You need more than a contract
workflow to #getworkdone

It is not at all intuitive. It does not send notifications so when Legal has created or updated a document for Sales, nothing notifies Sales that it is ready.

Ironclad can be frustrating to navigate and some features aren't intuitive. For example, it's not obvious how to change a signatory and it can only be done before the contract is approved. In one situation, my manager was unexpectedly in a car accident and I needed to change the person of contact. Since it was already approved, I had to request an edit and wait for it to go all the way back through the queue. I wish there was more visibility between team members- there is no way for me to check on requests filed by others, which is very obnoxious when someone is OOO. Last thing- leaving a comment doesn't notify anyone unless you tag them. I would love for all stakeholders- or at least the legal reviewer- to up know when a change is made.

The software should be refined so that you can make edits to a document without downloading and reuploading. For something as simple as directing a typo, you have to download the template, correct in Word and reupload. It feels unnecessarily cumbersome.

Not very user-friendly, which discourages Sales from using it properly.

It's a bit cumbersome to execute everything in the parameters set. And the UI is not very intuitive. It took a lot of trainings to get reps up to speed.

It's just not great. It can be better. Non-legal background users have hard time understanding the process. These process and system is very foreign to them and it doesn't resemble any other software that they use. So it takes a long time for them to understand the importance of versions, redlining, and metadata. Not being able to upload PDF is a big issue. Building a brand new workflow or tweak a bit takes too much time to build. There's not enough self producing(despite Blueprint) and self control in admin's perspective and we have to reply on Ironclad's support team most of the times. I don't think that's efficient in either side.

It was not as user friendly or intuitive.

The aspects of Ironclad that are a bit frustrating are the repository's relatively super linear understanding of contract viewership permissions. For example, the creator of a contract that is marked confidential you'd think would still have viewership access to their record, however, this is not the case as a group needs to be created to grant them viewership if an agreement is marked confidential. The repository needs to be a bit more dynamic to address the needs of large companies who may have a variety of different confidentiality levels between contracts.

Also the Ironclad editor is not very intuitive as it's only useful for simple word changes and one would need to download the document and work on it offline, which defeats the purpose of Ironclad which is to bring all these different processes for contracting together into this platform.

Lastly, the overall presentation of the platform could use some work, there's some lacking intuitiveness with how the platform is presented.

Lots of potential as a platform but there's still more work that needs to be done to stay miles ahead of any competitors and also be revolutionary in a niched field that hasn't seen a lot of innovation up to this point.