We need your advice as we look to develop a point of view on eSign tools.
Here’s the prompt.
What’s the relationship between your eSign tool and your CLM platform— specifically across the following vectors:
Are there significant advantages to having the same vendor for eSign and CLM?
Does your sales organization interact more often with your CLM or eSign tool?
What are some of the pricing challenges when needing to broadly adopt eSign and CLM across the business?
What advice do you have for us as we develop our own eSign strategy? Should we build our own? Should we build integrations with specific eSign vendors?
1 - No. For my current and last two employers, eSign was handled through DocuSign and was not the same as the CLM platform.
2 - CLM. We have our DocuSign access very locked down and limited. For our products/services, our sell-side contracts are primarily online TOU.
3 - In my experience, DocuSign access has always been pretty limited, so licensing hasn't been a big issue.
4 - I'd prefer integrations with DocuSign (and perhaps other well-known tools). People know DocuSign -- they know how to use it, they are comfortable with it, it has a good reputation. I don't see the upside of creating your own eSign tool. If you didn't offer an integration with DocuSign, I'd see that as a negative.
1. I don't see a significant advantage to having the same vendor for eSign and CLM. Most customers up for a CLM solution already leverage some form of eSign solution (DocuSign seems to be the premier choice today) and integration with a third party CLM doesn't seem to be a massive roadblock to any implementation.
2. I'll speak from the standpoint of an organization that may have both an active CLM and eSign tool. Hands down, CLM will be the primary engagement tool from a day-to-day prospective. The sales team leverages CLM to create sales contracts as well as track key contract attributes related to customers (contract start date, termination date, sales volume, etc.)
3. One issue I've seen across several organizations is the user licensing. I believe I provided some feedback around proposed licensing models for CLM. Naturally, introduction of CLM seems to call for the increase of eSign envelopes.
4. The largest pricing challenges I've encountered when needing to broadly adopt eSign and CLM across the business are related to licensing. Different defined user groups should be offered a different pricing levels. This would give potential customers more flexibility in the exploration of how they may prefer to establish CLM within their organization.
5. I would say keep the focus on CLM as I suspect that any integration with a eSign solution would not be a substantial lift. Maybe a good opportunity would be to offer discounted "CLM" partner rates to for several popular eSign solutions which may be leveraged by your customers. I think this could help to minimize any current change management concerns and increase user adoption.
Docusign seems to be the esig platform of choice for most vendors and CLM users. For your prospects, HR will be an independent user of an esig tool for the hiring process. This means there is at least one user-base outside the CLM users who will continue to need independent access/use of an esig tool. And I think standard controls and cost management leads to limiting users/seats for esig platforms. Edge case here: vendor requires that it initiate the esig process or the CLM prospect relies on the vendor to use its esig tool.
I agree with the comment above that integrating with the CLM user’s existing tool (whatever it is) is the way to go. Edge case here for building your own: How many of your prospects won’t have an existing esig tool? Seems like a very small minority.
As to contracts for sales orgs (outbound paper), I see that as another pre-existing user of an esig tool, like HR, who will not want to start using a new tool but will want what they are using integrated into the CLM.
I see most organizations connect eSig as phase 1 of implementation. It’s usually a relatively painless point and click installation with a lot of upside to sales org.
There is some concern over licensing models when it’s outside of the sales motion. Sales lives in SFDC. Integration with CLM is a component inside of SFDC that is also connected to eSig. So, with correct controls (probably similar to what Monday mentions above) a sales person can go through the entire contract generation to esig within SFDC and never have to log into another system. Add procurement, who doesn’t live in SFDC, and it’s not as simple of a process. They have to either access SFDC or CLM. And that may not be a simple integration to their source of truth system. So it can feel extra licenses for either CLM or eSig. So, having esignature as part of CLM, in the build your own scenario, may be helpful for procurement or HR. But sales is gonna live in the CRM. So an option to integrate to CRM or be native in CLM is ideal. I don’t know how much traction you’ll get over Docusign, unless a native eSig that you build, better price. When IT is an economic buyer, they will tend toward best of breed, even if its more expensive and it’s a point solution.
