April 2019 Legal Design Challenge Scenarios to improve contracting

A collaboration between DWF, LEx Open Source, Radiant Law and Wavelength Law First things first The Legal Design Challenge To kick start the challenge we gave a sample contracting lifecycle to each of the six teams. In March 2019, inspired by the idea of using collaboration and design The lifecycle aimed to cover the major activities from end to end and the teams were asked principles to improve contracting, DWF, LEx Open Source, Radiant Law to review and add their comments, thoughts and additions. and Wavelength Law hosted a Legal Design Challenge. Contracting Lifecyle Attendees from a wide range of in-house legal Anyone can take these outputs away to use in Contract strategy Contract creation and Implementation and Exit/renewal teams, law firms and legal service providers their organisation, either as they are or as a and selection execution management came together alongside procurement, contract basis that can be tailored or improved further. management, innovation and design experts to Equally anyone is free to discard the outputs Strategy/business plan Contract request/ Systemise and monitor identify problem areas and share their ideas on but use the design approach and tools to create authorising obligations and performance potential solutions. something different. Variations As part of a commitment to making this know- All that we ask in return is for people to build on Market analysis Review and approval Risk and dispute how open source, this publication is our way of the momentum that has been created, carry on management sharing the findings. the conversation about the value of design and Termination plan

The outputs are designed to be a starting point keep collaborating to improve contracting. Commercial position Negotiation of contract and Manage changes, renewals that can hopefully kick start a wider range of including redlines commercial terms and improvements activity, which utilises the value of collaboration Renewal process and design principles to improve contracting in Vendor selection Award Governance the industry.

In reality The management of documents, Pricing and risk governance data capture and monitoring decisions run It’s important to consider the different “The outputs are designed to be a runs along the are important throughout stakeholders and what they want through the lifecycle the process starting point that can hopefully kick lifecycle to achieve from the contracting process e.g. finance, business team, start a wider range of activity...” procurement, sales, legal, With multiple It’s important to data, compliance, IT, security owners and stages, consider specific external Six scenarios to corporate memory is an regulation input which can drive important element elements of the process and differ from industry re-design contracting to industry We asked six diverse teams to think about the key challenges in contracting and identify areas to re-design, here are the scenarios they came up with. The Workbook 1 3 5 With all the teams agreed on what the base contracting Making sure the right information is available to Making sure business owners find it easy to Making sure there are clearly understood rules the right people at the right time. implement the contract roadmap post signature. and more frictionless interactions. lifecycle should look like and include, the challenge moved on to applying design principles and a sequence of tools. 2 4 6 10x improvement in the time it takes to close the Educating key teams in the business to ensure Making it easier to manage the contract by The aim was to identify areas across the This section recreates the workbooks that contracting process. they have a simple and clear articulation of the tracking the data. contracting lifecycle that could be improved each of the teams used on the day for the ongoing obligations. and suggest practical ways to do it. design process. The outputs are unedited and unvarnished, with the aim of showing how the tools were used and the wide range of outputs that came up across the teams.

