In today`s complex and competitive global economy, it is not easy to maintain alignment between the company`s rapidly changing goals and priorities and its business and contractual policies and processes. Contract lifecycle management is discussed at length and the need to use this technology has been repeatedly emphasized. The maximum benefit that contract lifecycle management technology can achieve depends on how it is used. To measure each company`s progress in this technology, we have a model called the Contract Lifecycle Management Maturity Model. Rod is an experienced contract management and procurement expert with IT leadership training specializing in ICT Level 2 contracts – Locally Managed Core processes are located in a location where contracts are designed, reviewed, managed and stored locally. Individual contract holders manage critical contracts, but this is not always the case. Once contracts expire, they are archived locally to be accessible only to key local employees. Contract lifecycle management is designed to mitigate some, if not all, of these challenges. By providing a central repository, you can manage your contracts in a single location, regardless of their type, and leverage the data they contain to minimize business risk, detect revenue losses, and organize and control your engagements. Figure 1 contains some interesting observations. First, we find that the majority of clients are assessed at the basic or structured level for all process areas of contract management.

Only the JM&L Contracting Center has reached the integrated level for tender planning and source selection processes. Second, we also find that the areas of contract management and conclusion after the award process have reached lower levels of maturity than other areas of contract management. All contracting agencies, with the exception of the JM&L Contracting Center, have reached basic maturity levels for contract management. All customers have reached the basic deadline for the conclusion of the contract. Similarly, maturity models have been used in the comparative analysis of project management processes and practices (Crawford, 2001; Hillson, 2003; Ibbs and Kwak, 2000; Levene, Bentley and Jarvis, 1995; Pennypacker and Grant, 2003), maturity models have also been developed to assess the capacity and maturity of the organizational procurement and contracting process. The capacity of a process is defined as “the inherent ability of a process to achieve the intended outcomes” (Ahern, Clouse and Turner, 2001, p. 4). As the performance of a process increases, it becomes predictable and measurable. As the organization constantly improves its process capacity, organizational competencies increase and organizational processes become more mature (Ahern et al., 2001).

The JM&L Contracting Center has achieved an integrated level of advertising planning and source selection. To achieve the optimized level of maturity, the JM&L Contract Center must ensure that customer planning and source selection activities are regularly evaluated against measures of effectiveness and efficiency, and ensure that continuous process improvements, such as process optimization initiatives. B, are implemented to further develop these processes. The JM&L Contract Center should also ensure that databases of acquired knowledge and best practices are established and used to improve processes, standards and documentation for order planning and source selection (Garrett and Rendon, 2005). Activities to plan the call and select sources that should be regularly assessed against the parameters include determining the procurement methodology, determining the evaluation strategy, developing tender documents, evaluating proposals, applying evaluation criteria, negotiating contract terms and selecting contractors. Curtis, B., Hefley, W. E. & Miller, S. A.

(2001). The Employee Capacity Maturity Model: Guidelines for Workforce Improvement. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley. Integrated Level 4: Organizations at this maturity level have contract management processes that are fully integrated with other core organizational processes such as financial management, schedule management, performance management, and systems engineering. In addition to representatives from other organizational functional offices, the end customer of the contract is also a full member of the purchase or sale contract team. Finally, the organization`s management regularly uses metrics to measure various aspects of the contract management process and make contract-related decisions. This leads to the question – where are you in the CMMM model? Most companies are still in the early stages of the CMMM. Paper is still standard and for those who have a CLM strategy and the technology that comes with it, it is still only the basic features of the repository and bond management that are fully utilized.

This document is divided into four sections. First, a brief review of the literature on contract management is presented, with a particular focus on the use of maturity models to assess the maturity of the contract management process. The literature review also includes previous research on the comparative analysis of contracting and procurement processes. The second section discusses the research methodology in this case study and also includes a discussion of the maturity model and a profile of the Army`s contract centres evaluated. Subsequently, an analysis of the results of the evaluation and the implications for process improvement opportunities is discussed. Finally, the article presents a conclusion and implications for further research. A recent ACC report titled “2020 Legal Operations Maturity Benchmarking” found that most companies in traditional areas of law, such as compliance, are reaching an intermediate stage of maturity. It was mentioned that innovation and eDiscovery companies are still at a very early stage. This reinforces the fact that most companies do not fully recognize the value of their contract management processes and the business benefits that CLM has to offer. Frame, J. D.

(1999). Project Management Competence: Develop key skills for individuals, teams and organizations. ==External links==* Jugdev, K. & Thomas, J. (2002). Project Management Maturity Models: The Miracle Solution to Competitive Advantage. Project Management Journal, 33(4), 4–14. Lee, L., & Dobler, D. W. (1971).

Purchasing and materials management: text and cases. ==References=====External links===The CLM maturity model is a way to understand where a company`s contract management strategy is in order to understand the requirements required to create additional value: Structured Level 3: Organizations at this maturity level have contract management processes and standards that are fully established, institutionalized and prescribed throughout the organization. Formal documentation has been developed for these contract management processes and standards, and some processes can even be automated. In addition, as these contract management processes are mandatory, the organization allows the customization of processes and documents, taking into account the unique aspects of each contract, such as.B. contractual strategy, type of contract, terms and conditions, monetary value and type of requirement (product or service). Finally, the organization`s senior management is involved in providing advice, guidance and even approval of the key contractual strategy, decisions, related contractual conditions and contract management documents. Office of Government Accountability (OAG). (2007a, May).

Defense Procurement: Better management and oversight are needed to better control DoD adoption of services (GAO-07-832T). Washington, DC: Author. Today, however, CLM is a sufficiently important practice in itself that the clearer procurement aspects for assessing the maturity of CLM can be ignored. Bemelmans, J., Voordijk, H., & Vos, B. (2013). Design of a tool for an effective assessment of purchasing maturity in the construction industry. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 20(3), 342-361. Although TACOM, RDECOM, AMCOM, JM&L Contract Center, and NCR Contract Center acquire and purchase various types of systems, supplies, and services, the contract management processes used are common to all organizations (Rendon and Snider, 2008). In addition, the contract management processes used in these contract centers are also common for other agencies in the military, the Department of Defense, and the federal government for the purchase of systems, supplies, and services. Therefore, conclusions based on the analysis of these evaluations of the contract management process may apply to other U.S.

federal agencies. The results of the CMMM evaluation are explained in the next section. To learn more about contract management and how you can reap the benefits by putting your business on the path to the contract management maturity model, contact us to learn more. Level 2 Basis: Organizations at this maturity level have established some basic processes and standards for contract management within the organization, but these processes are only required for certain complex, critical, or highly visible contracts, e-contracts .B that meet certain dollar thresholds, or contracts with specific customers. Formal documentation has been developed for these established contract management processes and standards. In addition, the organization does not consider that these contract management processes or standards are established or institutionalized throughout the organization. Finally, at this level of maturity, there is no organizational guideline that requires the consistent use of these contract management processes and standards for contracts other than required contracts. .