Licensing in CLM generally, has been a pain as they are charged from purchase date, instead of activation date for obvious reasons in SAAS for rev rec. Delayed implementation means you are still paying for those licenses month 1.
1) Our current CLM provides an integrated eSign feature. As a result, we cancelled our subscription to DocuSign, which we only used for signing contracts. This represented a cost savings, which in turn allowed us to justify to management spending more money for the CLM we wanted versus one that did not provide eSign. So, for us it was a significant advantage to have eSign and CLM from one vendor.
2) Not really applicable since we are not a sales organization.
3) Having to separately procure CLM and eSign vendors just adds to the procurement processes that governmental entities must go through. The integration was attractive to all involved here for that reason.
4) I think that if you are hoping to market to governmental entities then you should develop your own integrated eSign unless you can offer an option that bundles a third-party solution (e.g. DocuSign) that can all come under the contract with you, rather than requiring separate vendors and contracts (and, therefore, procurement processes).
• Are there significant advantages to having the same vendor for eSign and CLM?
Yes – I believe there are significant advantages and cost savings. It also saves time not to have to download the document to the esign software. Cost savings will be great if you are on a per license model and now you have less licenses as a employee doesn’t need a separate license for the esign software. One thing to consider though is how simple the process is to interact/use with third parties that don’t have the CLM program. Is there an option to have solely the eisgn component for those employees that solely you esign but don’t need the other CLM factors or do they not need it and cannot initiate the signatory process but just be a signatory.
• Does your sales organization interact more often with your CLM or eSign tool?
The esign tool. Only lawyers, contract managers, paralegals and legal support staff use the CLM program. However, since we are on a per license model, only certain individuals have e-sign software (not every member in every department).
• What are some of the pricing challenges when needing to broadly adopt eSign and CLM across the business?
During the pandemic, the company I currently work at did an analysis of what support tools are utilized and underutilized and what percentage of the department needs those tools. Since many of our tools, particularly DocuSign is on a per license basis they make employees jump through hoops and get manager sign off to obtain access to the program. This has resulted in significant cost savings. Therefore you need to understand if the docusign can stand alone at a certain price or is limited to users with full access.
• What advice do you have for us as we develop our own eSign strategy? Should we build our own? Should we build integrations with specific eSign vendors?
I think building your own should be a cost analysis discussion. E-signatures is needed by every company particularly with the increase work from home employees. However, how widely it is used will be dependents on the percentage of the company that will have interactions or the ability to use the CLM program and how easy it works with third parties. Building an integration to work with a esign vendor would be a nice tool but not that useful or cost saving if majority of the company doesn’t have access to the CLM. You are likely only saving a few minutes of time which may not be worth the cost to build.
1 - While I know there are plenty of ways to integrate different eSign and CLM services, I think it streamlines operations to have them be the same vendor assuming both products meet your needs. Companies are trying to streamline the tools they use and the spend they commit to different parties and if you can consolidate your tools while gaining the functionality you need, I think most companies would jump at that opportunity.
2 - Our Sales org interacts with the eSign tool exclusively. I could maybe see a use case for high level directors in Sales to see some of the reporting in the CLM but it is not an urgent need at this time.
3 - I believe I made some comments on a previous post about pricing and eSign/CLM and my thoughts there are what I would offer up again. In sum, I'd like to see the pricing for those tools align better so that they are structured in a similar way.
4 - I would suggest you build your own based on my comments in 1. I think the big integration partners would be DocuSign and Conga.
1 The only advantage I can see is a more streamlined integration between the two platforms. Chances are your client already has an eSign vendor in place. The added time and money spent on transitioning from the legacy vendor to a new vendor could take the shine off your sales pitch, unless your eSign solution offers a functionality that current market vendors lack.
2 Sales relies on CLM for initiating contracting but other units tend to engage and support the need for eSign. This allows Legal and other SMEs the opportunity to review and approve a contract before signature.
3 Most of the pricing challenges tie into what we have previously discussed about licensing. For eSign, the pricing has been tied to envelopes purchased versus CLM’s seat licenses. One pain point/annoyance I have encountered with eSign is voided or cancelled eSign requests count as a used envelope. I get that a rejection should counts as a spent envelope, but I struggle to see the why a voided or cancelled request should burn one of your envelopes.
