Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) Reviews

My main use case for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is to generate contracts for customers and maintain the lifecycle of the contract. We use Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) to generate contract documents, and we also use Microsoft Word to prepare templates for the contract documents.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has several features that we can utilize. We can integrate CLM extensions in Microsoft Word and use them to create more generic templates that we use to make dynamic agreements. We can add designs to the templates, and we can integrate that with Salesforce as well.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) supports many types of extensions, including PDF and document formats. We can track the changes that are made by customers, which is also one of the highlights of the features.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has positively impacted my organization by significantly decreasing the time required for generating contracts and agreements for customers. We have different types of agreements, such as NDAs and other types, and we use these templates to simply generate the contracts.

Sometimes I feel that the generation of templates in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is slow or it breaks somewhere. This is a rare case, but it is something I have heard from my colleagues, though I have not personally experienced it.

I have been using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) for the past two years.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is stable in my experience.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has handled the growth and increased usage adequately.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has good customer support. We can raise a case and the technical support team members will reach out to us and help us. However, we have never contacted them.

We did not use any other solution before Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).

I have seen a return on investment from the money saved by reducing the time to generate contracts and the back-and-forth calls to clients by sending contracts.

Before choosing Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), the competition included only Salesforce Revenue Cloud, and we did not have any other Conga CLM product. The functionality provided by Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) does not match that of Salesforce Revenue Cloud. For that reason, we chose Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) stands out to me because I have seen different products of Salesforce as well, but nothing stands out as much as Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM). I have tried Salesforce Revenue Cloud as well, but it does not have as many features as Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has.

I have not used Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) AI capabilities regarding governance and security. I have not used Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) regarding its accuracy and reliability of output.

We use Salesforce to use Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), and for the deployments, we use Copado.

I believe that Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is designed according to industry standards. If you are working with agreements with your clients, I recommend choosing Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM). I give this product a rating of 7.5 out of 10.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is used for contracts and contract cycles, specifically with sales projects.

The main use case involves integration with Salesforce. The sales team uses Conga Salesforce, and whenever they need to generate contracts from Salesforce, they use Conga Composer. Depending on the various information captured in Salesforce, Conga Composer generates contracts, which speeds up the process of contract creation. This has been helpful, with the legal team, lawyers, and attorneys assisting in formulating the contracts, creating a strong group of users utilizing Conga Composer.

The sales and legal teams collaborate on various contracts to ensure that all activities are properly captured in the system.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) offers several best features, including the streamlined integration. The seamless integration within Salesforce makes the job much easier. In terms of layout flexibility, complex table documentations are faster to read and review in Conga Composer, and bringing different objects into the document, including related objects and fields, is also a great feature. The e-sign signing feature is very helpful, and integration with other external tools beyond Salesforce enhances Conga.

The most useful feature is Salesforce integration and bringing data seamlessly within the system, making the job for the sales and legal teams much easier. This is the most important aspect.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has impacted my organization positively, specifically in terms of the contract lifecycle. Before Conga Composer was implemented, there was a lot of manual back-and-forth discussions and email communication happening. I tried a couple of other CLM solutions, but they did not work. Conga Composer brings both the legal and sales teams together on the same platform, helping us review contracts much faster. Changes are much faster, and publishing the documents is much faster. The overall process of contract review, which used to take at least two weeks, has reduced to a couple of days now, including all the communications and internal discussions, representing a huge improvement. The gap between the legal and sales teams has been reduced drastically, leading to much more collaborative efforts and discussions within these two teams.

At times, Conga Composer gets stuck and has loading issues, being slow in loading and sometimes processing documents, and this needs to be improved. Too many API callouts happen when uploading any document into Conga, and in the legacy or previous versions, URL hacking was quite easy in Conga. Onboarding new resources on Conga is very difficult due to the documentation and knowledge articles not being that great. Additionally, a hard governance limit needs improvement, and authenticity and security are areas of concern that require attention.

I chose a rating of seven out of ten because there are many areas for improvement for Conga; it is not a complete solution yet. With the great seamless integration, it still has several open areas, and the product lacks stability in many aspects. The areas for improvement are significant and need to be addressed; once it is stable, I believe it will be one of the most competitive products.

