilities Methodology