4 I would spend your time and resources building a CLM solution and then, if the passion is still there, focus on an eSign solution. You can always leverage your CLM customers in your eSign pilot.
1 - No. For my current and last two employers, eSign was handled through DocuSign and was not the same as the CLM platform.
2 - CLM. We have our DocuSign access very locked down and limited. For our products/services, our sell-side contracts are primarily online TOU.
3 - In my experience, DocuSign access has always been pretty limited, so licensing hasn't been a big issue.
4 - I'd prefer integrations with DocuSign (and perhaps other well-known tools). People know DocuSign -- they know how to use it, they are comfortable with it, it has a good reputation. I don't see the upside of creating your own eSign tool. If you didn't offer an integration with DocuSign, I'd see that as a negative.
1. I don't see a significant advantage to having the same vendor for eSign and CLM. Most customers up for a CLM solution already leverage some form of eSign solution (DocuSign seems to be the premier choice today) and integration with a third party CLM doesn't seem to be a massive roadblock to any implementation.
2. I'll speak from the standpoint of an organization that may have both an active CLM and eSign tool. Hands down, CLM will be the primary engagement tool from a day-to-day prospective. The sales team leverages CLM to create sales contracts as well as track key contract attributes related to customers (contract start date, termination date, sales volume, etc.)
3. One issue I've seen across several organizations is the user licensing. I believe I provided some feedback around proposed licensing models for CLM. Naturally, introduction of CLM seems to call for the increase of eSign envelopes.
4. The largest pricing challenges I've encountered when needing to broadly adopt eSign and CLM across the business are related to licensing. Different defined user groups should be offered a different pricing levels. This would give potential customers more flexibility in the exploration of how they may prefer to establish CLM within their organization.
5. I would say keep the focus on CLM as I suspect that any integration with a eSign solution would not be a substantial lift. Maybe a good opportunity would be to offer discounted "CLM" partner rates to for several popular eSign solutions which may be leveraged by your customers. I think this could help to minimize any current change management concerns and increase user adoption.
Docusign seems to be the esig platform of choice for most vendors and CLM users. For your prospects, HR will be an independent user of an esig tool for the hiring process. This means there is at least one user-base outside the CLM users who will continue to need independent access/use of an esig tool. And I think standard controls and cost management leads to limiting users/seats for esig platforms. Edge case here: vendor requires that it initiate the esig process or the CLM prospect relies on the vendor to use its esig tool.
I agree with the comment above that integrating with the CLM user’s existing tool (whatever it is) is the way to go. Edge case here for building your own: How many of your prospects won’t have an existing esig tool? Seems like a very small minority.
As to contracts for sales orgs (outbound paper), I see that as another pre-existing user of an esig tool, like HR, who will not want to start using a new tool but will want what they are using integrated into the CLM.
I see most organizations connect eSig as phase 1 of implementation. It’s usually a relatively painless point and click installation with a lot of upside to sales org.
There is some concern over licensing models when it’s outside of the sales motion. Sales lives in SFDC. Integration with CLM is a component inside of SFDC that is also connected to eSig. So, with correct controls (probably similar to what Monday mentions above) a sales person can go through the entire contract generation to esig within SFDC and never have to log into another system. Add procurement, who doesn’t live in SFDC, and it’s not as simple of a process. They have to either access SFDC or CLM. And that may not be a simple integration to their source of truth system. So it can feel extra licenses for either CLM or eSig. So, having esignature as part of CLM, in the build your own scenario, may be helpful for procurement or HR. But sales is gonna live in the CRM. So an option to integrate to CRM or be native in CLM is ideal. I don’t know how much traction you’ll get over Docusign, unless a native eSig that you build, better price. When IT is an economic buyer, they will tend toward best of breed, even if its more expensive and it’s a point solution.
Licensing in CLM generally, has been a pain as they are charged from purchase date, instead of activation date for obvious reasons in SAAS for rev rec. Delayed implementation means you are still paying for those licenses month 1.