2 3 The Workbook Workbook 1 Use the problem statement sheet and the ‘fishbone’ Scenario diagnostic tools to identify the problem areas, desired 3 Use the Impact vs. Effort matrix to help to prioritise the ideas on the list. Ideas that fall into outcomes and underlying causes. box 1 have the best chance of success. Anything that falls into box 4 should be discounted. Problem statement: Information given to the business requires multiple Prioritisation 1 instructions from multiple stakeholders. Plot numbers left onto matrix below Desired outcome: Right information to the right people at the right time with an audit trail by clause. 1 5 4 8 2 10 7 2 Large 3 17 Problem causes 11 14 6 9 Brainstorm as many ideas from everyone in Mindset 2 1 the team and create a list. At this stage Lack of ownership Lack of prioritisation My way is the right way no idea is a bad idea so everything should Size of impact 12 15 Loss of interest Lack of collaboration No buy-in to change be captured. Must win, I know best Not seeing the big picture Understanding who Small 13 attitudes makes the decision Ideas for potential solutions 4 3 No shared No clear objectives or Reward structure 1 Standardised data - industry standards, schema, data structure, understanding of risk too many conflicting drives inconsistent taxonomy, ontology that starts to form the building blocks. Hard Ease of implementation Easy profile and alignment objectives behaviours 2.2 Industry contract standards - external knowledge that needs to be Process incorporated into considerations as an ‘agreed basic’. 4 Get the whole team to vote on the ideas in box 1 and choose a maximum of three to work Personal vs. business Need for speed vs. risk Regulatory challenges 3.3 Better knowledge management (collate know how, knowledge share, objectives profile platform). on in more detail. Use the solution grid to think about the actions that need to be taken to deliver the solution. Value of retaining Politics between Competing priorities 4.4 Leadership training to help frame how business is transacted and corporate knowledge departments risk managed within the organisation. How to drive best practice and considerations. Bringing the best ideas to life Too much top down decision making 5.5 Define a legal team’s value proposition (in house) and publicise. Tech Solution People Process System Other 6.6 Refining roles – approval, responsibility and accountability within No data strategy/ Lack of integration/ Too much communication the business as ‘go to’ include extent of remit. Standard operating Engage with people at the Define, measure, analyse, Aim to automate repeatable Decide the priority for limited data captured duplication of effort by email procedures. coal-face to understand improve, cement. Document and predictable tasks. approach. Pick the area or 7.7 Governance framework - ownership and accountability that the impact of their work, the 'as is' and the 'to be' Design system and subject matter and divert No single source of Legacy ways of working Tech confidence/need supports delivery of contracting framework. understand the blockers, the based on an understanding architecture that builds resource to support the truth dominate for training contribution that is made of the target operating towards best solution but activity. Understand that this 8. A formally articulated business strategy - golden thread that runs 8 and the connections across model that brings together ensures momentum. Don't let change is fundamental to No central record Document version and Data security concerns through the activity. against action control the business. Map customer all inputs. perfection be the enemy of business change. Understand 9.9 Playbook for job of work that draws together key measures shared journeys with pain points the good. Base line product the knowledge that is being No data strategy/limited data captured continuously throughout the contract lifecycle, that articulates overlaid. Understand the 'so should allow 'add-ons' for AI used and aim to capture as middle ground together with deal breakers/redlines, key contacts and what' of the activities and (in whatever format) as they build. People dependencies, decision makers i.e. all material info in one place. the drivers/motivations. are developing. People don’t Information provided Not enough good project 10.10 Object orientating, clause auditing and workflow platform that Project management Recognise the skill set Tool kit should be a set of System agnostic but it Value chargeable versus understand their by different people in management allows business to drive based on common ways of working that instructions different formats toolkit. and value that project basics that apply universally must be complementary to overheads may influence manage the exceptions driving value. management can bring. and then varied by business existing architecture. User how the business responds Competing Different skill Corporate knowledge 11.11 Standard operating procedures - embedding process for driving May be dedicated resource area/activity to deal with the defined and input from users to change. Key to success is requirements in terms requirements to achieve can create single points consistency and then automate in areas to then overlay technology or skill set. Building out the exceptions. System needs to along the way. Not a top adoption and integration to of time and workload outcomes not recognised of failure such as buzzword subject. multi-disciplinary teams. be integrated with finance down solution. Also identify ensure that they are aligned. Skills needs to be extended and reporting to give an the gaps ahead of time of Recognise the contract Unclear roles and Input required from a wide Unsure who is making the 12.12 Culture mapping and identifying issues/blockers across the past mandatory Prince 2 umbrella view and 'value add'. what it cannot do rather than activity is a mini project that responsibilities range of people decisions organisation to get a clear view of the organisation ‘as is’ to help training without any real life focusing on what it can do to has a start and finish and the future ‘to be’. application. the exclusion of all others. ability to learn continuous Lack of ownership Different interpretations Fear of making decisions improvement methodology. 13.13 Collaboration platform to sit on top as an enabler of ways of Not working in a repeatable and predictable manner working, as a single way of working and exchanging. Legal engagement at the Training deal makers about Kick-off and regular stand Flag for legal engagement Business has to support Process 14.14 Change management and continuous improvement methodology start of the contracting what they can do (rather ups to track progress. based on deal value or the change of stakeholders Internal process vs. Different documents in No identification of within agile environment that underpins the way that the business process. than what they must not do). Understand and address involvement of procurement and approach for this to external process different places decision making roles needs to work. Introduce a single point of the current ways of working based on business rules. be successful. Engage with ownership. At the start this and knock down blockers. Create baseline with leadership and decision 15. Rewards linked to business objectives that drive behaviour. No one process fits all No standard operating More accountability 15 may be about people but Consensus building. intention of moving on to makers and find a pathway model or process needed when the 16.16 Legal input in the room at the start of an engagement - over time that engagement self-service contract builder to cascading framework. owners process isn’t followed understanding the value from the outset. may become automated. that sees legal engagement as a value add. 17.17 Collaborative decision forums - sharing best practice and agreeing common approaches that can be scaled. 6 7 Workbook