The accuracy and reliability of output in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) are improving slowly and steadily; however, it depends on the usage of the AI. The libraries and clauses still need improvement, and I would say the document processing, especially when uploading a set of documents, presents challenges for the AI. It is still an in-progress model, and it is too early to judge; it has not been completely tested.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has been used for around three to four years.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is stable in my experience, but it still needs improvement.

Scalability is good, and I do not have a challenge when increasing the number of users.

Customer support is not good.

Earlier, OpenText was used, but there were challenges with seamless integration with Salesforce. When attempting to expand and add more features to these tools, it was very difficult to introduce those features.

The overall initial investment for Conga is high, which takes a hit. Additionally, the licensing and support level is a bit excessive. Moreover, security is one of the areas that needs to be improved.

Other options were evaluated before choosing Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).

Contract volume has increased over the period, with at least a ten to fifteen percent increase in the contract review process, and I was able to complete more contracts compared to the previous period.

The governance and security of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) are fine; it utilizes existing core models, and there has been good improvement in that area. However, regarding security, it still has the same standard vulnerabilities that any AI possesses, so I do not have a better view on this.

I would definitely advise others looking into using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) to follow the best practices. Before implementing, ensure that the team has proper knowledge of Conga applications; I recommend implementing thorough training or cross-training for the users. Start with integrating Conga Composer with the Salesforce system while ensuring that unnecessary workflow rules or automations are not introduced. Finally, I recommend performing thorough testing on your end. I provided a rating of seven out of ten for this solution.

We use Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) to automate and standardize the CLM lifecycle process, including the contract request, intake forms, contract document generation, approval workflows, negotiation, e-signature integration with DocuSign, Adobe Sign, and many other e-sign platforms, and contract repository management. We have also integrated Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) with other ERP systems.

Before implementing Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), contract requests were managed through emails and manual follow-ups for many of our customers. After we implemented it, we saw that there is a huge difference in approval tracking. It resulted in improvements in negotiation steps, approval steps, and signing steps. By implementing automated workflows and having standardized templates, whenever someone is launching a contract, the contract is generated based on templates and the fields that they have put in. That's the major difference we have seen. It has streamlined the process across sales, across legal, and our other teams.

In my opinion, the best feature of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is contract automation combined with strong Salesforce integration. It streamlines contract generation, approvals, and storage while improving compliance and reducing manual efforts.

At a high level, it has reduced manual entry. If someone is from an Opportunity or Account object, the integration is with the standard Salesforce object. In one of the cases, we did an integration with the Salesforce CPQ object as well. It has reduced the manual entry or duplicate work between when someone is initiating a contract. Salespeople can initiate the contract from Salesforce into Conga Lifecycle. It has improved the data accuracy and consistency. We have also observed that it has reduced the time for generation and approval cycles. It has given great visibility for the tracking of contract status within Salesforce or within the Salesforce dashboard. It has also enabled some of our sales teams to track their opportunities or the CPQ object quote where they have started the deal. They can track where the contract is pending for approval or negotiation.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) platform has also strengthened compliance by ensuring the approved templates and clause library can be consistently used by cross-teams across all types. This reduces the legal risk. Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has also helped improve collaboration between the CLM team itself. It has improved the collaboration between legal and other infosec or IT teams, and that has resulted in accelerated contract execution and a better turnaround time. It has improved the visibility across systems, enabling the team to see where the contract is. This is the overall high-level view.

The most challenging aspect during implementation was configuring the complex approval workflows and managing the changes across different use cases. I assume that while the platform supports these scenarios, the configuration and testing effort can be significant, specifically when integrating with other systems such as Salesforce or any other CRM system. My suggestion would be, and I think those features are coming now, that if Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) could expand the AI integration, some of those workflows can be automated.

I know that Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has been investing in AI capabilities to help improve contract reviews, analysis, and extraction. On the security side, contract data is highly sensitive, so security access control, audit trails, and governance are critical considerations for any organizations. We have started using AI in a few of the areas, but we do not have the entire exposure to Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM)'s AI and how they have been integrating with it.

After we started using AI, there is still a need for humans to verify the data for governance. It has reduced the work, but not significantly. Some areas still require human intervention to ensure accuracy and compliance, so exploring ways to enhance AI capabilities might reduce reliance on manual checks.

I have been using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) for around four years.

I do not find any issues with the user support.

