Case study · Enterprise SaaS · Contract lifecycle management
The page where contracts are created, reviewed and sent for signature, rebuilt around status, next actions and context.
Client branding is removed from all screens. Contracts, accounts and people shown are demo data.
In CLM, the contract record is the working page for a single agreement. Users capture details, generate or upload documents, route for review and approval, send for signature and track obligations after activation.
The legacy record had grown feature by feature. I redesigned it so users can see where a contract stands and what to do next without hunting.
BeforeAfter
Drag the handle, or use the arrow keys after focusing it.
The record showed every possible status at once, hid actions behind unlabelled icons, and spread one contract's context across a long link list. Users relied on memory and on asking colleagues.
Contract owners need to know a contract's status, its key facts and their next action at a glance, but the legacy record makes them read everything to find anything.
Show where a contract is in its lifecycle, and what's already done?
Put the right next action in front of the user for the current stage?
Keep documents, activity and related contracts one click away, without leaving the record?
I audited every view of the legacy record: details, next steps, activity, obligations, documents, related contracts and the contracts list. Each problem below is pinned on the real screens.
12345
12
1
12
1
12Ten stages always visible, none marked done.
Six relevant stages with checks for completed ones
Next steps behind an unlabelled icon, all equal weight.
Labelled rail and actions grouped by phase
Value, account and owner lost among empty fields.
Key facts strip under the title
Twelve sidebar links take a full column.
Horizontal tabs with a More overflow
Red dot and small text for status.
Colour-coded status chips everywhere
Little context on who did what.
Date-grouped feed with actor, object and link
No versions, no status, truncated columns.
Version hierarchy, status chips, Compare
Single chain with a "+0" node.
Parent, children, amendments and related, grouped
Mixed date formats across views.
One date format across the record
Owners move contracts forward. Reviewers check documents and obligations. Both need status and context first, then detail.
Five principles guided every decision on the record.
Only relevant stages, with completed ones checked.
Number, account, owner and value under the title.
Group actions, and disable what doesn't apply yet.
Panels open next to details, never replacing them.
Same chips, dates and tables across every view.
Nothing was removed. Navigation moved from a sidebar column into tabs, hidden icons became labelled panels, and actions were grouped by lifecycle phase.
Terminal states such as Terminated, Canceled and Amended still exist, but they appear only when a contract reaches them, instead of crowding every draft.
The title carries a status chip, a key facts strip follows, then the lifecycle stepper. Details sit in collapsible sections, so users can fold away what they don't need.
12345
1The labelled rail opens panels beside the details: Actions grouped by phase with unavailable ones disabled, Activity as a readable feed, and Files grouped by purpose.
1234
123
12Documents now show version history as expandable rows with status chips, and fulfillments show whether each obligation was met on time, late, rejected or waived.
123
12The parent sits above the current contract, with child contracts, amendments and related agreements grouped below. Linking uses the same structure, so users always know what they're connecting.
1234
123The contracts list uses readable names and status chips. Obligation records reuse the header, stepper and collapsible sections, so users learn the pattern once.
12
12Six participants completed three tasks on both versions: find a contract's status and value, take the next action, and find the latest signed document.
| Finding | Severity | Change made |
|---|---|---|
| Participants missed the next steps icon on the legacy record | High | Labelled rail; Actions opens by default on In Review |
| Disabled actions confused some users | Medium | Tooltip explains why an action isn't available yet |
| "More" tab hid frequently used views | Medium | Tab order by usage; More shows a count |
| Older document versions were hard to find | Low | Expandable version rows |
These are targets, not measured results, and will be replaced with live data after rollout.
Lifecycle stages shown on a typical contract
Faster to find status and value
To the next action from any tab