Scenario 1 Use the problem statement sheet and the ‘fishbone’ 3 Use the Impact vs. Effort matrix to help to prioritise the ideas on the list. Ideas that fall into diagnostic tools to identify the problem areas, desired box 1 have the best chance of success. Anything that falls into box 4 should be discounted. outcomes and underlying causes. 2 Problem statement: The contracting process takes too much time. Prioritisation Desired outcome: 10x improvement in time it takes to close a contract. Plot numbers left onto matrix below

1 3

Large 5 2 Problem causes 2 2 1 4 General Brainstorm as many ideas from everyone in Size of impact Turns of documents (mismatch of expectations) the team and create a list. At this stage 6 Unreasonable and irrelevant terms of the first draft and response no idea is a bad idea so everything should be captured. Small Drafts are getting stuck in inbox 4 3 Pointless arguments caused by lack of empathy and unreasonable 1 Assisted business negotiation. positions Hard Ease of implementation Easy Tech 2 Better first drafts (short, clear, reasonable, relevant).

No tech 3 Incentives to speed up the contract (risk vs. delay). 4 Get the whole team to vote on the ideas in box 1 and choose a maximum of three to work on in more detail. Use the solution grid to think about the actions that need to be taken Gap in tech 4 Explicit cost of delay. Lack of tech integration to deliver the solution. 5 Industry standard terms. Contract terms Bringing the best ideas to life 6 Negotiation platform. Unreasonable terms of the first draft and response Chosen solution People Process Lack of market standards Assisted business negotiations (playbooks, Agreed approach across sponsor, sales, DMAIC Contract is too long with irrelevant terms templates, online instruction forms, term legal, procurement. (define, measure, analyse, improve, control). Data sheets) - i.e. get the business to close as 1. Identify and prioritise target deals much as possible. 2. Identify key issues Lack of storing knowledge 3. Map out business positions and document Document centric contracting 4. Educate business Insufficient data to progress Better first drafts (short, clear, reasonable, Agreed approach across sponsor, sales, Same as above, plus update first the standard People relevant). legal, procurement. terms using quill and glass of wine and GC and business blessing to go for it. Poor understanding of Too many egos and no implications compromise Incentives to speed up and explicit cost of Agreed approach across sponsor, sales, Price the cost of delay, build an insurance negotiations. legal, procurement. model for the risk positions taken. Collect Capacity Poor communications data and make explicit the value of respective contracts to allow triage. Agree at the senior Incentives of participants Not engaged level the risk appetite and give permission Conflicting positions Silo mentality to be reasonable. Use nudge to encourage behaviours to speed up contracting. Process

Lack of deadlines and false deadlines Too much/lack of process

8 9 Workbook

Scenario 1 Use the problem statement sheet and the ‘fishbone’ 3 Use the Impact vs. Effort matrix to help to prioritise the ideas on the list. Ideas that fall into diagnostic tools to identify the problem areas, desired box 1 have the best chance of success. Anything that falls into box 4 should be discounted. outcomes and underlying causes. Problem statement: There is an ineffective transition between contract execution Prioritisation 3 and implementation, leading to customer dissatisfaction, loss of revenue/profit and increased risk. Plot numbers left onto matrix below Desired outcome: Business owner finds it easy to implement the contract roadmap. 1 3 4