They are somewhat reliable, but they are not completely reliable. The efficiency, from the manual effort perspective, has improved the efficiency and reduced the manual review. However, that is not something I would say allows us to proceed without review and start using AI-extracted data.

Earlier, we were using an in-house or manual solution. Then we migrated from there.

Generally, the deployment is something the Conga team is handling, not us.

We worked directly with the Conga team.

We did evaluate Icertis.

A key advantage is the flexibility.

A 25% to 40% reduction in standard agreements is what we have achieved. The centralized repository also improved the reporting on contract renewals, expiration, and helped the team to identify and address those bottlenecks more quickly. That has helped our team.

One of the examples that comes to mind is that by combining automated contract generation with standardized clauses, we have reduced the time it takes to prepare the contract. It has also improved compliance with legal standards and provided more visibility across business users, legal, and procurement.

Organizations should first note down their requirements and see if Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) entirely fits with their requirement. A thorough analysis should be done before choosing Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM). I would rate this solution an 8 out of 10.

In our current project, we use Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) as a pricing model, and it is quite effective. It is helpful for us, similar to CPQ, as it redirects pricing to the CPQ from CLM.

We first make an agreement, and then we link those agreements for different accounts. If this is going to affect the pricing for the CPQ to that account member, then we use those accounts as members. After that, we can consider it as a product. If we are selling that product to that account, it will apply discounts such as tier one, tier two, or tier three. We are using it as a pricing platform, not the contract we made for a customer.

The main benefits I have seen from using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) are that we use it as a discount platform in a huge project for different customers or accounts across the world. It helps us manage discounts directly set in the system, picking those prices from a contract price list and not the country price list. CPQ and CLM are interlinked. As per making contracts, we are not currently using Conga, but the Conga team proposed to use the contract, and we are planning to move fully forward with Conga.

What I appreciate about Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is that it offers multiple customization options that we can tailor to our needs. It can be integrated with various tools, such as multiple signature platforms, which is quite good. However, I have worked more often on CPQ over the past two years.

The intuitive interface of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has helped reduce our administrative overhead by providing us five days of training, around eight hours per day, and you can customize it accordingly. If you want it for four hours, they will guide you on how to use this platform, and after that, they administer an exam. Learning those functionalities is quite good, but it is also quite complicated because it has multiple customization options.

The analytics tools of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) are good, and you can see it on the home page as well.

Regarding what I would improve in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), from my technical understanding, there is improvement criteria everywhere, but currently, we can achieve whatever we want. They are implementing other things and improving as well, and I do not recall any issue we have faced right now.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) can be improved in every system or ERP. While we are not facing any issues currently, there might be some sticking points at some stages, but that is primarily due to user awareness. Waiting for the time to complete transactions helps it run fine.

In terms of specific features missing in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), the standard process is fine. However, we can enhance more customization, implement signature steps, or allow direct signing within the CLM tool. Negotiation can also be improved. However, it is working fine currently.

The complexity of customization in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) alongside the mentioned sync issues could be improved. However, the syncing issue primarily stems from different integrations such as SAP. While using SAP as an order or contract tool or integrating other tools for signing, there may be some slowness, but the templates and overall customizability are fine. Conga's customization is greater than many other CLM tools, so my assessment remains a nine.

I have been working with Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) for around three years.

Regarding stability, I might experience downtime on weekends but not often, and while there may be some glitches or issues, they do not usually arise from Conga's side. Sometimes users create issues by doing something wrong.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has too much customization, making it not that easy to scale it up and scale it out.

I connect daily with the technical support team as part of CPQ, not the CLM, since some users may increase the field size or data. We will connect with the Conga technical support team and need to purchase that support package to access their assistance.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the technical support team as a nine. While complex issues might take time, their service is good and they are easily reachable.

Prior to adopting Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), I only trained in Conga CLM and CPQ. I have not used any other ERP. There are many tools for contract management, but Conga is one of them.

When discussing the negotiation tools within Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), we make a CFD template through X-Author, which is also presented by Conga. Then we send that file, and whatever the user changes—either those fields, values, or amounts—they send it back to us. We can accept those changes or negotiate if needed.

Currently, in our project, we are integrating Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) through multiple tools such as OT OpenText and SAP, ABAP, HANA. We are using APIs, and it can be integrated anywhere as I know.

