Share your experience using CellarStone MaxAgreement

My main use case for Ironclad is drafting contracts, creating the first version of the contract, validating, approving the contract, and contract signature through the integration of DocuSign.

For example, I have an automatic workflow for NDAs, so internally, someone can request the NDA if they talk to a third party, and everything is automated depending on the questionnaire. An NDA is customized and sent directly for signature to the third party and then to Amadeus for counter-signature.

The best features Ironclad offers are that it is very easy to use and very easy to customize; you do not need to be a developer to customize it and to create your own workflows.

When I say it is easy to customize, I mean creating the questions and creating the conditions in the template. For example, if you have different businesses and depending on the type of business, you want to customize a document such as an NDA, it is quite easy to do it by yourself inside Ironclad.

Ironclad has impacted my organization positively because it is more efficient, allowing us to spend less time on easy tasks and therefore spend more time on more complex tasks. I would estimate 15 to 20% time saved on our side indicates the efficiency gains.

Ironclad can be improved by integrating with artificial intelligence; it does already, but it is not really useful at the moment as it has many bugs and a lot of inaccuracy.

The AI integration is weak at the moment.

I have been using Ironclad for more than five years.

Ironclad is stable.

Ironclad's scalability is very good; you can use it for different use cases, so it is very useful.

The customer support is very good, we have a very good relationship with Ironclad people, and they are very reactive.

Positive

I previously used Conga, which was really bad in terms of configuration; at that time it was called Apttus, and it is very difficult to configure in Salesforce, requiring a training of five days to know how to configure it.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was acceptable.

Before choosing Ironclad, I evaluated options such as Agiloft, Contract Express, and Exari.

My advice for others looking into using Ironclad is that they need to test it, have a specific use case, and I am sure they will adopt it very quickly. I rate this product an 8.

I used Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) to generate contracts within the legal department of a pharmaceutical company.

We maintained a library of contract templates and terms, and based on our configuration, we selected the proper template, added the details in the relevant fields, and the contract with all details was automatically generated by the system.

As part of the contract management process, we also sent the contract for review and for e-signatures through a DocuSign integration. Once the review was completed and the contracts are signed through DocuSign, the contract was automatically set as active inside our Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) database.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is a system that is easily configurable on the Salesforce platform, which is a very flexible platform. It is very easy to use from a user perspective, and it is a very stable system that rarely has any bugs or downtime.

Based on the Salesforce interface, it is very easy to use, navigate and find the contracts that I want. It is also very easy to fill in the missing information on a contract by completing simple fields, and it is also very easy to send for online review or for e-signatures through buttons that appear on the page.

The time it takes to generate a contract and have it signed through an integration is considerably lower compared to having done it outside of the system. We have cases where we needed wet signatures on a contract, which means that the contract had to be sent for signature outside of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), and this typically needed five or six times additional time to have it ready and activated. 

By using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), the time it takes to manage a contract, from contract creation to signature, is significantly reduced.

At the time I used the system, it appeared that it was lacking AI features that are very recently developed. I believe that Conga should invest more in developing robust AI features that can be used for redlining a contract and also identifying terms that need to be revised within a contract.

Sometimes their support is not very efficient. That is something that they may need to consider as an improvement.

Their pricing models were not very straightforward, especially in the case where we needed to renew an annual contract. Based on the number of users, the Conga team would provide us every year with a new quotation. On the pricing side, I believe that it is a bit pricey, and the cost structure related to the licenses is not very transparent.

I have been using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) for three and a half years as a power user and a system administrator.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is one of the most stable systems I have seen. We are talking about almost zero downtime.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is very scalable, especially the version that is available on the Salesforce platform that we used, which is, of course, a highly customizable and scalable platform. We are overall very pleased with the scalability and we are able to onboard a number of countries from different continents with different contract management processes in the same organizations very easily.

About customer support, I would say that in the beginning at about 4 years ago, they were not very efficient and we were not very satisfied with their support. But in the last year, we saw improvement there as well in terms of efficiency and quality of the fixes.

Positive

The previous solution was a custom-made on prem solution for the customer use case. It was switched because this solution was hardcoded, it was not flexible, and it did not have all the features that we needed to efficiently do the contract management together with redlining and e-signature integrations.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is a solution built on the Salesforce platform, so it is a managed package installed in a Salesforce organization. The installation is straightforward, but the configuration can be complex so an implementation partner is necessary.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) was purchased through the Salesforce AppExchange. We used Conga managed services and a Salesforce implementation partner to set it up. Overall we were satisfied with the quality of the implemented solution.

There are definitely improvements as far as ROI is concerned, both money-wise and in terms of employees that are needed. Regarding the employees, I would say that it was manageable, with the introduction of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), to reduce the administrative team that handled the contracts to about half. From a team of six people, it was reduced down to three people by fully utilizing the system.

Licenses pricing was not very transparent at some times and we needed to negotiate it with the Conga Account Executives. The set up cost on the Salesforce platform was more transparent and done together with an implementation partner. 

Unfortunately, I do not have access to that information because it was already introduced in the company when I joined. I know that on the evaluation, ContractPodAI, Ronclad & Icertis were also potential vendors for contract management.

I would advise companies to focus on Conga's roadmap to develop solid AI features moving forward. I would also advise them to consider the scalability together with the stability of this platform and all the features that it has. Additionally, I would advise them to look into the different pricing options for licensing and demand transparency in terms of the contract they sign, especially if it is a multi-year contract with different license types. I rate this solution a 9 overall.