Large 6 7 Problem causes 2 5 2 2 1 People

Brainstorm as many ideas from everyone in Size of impact 6 Lack of accountability the team and create a list. At this stage Inconsistent handover of responsibilities

no idea is a bad idea so everything should Small Staff turnover = loss of key be captured. 4 3 Communication with inconsistent language Hard Ease of implementation Easy Process 1 A method to understand the delta from the norm. 2 Better tools for extracting data from contracts. How contractual change happens The ‘why’ of a negotiated positon in the real world isn’t how it often isn’t captured 3 Take the output and make the contract easier appears in the process map in the future. Important information is lost in Not enough learning from failure contractual complexity 4 Identify the key data points and capture them in a Get the whole team to vote on the ideas in box 1 and choose a maximum of three to work consistent way. 4 Contracts difficult for non-lawyers Contracts not designed for on in more detail. Use the solution grid to think about the actions that need to be taken to understand practical implementation 5 Upload the document to central and easily accessible to deliver the solution. Transition to delivery teams is too often an after thought source for ongoing management.

Technology 6 Post contract questionnaire to encourage continuous Bringing the best ideas to life improvement. Tech solutions are not often embraced (too much is still via email) Solution People Process System Other 7 Education and earlier involvement of the delivery team. Multiple systems Identify key data points External specialists to design Business process mapping. Text extraction tools to May work best in the first and capture them. and train people on the extract key terms from the instance on high volume No single repository processes. Understand the signed contract. Then 'survey agreements with some Obligations not visible users and the level of detail monkey' to understand the variances. needed. Understand and map 'essence' of the deal and why Rubbish in, rubbish out when it comes to data and information the stakeholders impacted we arrived at a positon in by the design solution. May the contract. Then have a Multiple business systems and tech need new role of super-user structured database, which Motivation who can work across the could be augmented and end different functions. into different systems. Slice and dice this information No handover of responsibility for different business users. Push some information to No consequence recognition - not part of role business users in the form of Sales team bonus structure doesn’t encourage good e.g. calendar notifications. practice contracting Benefit of ongoing contract management not understood by lawyers leading transactional elements

Contract often not aligned to bigger business drivers

10 11 Workbook

Scenario 1 Use the problem statement sheet and the ‘fishbone’ 3 Use the Impact vs. Effort matrix to help to prioritise the ideas on the list. Ideas that fall into diagnostic tools to identify the problem areas, desired box 1 have the best chance of success. Anything that falls into box 4 should be discounted. outcomes and underlying causes. 4 Problem statement: There is a disconnect between the business and Prioritisation legal teams throughout the contract process. Plot numbers left onto matrix below Desired outcome: A collaborative approach that leads to a simple and clear articulation of obligations for all involved. 8 3 5 11 13 2 14

Large 4 9 18 2 7 12 15 6 Problem causes 10 19 Brainstorm as many ideas from everyone in 2 1 People the team and create a list. At this stage

Size of impact 1 Interpretation: Contracts not easy for readers to navigate and no idea is a bad idea so everything should 16 understand what they mean for them because of complexity, be captured. 17