Given my experience with Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), I would advise organizations considering using it to understand that we use it mainly for pricing, which might be complicated. No other project in my company uses Conga CLM in that way, but Conga handles it nicely. I would rate this product an overall 8.5 out of 10.

My main use case for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) starts from contract creation and approval workflow. In the past, I have used Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) to generate contracts from pre-approved templates. When a sales deal is finalized, I create the contract using standardized clauses, which reduces manual drafting. Then I route through automated approval workflows, which includes legal, finance, and management, so everything moves quickly without back and forth emails. This helps us cut down contract turnaround time significantly.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has a very positive impact on our organization, especially in terms of efficiency and visibility. One of the biggest improvements is in contract turnaround time, which we are able to reduce significantly by automating approvals and using standardized templates. It also improves compliance since all contracts are created using pre-approved clauses, which reduces legal risk and inconsistency. From a visibility standpoint, having a centralized repository and dashboards allows us to track contract status in real-time and identify bottlenecks. In terms of metrics, we see roughly a 30-40% reduction in contract processing time and fewer delays due to manual follow-ups. Overall, it helps us close deals faster and operate more efficiently.

The best features of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) are the centralized repository of all contracts and legal languages that improve efficiency, consistency, and visibility. The templates and clause library are extremely valuable as they allow us to generate contracts quickly using pre-approved language, which reduces legal risk and saves time. Another feature is the automated approval workflows because they streamline the entire review process and ensure contracts reach the right stakeholders without manual follow-ups.

I find that the automated approval workflows in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) definitely make things easier for our team. They reduce manual follow-ups and email chains by automatically routing contracts to the right stakeholders such as legal and finance, which speeds up turnaround time and improves visibility. That said, there are some initial challenges. Setting up the workflows requires careful configuration, especially for complex approval hierarchies. We also have to fine-tune conditions to avoid bottlenecks, for example, making sure approvals do not get stuck if someone is unavailable. But once we optimize the process, it becomes much more efficient and reliable.

In addition to the core workflow, one thing I find valuable in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is how everything is centralized. It is not just about creating and approving contracts, it is also about having a single source of truth where all contract data, versions, and communications are tracked.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is a powerful tool, but there are a few areas where it could be improved. One challenge is the initial setup and configuration, especially for complex workflows and approval hierarchies. It can require significant time and expertise to get everything aligned with the business process. Another area is the user interface, which can feel a bit complex for new users. We also find that reporting and customization could be more flexible. While standard reports are used, creating highly tailored reports sometimes requires additional effort or technical support. The main areas for improvement would be the initial setup complexity, a steeper learning curve for new users, and more flexible reporting. But overall, it is a strong platform once configured properly.

Integration is also complex, whether we need to integrate other ERP tools or middleware tools, so integration and mobile access are two areas where there is room for improvement. Setting up and maintaining these integrations can be complex.

I have used Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) for three years during my career.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is generally stable, but with some practical nuances. In our experience, once it is properly implemented and configured, it performs reliably for day-to-day contract operations such as generation, approvals, and tracking.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is quite scalable. Being cloud-based, it can handle more users and higher contract volumes, and we just need proper configuration as complexity grows.

Customer support is exceptional. We always have the chance to connect with the customer support team, and they are able to resolve our queries in time.

We do not use any other CLM.

One challenge is the initial setup and configuration, especially for complex workflows and approval hierarchies. It can require significant time and expertise to get everything aligned with the business process.

We use Salesforce for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).

I do see a clear return on investment from using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), mainly through time savings and improved efficiency. We reduce contract turnaround time roughly by 30 to 40%, which helps accelerate deal closures. The automated workflows also reduce the need for constant follow-up, saving a significant amount for both sales and legal teams.

From my experience, the pricing and licensing for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) feel more in line with an enterprise-level investment. It is not the cheapest solution, but it aligns with the value it provides in terms of automation and efficiency. The setup cost can be relatively high, especially during the initial implementation phase, since it often involves configuration, integration, and sometimes external support or consulting. In terms of licensing, it is typically structured per user or role, which works well, but costs can add up as you scale across teams. Overall, while the upfront and licensing costs are significant, the return on investment becomes clear over time through improved efficiency, reduced manual work, and faster contract cycles.

