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.
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.
The only drawback of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is that it does not work for small-scale business areas because I have implemented it for one customer with four or five pages of templates and three to four record types. For that small business, Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) does not work well because it is a bit complicated. Sometimes all customers need is a click of a button to go in and do things, and Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is a bit complicated for such kinds of businesses. There are definitely areas where Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) could be easier to use for smaller businesses, particularly making processes more streamlined and user-friendly.
Learn what your peers think about Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2026.
Apttus enhances sales and contract management by automating quote generation, pricing, and product configuration. Valued for its robust contract lifecycle management, it integrates seamlessly with ERP and CRM systems. Users report streamlined workflows, improved collaboration, and increased accuracy, boosting operational efficiency.
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.
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.
The only drawback of Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is that it does not work for small-scale business areas because I have implemented it for one customer with four or five pages of templates and three to four record types. For that small business, Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) does not work well because it is a bit complicated. Sometimes all customers need is a click of a button to go in and do things, and Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) is a bit complicated for such kinds of businesses. There are definitely areas where Conga Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) could be easier to use for smaller businesses, particularly making processes more streamlined and user-friendly.