1) Our current CLM provides an integrated eSign feature. As a result, we cancelled our subscription to DocuSign, which we only used for signing contracts. This represented a cost savings, which in turn allowed us to justify to management spending more money for the CLM we wanted versus one that did not provide eSign. So, for us it was a significant advantage to have eSign and CLM from one vendor.
2) Not really applicable since we are not a sales organization.
3) Having to separately procure CLM and eSign vendors just adds to the procurement processes that governmental entities must go through. The integration was attractive to all involved here for that reason.
4) I think that if you are hoping to market to governmental entities then you should develop your own integrated eSign unless you can offer an option that bundles a third-party solution (e.g. DocuSign) that can all come under the contract with you, rather than requiring separate vendors and contracts (and, therefore, procurement processes).
• Are there significant advantages to having the same vendor for eSign and CLM?
Yes – I believe there are significant advantages and cost savings. It also saves time not to have to download the document to the esign software. Cost savings will be great if you are on a per license model and now you have less licenses as a employee doesn’t need a separate license for the esign software. One thing to consider though is how simple the process is to interact/use with third parties that don’t have the CLM program. Is there an option to have solely the eisgn component for those employees that solely you esign but don’t need the other CLM factors or do they not need it and cannot initiate the signatory process but just be a signatory.
• Does your sales organization interact more often with your CLM or eSign tool?
The esign tool. Only lawyers, contract managers, paralegals and legal support staff use the CLM program. However, since we are on a per license model, only certain individuals have e-sign software (not every member in every department).
• What are some of the pricing challenges when needing to broadly adopt eSign and CLM across the business?
During the pandemic, the company I currently work at did an analysis of what support tools are utilized and underutilized and what percentage of the department needs those tools. Since many of our tools, particularly DocuSign is on a per license basis they make employees jump through hoops and get manager sign off to obtain access to the program. This has resulted in significant cost savings. Therefore you need to understand if the docusign can stand alone at a certain price or is limited to users with full access.
• What advice do you have for us as we develop our own eSign strategy? Should we build our own? Should we build integrations with specific eSign vendors?
I think building your own should be a cost analysis discussion. E-signatures is needed by every company particularly with the increase work from home employees. However, how widely it is used will be dependents on the percentage of the company that will have interactions or the ability to use the CLM program and how easy it works with third parties. Building an integration to work with a esign vendor would be a nice tool but not that useful or cost saving if majority of the company doesn’t have access to the CLM. You are likely only saving a few minutes of time which may not be worth the cost to build.
1 - While I know there are plenty of ways to integrate different eSign and CLM services, I think it streamlines operations to have them be the same vendor assuming both products meet your needs. Companies are trying to streamline the tools they use and the spend they commit to different parties and if you can consolidate your tools while gaining the functionality you need, I think most companies would jump at that opportunity.
2 - Our Sales org interacts with the eSign tool exclusively. I could maybe see a use case for high level directors in Sales to see some of the reporting in the CLM but it is not an urgent need at this time.
3 - I believe I made some comments on a previous post about pricing and eSign/CLM and my thoughts there are what I would offer up again. In sum, I'd like to see the pricing for those tools align better so that they are structured in a similar way.
4 - I would suggest you build your own based on my comments in 1. I think the big integration partners would be DocuSign and Conga.
1 The only advantage I can see is a more streamlined integration between the two platforms. Chances are your client already has an eSign vendor in place. The added time and money spent on transitioning from the legacy vendor to a new vendor could take the shine off your sales pitch, unless your eSign solution offers a functionality that current market vendors lack.
2 Sales relies on CLM for initiating contracting but other units tend to engage and support the need for eSign. This allows Legal and other SMEs the opportunity to review and approve a contract before signature.
3 Most of the pricing challenges tie into what we have previously discussed about licensing. For eSign, the pricing has been tied to envelopes purchased versus CLM’s seat licenses. One pain point/annoyance I have encountered with eSign is voided or cancelled eSign requests count as a used envelope. I get that a rejection should counts as a spent envelope, but I struggle to see the why a voided or cancelled request should burn one of your envelopes.
4 I would spend your time and resources building a CLM solution and then, if the passion is still there, focus on an eSign solution. You can always leverage your CLM customers in your eSign pilot.