We evaluated a few other CLM solutions before choosing Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM). Some of the options we looked at include DocuSign CLM, Icertis, and Agiloft.

The clause library and templates are extremely valuable as they allow us to generate contracts quickly using pre-approved language, which reduces legal risk and saves time. Another feature is the automated approval workflows because they streamline the entire review process and ensure contracts reach the right stakeholders without manual follow-ups. I would rate this review a 7 out of 10.

My main use case for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is that in our day-to-day work, we primarily use it for our business purposes where we need to generate contracts for different states of America, including New Hampshire, Ohio, Texas, and Delaware. For all of these contracts, we have different types of contract record types such as SOW contracts, provider contracts, and contracting cases, which are the different types of objects that we use.

For these processes, we are primarily trying to generate a contract that should be in draft version, and we upload a contract to send for negotiations. After this, the provider verifies the contract we have sent and updates anything needed from their side.

We convert the contract from Word to PDF format using Conga before sending it to the provider. Once the provider verifies everything and completes their internal signing process, we verify any required changes as per the provider's feedback and then send the contract for external signature, known as the counter signature party.

Once that is completed, we move to the next stage in the contract execution flow, and once the contract is executed, we send it to the provider for signing purposes through the mail or other means, automatically updating the contract status to executed with the execution date being not more than today's date.

In my opinion, the best features of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) are the signing approval processes and the document generation process, which I find very good, as the provider verifies the contract provided by Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) efficiently.

The signing approval process and document generation capability of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) stand out for me due to the speed and automation, making it possible to view the contract flow in the user manual itself. Since we use Salesforce, we can generate the PDF from Word to PDF format, ensuring that nobody can edit the contract after it is generated by the provider.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has positively impacted my organization because once the contracts are generated, it clearly shows the provider that the contract has been created, allowing us to move forward without confusion regarding customer requirements. We can mention everything in the contract, and the provider can clearly see all details included.

The clarity and smooth process provided by Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) have greatly impacted my team and business. We do not need to wait until the customer verifies; instead, the draft version of the contract is generated and sent to the provider, who can verify and update necessary changes automatically. Both the provider and customer can see what has been updated, thus saving time and ensuring that everyone agrees on the generated contract. This helps us progress swiftly to the signing process for product exchanges.

For improvements in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), I think that for sending contract approvals, the customer signing process needs to be implemented after verifying the necessary details, which I expect to see in the future.

I would add that for the different states where we generate different contracts, the signing process should not be the same for every contract and must be based on specific business requirements, indicating a need for improvement.

I have been using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) for around two plus years in my AmeriHealth Mercy Family of Company, and it helps us with the contract execution flow, an end-to-end process from the initial stage of the draft version of the contract to the executed stage, making it easier for signing, internal signing process, and external signing process.

In my experience, Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has excellent scalability, efficiently handling growing workloads and users as the process continues from contract generation to the contract execution state.

Customer support for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is effective. We interact with the customer through Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) to verify contracts and update needed points according to requirements. Once updates are made, the provider can verify and adjust requirements accordingly, which proves helpful for the support team.

I did not use any different solution before Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).

Regarding governance and security in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), I think it should allow access to send up to ten contracts per day for security purposes, and the signing and approval processes should not be automatically generated but verified by the provider to ensure everything aligns with business requirements.

When AI is integrated with Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), it provides a great opportunity for contract generation and verification. However, security remains critical; hence, my opinion is that while accuracy and reliability are essential, security takes precedence during contract creation and verification.

My advice for others looking into using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is that it significantly aids both the provider and customer with the product, and the signing process is very effective. However, it is essential to ensure that the signing process is verified manually and not solely automated. I would rate this product a nine out of ten.

My main use case for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) occurs when I work in a telecommunication project, where there is a requirement to generate the quote and order file along with several related documents once the opportunity is completed and the order gets generated. I was using Conga to automate document generation based on my data in the backend.

Regarding my main use case and how Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) fits into my process, it simply involves creating queries and templates based on those queries, allowing me to automatically generate documents where the data is populated into my orders seamlessly.

The best features that Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) offers include Salesforce integration, document automation, and easy template creation. All three are highly valuable, especially since I work as a Salesforce developer and find the process to create templates significantly streamlined.