variables and legal language Small Lack of empathy: No shared understanding of each other’s objectives 1 Business questionnaire to produce standard commercial 4 3 Perhaps due to conflicting priorities (risk/profit) terms. Hard Ease of implementation Easy Siloed teams: Different ways of working. Not all areas of the business are involved throughout the lifecycle 2 On-boarding initiation checklist - pre-signature- who, key business success factors, project initiation document, Process key stakeholders, responsibilities, risk appetite, 4 Get the whole team to vote on the ideas in box 1 and choose a maximum of three to work contract objective. No agreement/tracking/visibility of end to end process: Not on in more detail. Use the solution grid to think about the actions that need to be taken documented, too much complexity, volume and variety of contracts, 3 Contract metrics dashboard. to deliver the solution. no process owner 4 Collaboration managers for each function with an agreed No standard terms agreed: No ability to take standard terms and ‘Contract Success Approach’. Bringing the best ideas to life special conditions and variables. Seen as anticompetitive or conflict of interest. Time consuming 5 Customisable metrics matrix. Solution People Process System Other No retrospective/live feedback: Everyone focused on the next 6 Online ‘day in the life of’ user experience game. delivery/no one updating the process Collaboration managers Cross party contract Agreeing data points Live and dynamic Data points to be 7 Visual, engaging training materials. for each function with success managers to be and team to be involved. dashboard. Pulse agreed and tracked. No visibility: no governance model/silos/no collaborative working 8 Playbook for contracts. an agreed 'Contract identified and trained. Customisable roles and questionnaires to capture Who?, 12 key business Technology Success Approach'. KPIs to be defined responsibilities matrix. temperature of both success factors, project 9 Top ten obligations in plain English. to ensure people are parties. NPS of likelihood initiation document, focused on the right of raising dispute: on a key stakeholders, Complex tools: Limited training/not enough people trained/training 10 End to end process analysis and one-page dashboard success metrics. scale of 1-10 how likely are responsibilities, risk documents are not designed for business users framework - live and continually updated throughout you to… Happy/sad icons appetite, contract Not integrated: Tools are not integrated with other systems used by process. to gauge temperature. objective. other parts of the business e.g. salesforce. System silos 11 Single source of data, agreed data points. User-centric education Enhancing knowledge of Apply legal design thinking E-learning platform with Continuous Mindset and empowerment. all stakeholders involved. and generate content to visual guides, pictures, improvement loop. 12 Measurement metrics. Gaining consumer easily communicate. voxpops etc. to easily Lack of joint ownership: Attention to contract ends after signature 13 Contract progress visual. feedback into process. consume content. and incentives and remuneration are not aligned. What is important Need legal design thinking to the business is not understood 14 Learning programme to create more ‘user-centric specialism to apply to education and empowerment’. content generation. Lack of trust: No empathy to each other’s priorities 15 Recommendation engine/clause analysis. Standardised Agree standard service Industry associations Standardised SLO Imitate telco/banking/ Data service obligations. obligations across adopting common terms. Identify common construction industries in 16 Attributing metadata to contracts that can be the industry. legal standards. data points. Create an terms of standardisation. No collaboration: No agreed data points/agreed success metrics interrogated. open source database and dashboard. No joint responsibility for defining and tracking the data points 17 Collaboration tools. because of different priorities 18 Standardised data points - defining and recording No process for tracking data overtime because SLAs and performance - key obligations/deadlines/number of stakeholders. metrics have not been agreed, no ownership of data and no visibility 19 Standardised service obligations.

12 13 Workbook

Scenario 1 Use the problem statement sheet and the ‘fishbone’ diagnostic 3 Use the Impact vs. Effort matrix to help to prioritise the ideas on the list. Ideas that fall into tools to identify the problem areas, desired outcomes and box 1 have the best chance of success. Anything that falls into box 4 should be discounted. underlying causes. 5 Problem statement: No clear roles & responsibilities focussed on ‘owning the process’. Prioritisation Desired outcome: Making it easier to manage the contract by tracking the data. Plot numbers left onto matrix below

6 9 15 1 3 Large 8 13 Problem causes 2 2 1 4 Process Brainstorm as many ideas from everyone in 10 Size of impact Lack of clarity on ownership the team and create a list. At this stage Lack of project management no idea is a bad idea so everything should be captured. Small Lack of process 4 3 Lack of understanding of need for roles 1 Top down communications re importance of roles/ Hard Ease of implementation Easy responsibilities, create a direct link to corporate strategy. Strategy 2 Find ways to encourage consensus across department Lack of articulated shared goals e.g. goal of contracting. 4 Get the whole team to vote on the ideas in box 1 and choose a maximum of three to work Short term roles 3 Appoint ‘contracting champions for change’. on in more detail. Use the solution grid to think about the actions that need to be taken System 4 Tie contracting outcomes to objectives & incentives. to deliver the solution. No corporate who’s who Introduce third party facilitation. 5 Bringing the best ideas to life Environmental 6.6 Establish high level process for contract process/map the contract process. Solution People Process System Other Unmanageable work loads 7 Develop a taxonomy of contract types. Blame culture Appoint 'contracting Identify champions 1. Define Multi-channel Achieving buy-in. 8 Document all the contract roles and include contract champions for change'. (influencers) within the 2. Communicate communication. Organisation roles don’t map to contracting roles roles in job specs. business at different levels, find out what 3. Test Lack of incentives 9.9 Create cross-functional teams - mixed teams of resonates with them. 4. Reinforce Unclear hierarchy procurement and legal. Making sure their role is defined and to 10 Introduce continuous improvement reviews. follow-up with them to keep momentum. 11 Spot check for success, ensure the process lives/breathes. Create cross-functional Importance of cross- 1. Map contract process Using a mapping tool. Process design. teams - mixed teams of functional teams and 12 Create a cadre of lawyers for development as LPMs 2. Map process roles Document the process in a procurement and legal. having a facilitator in contracting. process delivery system. to smooth exchanges 3. Assess technology tools 13 Implement formal “project” management. between different roles. 14 Develop rules of thumb for contract effort estimation. Tie contracting outcomes Make sure collaboration is Incentives and recognition Systems to implement Incentivising. Given the great amount of debate in each group, you may see to objectives & incentives. recognised. should be consistent, this should be simple that not all of the ideas have been through prioritisation. 15 Collect historic and current cost data on contract regular, earned and public. and effective. We are not discounting any of these ideas, it’s just that production. they didn’t have time to get through them all. Maybe you 16 Capture and share lessons learned on every contract. could have a look and prioritise a few for yourself? 17 Re-use cost/billing codes to conform to process map.

14 15 Workbook

Scenario 1 Use the problem statement sheet and the ‘fishbone’ 3 Use the Impact vs. Effort matrix to help to prioritise the ideas on the list. Ideas that fall into diagnostic tools to identify the problem areas, desired box 1 have the best chance of success. Anything that falls into box 4 should be discounted. outcomes and underlying causes. 6 Problem statement: Tracking the data in contracts is too difficult making Prioritisation opportunities for easier. Plot numbers left onto matrix below Desired outcome: Instant access for everyone to relevant data at any time.

4 6 3

Large 1 2 5 2 Problem causes 14 Brainstorm as many ideas from everyone in 2 1 Format the team and create a list. At this stage 7 Size of impact Lack of incentive to make contracts clear no idea is a bad idea so everything should 8 Data is generally unstructured be captured. Small Contracts often multiple documents 1 Create the capability to set business rules. 4 3 Process 2 Create a tool that removes the 80% standard/agreed Hard Ease of implementation Easy Lack of understanding clauses and focuses on the 20% contested points.

Lack of available data 3 Change the dialogue - ask the other side what is important to them at the outset or ask end users what they care Get the whole team to vote on the ideas in box 1 and choose a maximum of three to work Business rules monitoring is ad hoc 4 about most in the contract. on in more detail. Use the solution grid to think about the actions that need to be taken Change 4 Create a consistent data model for contract data. to deliver the solution. No real-time updates 5 Create industry standards. Bringing the best ideas to life Regulation is complex and can change 6 Develop an open source contracts registry and dashboard. Contracts are difficult to change 7 Company contract audits as a regulatory standard. Solution People Process System Other When contracts change it often creates a new document rather 8 Agree and implement incentivised contracting models. Cut the c%@p Trust between 1) Heads of terms Decision tree to identify Industry norms. than a new version auto tool. parties. 2) Determine contract type preferred position on closes. Code of conduct for law firms Utilise data room technology to hold all details/data on a Methods 9 3) Issue questions on both sides Gamification rating willing to collaborate. contract and make it visible to all parties. 4) Re-conciliation (Popularity of clauses)/ Risk versus commerciality skill sets 5) Agree on all points (go to 8) “Tinder“ of clauses. 10 Create a technology masterclass on technology that could 6) Don’t agree on points Existing tools tend to be ‘point solutions’ apply to contracts for lawyers. 7) Negotiate points Electronic heads of terms. 8) Auto produce contract Questionnaire sent to both Standards Pareto portal - client select relevant points in a contract 11 parties. they are interested in to automate a document. Data model not defined Structured Multidisciplinary Codification of clauses in a The database of clause types/ Trending clauses Real time collaboration to create contract party A and Exceptionalism is not a default standard 12 Contracts teams. modular way. variables/variances. (crowdsourcing standards). party B incorporating more google docs style live tracking transferable Culture change and Build a contract from Need to work in existing tools of documents. and readable. teams that have clauses library. i.e. Microsoft Word. 13 Live edit function and workflow. non-legal skills Each clause would include text represented. and or applicability and contact. 14 Cut the c%@p auto tool. Single evolving RACI - Who/ Create a family link between Doc editorial system (i.e. Imitate telco/banking/ Given the great amount of debate in each group, you may see Objective alignment (like dating matchmaker). that not all of the ideas have been through prioritisation. 15 contract. changes? documents of a similar type. Google docs). construction industries in terms of standardisation. We are not discounting any of these ideas, it’s just that 1616. Work collaboratively on negotiation. Contracts Solution to identify group - Trigger - Notification contracts using tech. they didn’t have time to get through them all. Maybe you 17 Make structured contracts transferable and readable. could have a look and prioritise a few for yourself? - Negotiation - Sign/record. Workflow and sign off system. 18 Ability to “tag” extra data points. Audit trail 19 Performance optimisation of contracts over time. - Why are we changing? (Trigger for change). 20 Have one single evolving contract.