Although I have not used all features extensively in my daily work, I find writing Conga queries remarkable because it allows me to combine data from two to three objects in a single query, making it a standout feature for obtaining data from multiple sources efficiently.

An unexpected advantage I discovered in using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is that previously, in Salesforce, when I used Visualforce pages for document generation, I encountered numerous errors and complications that Conga resolved by simplifying the document generation process.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has positively impacted my organization by reducing team time and enhancing the quality of documents I share with customers, allowing me to make changes in quotes and orders with just one click.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is easy to use for me, though one area for improvement could be Conga Composer, as it would be beneficial to simplify how I open it and add my queries quickly during the automated process.

I chose a nine because sometimes I feel that opening Conga Composer feels a bit heavy, and occasionally I need to refer to additional documents to complete specific tasks, which is the only reason preventing a perfect score.

I have been using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) since I joined Infosys in March 2024. From that time, I have been working in Conga contractor Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) life cycle to generate templates and various documents, utilizing Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) to accomplish this task.

My advice for others considering using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is to thoroughly review the documentation to understand the process and potential benefits, as it proves useful for business operations related to contract generation and document signing automation. I would rate this product a nine out of ten.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) was used in my previous organization for document generation in the banking domain, specifically in the home loan department. At various stages of the home loan process, we had to generate documents. Initial documents were created that provided details about the loan, which demonstrated how Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) helped with document generation. When the loan cycle was completed, the final document was also generated using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) offers the ability to generate dynamic documents in various types such as PDF and Word formats. Generating different types of documents helped my team because we did not have to manually enter customer details. We created one document with a merge field and used that template to send details to our clients.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) positively impacted my organization because we did not have to manually enter customer details such as their name, where they work, or their address. All of those things were already stored in Salesforce, so we just fetched those details as a merge field in our template, and all of these things were done dynamically without having to do it one by one for each customer.

I noticed time was saved because of this automation. I do not have an exact number, but we can estimate approximately 60 to 70 percent of the time was saved.

There were many bugs with Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) application that could be improved. Additionally, the cost could be reduced.

I have not used Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) at my current company, but I used it in my previous organization from 2019 to 2021.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) was used along with Salesforce in my organization. I do not have specific details regarding Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM)'s AI capabilities and its governance and security. I will not discuss Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM)'s AI capabilities since that was recently introduced, and since I worked five years ago, there used to be some errors and bugs as I have mentioned earlier. My overall rating for this product is 6 out of 10.

My main use case for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is for document generation. A specific example of how I use Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) for documents is creating a master service agreement, for which I automate the process using one template.

The best features that Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) offers are related to documents, and you can find contracts, which is a valuable feature.

The search functionality based on keywords helps me in my daily work. I would add that the document automation process is another helpful feature.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) has impacted my organization positively as we use this CLM tool whenever a client has a requirement, making it very helpful to build the requirements. It is helpful as it replaces manual document generation; instead of that, using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) provides an automated generation process that gives a more user-friendly environment.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) can be improved in terms of UI and functionality, as it needs to be more clean and polished.

The look and feel of the UI and the remaining features should be clearly presented in a modern way. Each page should be clear and more understandable for any user.

I have been using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) for five years.

My advice to others looking into using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is that if it really matches your requirements, then you should definitely make use of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM). I gave this product a rating of 8.

One of our main uses for Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is that we have integrated it with our Salesforce system.

One of the common use cases was managing sales contracts directly from Salesforce. When an opportunity reached a certain stage, the sales team would initiate a contract request from Salesforce. Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) automatically generated the contract using predefined templates and Salesforce data, such as customer information, pricing, and terms. The contract then went through an approval workflow, involving sales managers and legal teams. Once approved, it was sent for e-signature, and the signed document was automatically stored and linked back to the Salesforce record. This reduced manual effort, improved accuracy, and provided complete visibility into the contract status throughout the process.

In my day-to-day work, Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) helped streamline the contract process by keeping all the contract-related information in one place. My main involvement was tracking contract status, coordinating with stakeholders for approvals, ensuring required documents were attached, and following up on pending actions. Since it was integrated with Salesforce, I could easily access customer and contact information without switching between multiple systems. This improved efficiency, reduced manual working and manual tracking, and helped ensure contracts moved through the approval process on time.

The features that stand out most in Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) are contract automation, approval workflows, centralized contract repository, and Salesforce integration. Contract automation saves time by generating contracts from templates with pre-populated data. The approval workflow feature helps ensure contracts are reviewed by the right stakeholders before execution. The centralized repository makes it easy to search, track, and manage contracts throughout their lifecycle. I also find the Salesforce integration particularly valuable because it allows users to work within Salesforce and access contact information without switching systems. Together, these features improve efficiency, reduce manual errors, and provide better visibility into the contract management process.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) had a positive impact by streamlining the contract management process and reducing manual effort. It accelerated approvals and provided better visibility into contract status. It helped the organization manage contracts more accurately and complete the contract lifecycle faster.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) overall is a strong solution, but there are areas where it could be improved. The user interface can sometimes feel complex for new users and may require additional training. Some advanced configurations and workflow customizations can also be challenging and may require specialized expertise. In addition, improving system performance for large contract volumes and making reporting more intuitive would enhance the user experience. Despite these areas for improvement, the platform provides significant value through its automation and Salesforce integration.

I would appreciate seeing easier integrations with other enterprise systems, more powerful reporting and analytics, stronger AI-driven contract insights, and a simpler user interface. These enhancements would make the platform even more efficient and user-friendly.

Beyond what I have already mentioned, I would appreciate seeing easier implementation, faster onboarding, more pre-built templates, and self-service configuration options. These improvements would make the platform easier to adopt and manage.

I have been using Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) since one month ago.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is stable. In my experience, day-to-day contract creation, approval workflows, document generation, and contract tracking operated reliably. As with any enterprise application, there were occasional issues or maintenance activities, but nothing that significantly disrupted business operations. Overall, I found it dependable for managing contract lifecycle processes and supporting business users.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is highly scalable. It can support growing contract volumes, additional users, and more complex workflows. As an organization expands, since it integrates closely with Salesforce and is cloud-based, it can accommodate business growth without requiring any significant infrastructure changes. As our needs evolved, the platform was flexible enough to support additional approval processes, contract types, and reporting requirements.

The customer support was very responsive and has been positive. The team was generally knowledgeable when addressing issues or questions. For standard requests and troubleshooting, we received timely assistance and access to available documentation. Overall, the support experience was good and met our needs. I rate it ten out of ten.

Before Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), many contract-related activities were handled through emails, shared folders, and manual tracking. The move to Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) helped centralize contract management, automate approvals, improve visibility, and reduce manual effort. The Salesforce integration was also a major advantage.

I would recommend clearly defining processes, setting up proper workflows, focusing on user training, and using a phased implementation approach. Good planning and adoption are key to getting the best value from Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).

I do not have the exact metrics, but we have observed reduced contract turnaround times, fewer manual processes, and improved productivity. Since I was not involved in the financial analysis, I would not want to estimate specific cost savings or headcount impacts.

While I was not responsible for purchasing decisions, my understanding is that enterprise contract management solutions like Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) require a significant investment in licensing and implementation. However, the efficiency gains from automated contract generation, approvals, and centralized contract management can help justify the cost for organizations with high contract volumes.

I was not part of the decision-making process, but common alternatives organizations often consider in this space are DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, and Ironclad. However, I cannot confirm whether those were specifically evaluated or not, but we chose Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).

I would say the accuracy and reliability of Conga's AI capabilities are generally good, especially for tasks such as contract analysis, clause identification, data extraction, and workflow recommendations. However, as with any AI solution, the output should be reviewed by users, particularly for high-risk or legally sensitive contracts. I view the AI as a tool that helps improve efficiency and reduce manual effort, rather than a complete replacement for human review.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is very strong on security. From my experience, the capabilities place a strong emphasis on governance and security, which is important when working with sensitive contract data. Features such as role-based access controls, audit trails, approval workflows, and centralized document management help ensure that only authorized users can access the contract information. The platform also supports compliance and accountability by maintaining a record of contract activities and approvals. As AI capabilities continue to evolve, maintaining transparency, data privacy, and proper oversight will remain critical. Conga appears to be moving in that direction.

Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is a strong platform, especially with Salesforce integration. Its real value comes when it is properly implemented and adopted. It helps improve efficiency, visibility, and contract control across the organization. I would rate this review nine out of ten.