16 17 Final thoughts Thank you! A quick summary A very big thank you to everyone and a final request that attended on the day:

The original hope for the Legal Design Mo Zain Ajaz, LEx Open Source Challenge was that it could showcase the Chris Bell, Axiom benefit of collaboration and design when Gareth Brewerton, Munnelly trying to solve business challenges, as well Hazel Butler, Vodafone UK as the value of sharing the outputs on an Craig Chaplin, DWF open source basis to encourage others. Rachel Coleman, LLP Richard Copley, Anaxas John Craske, CMS Final request Martin Davidson, ThoughtRiver The Legal Design Challenge should be seen Kristin Devey, Kyan as a starting point and not much will change “Take what you can from the work Jason Dunning, DWF Ventures if it ends up just being a one off event or a Annie Gilchrist, Lexoo theoretical exercise. The aim was to make that came out on the challenge, Adam Goodman, RBS Group it easier for people to use design principles keep the conversation going and Alex Hamilton, Radiant Law and tools and to enable them to either build Barbara Hamilton-Bruce, Wavelength Law on the outputs or tackle similar challenges. most importantly Amy Hayden, Cambridge University Press The more people that get involved, the more James Hodges, Reckitt Benckiser value can be created. With that in mind keep collaborating...” Jenny Hotchin, Pinsent Masons LLP our final request is that you take what you Manu Kanwar, LexSolutions can from the work that came out of the Peter Lee, Wavelength Law challenge, keep the conversation going and Harriet Loach, Ethien Limited most importantly, keep collaborating. Cathy Mattis, Freehills LLP Amy McConnell, Vodafone UK Limited Ravi Mohindra, Consultant James Moore, Flex Legal PS - A date for the diary Hugh Morgan, Lucozade Ribena Suntory If you found the outputs from the Legal “The aim was to make it easier Jonathan Patterson, DWF Ventures Design Challenge useful or interesting then for people to use design Michael Rabinovitz, Objective Media Group watch out for the next Legal Design Geek Santiago Rojas, Alliance Business School event on 17 October. It will be a chance to principles and tools...” Benjamin Ross, Bortstein Legal Group learn more about useful design principles Alex Smith, Reed Smith and tools and showcase new challenges Emma Sorrell, LLP and opportunities to collaborate. Derek Southall, Hyperscale Group Stephanie Stevenson, LOD Angela Tang, Pi Top Ashleigh Terry, Cambridge University Press Anya Topley, ASB Law Morgane Van Ermengem, Wavelength Law THE NEXT LEGAL DESIGN GEEK Jimmy Vestbirk, Legal Geek CONFERENCE IS Carolyn Wensley, LLP Stuart Whittle, Weightmans LLP 17TH OCTOBER Hans-Peter Wiesemann, BSH Hausgeraete GmbH Andy Wishart, Thomson Reuters IN CENTRAL Ivy Wong, Lexoo www.legalgeek.co Jack Zorab, Legal Geek

18 19 A collaboration between DWF, LEx Open Source, Radiant Law and Wavelength Law