Business Case Builder for Contract Management Software | fynk

Business case builder

The case you have to make internally

A calculator tells you whether contract software pays off. It doesn't get you a yes. Answer a few questions and you'll walk in with the whole case, objections already answered. Free, no account, nothing stored.

Numbers carried over from your ROI calculation.

Your organisation

Company name

Goes in the document header. Nothing is sent anywhere.

Industry

Headcount

How contracts are handled today

What hurts most

Your numbers

€ EUR $ USD

How many contracts does your team handle per year?

How many employees are involved in contract management?

What's the average monthly gross salary of those employees?

Gross is marked up by 1.25x to full employer cost.

How does your team handle contracts today?

Contracts currently live (optional)

Used for the renewal section, which depends on the contracts you already hold rather than the ones you sign this year. Left empty, it assumes an average contract life of three years.

Average annual value of a contract

Used only to size what a missed renewal costs. Leave it at zero and that section states the mechanism without a figure.

Check these two numbers against each other

At 200 contracts and 5 people, the model implies 6% of each person's entire working year on contract administration and nothing else. That is high enough that a reader will stop believing the rest of the document. Raise the number of people involved, or lower the contract volume.

Value of recovered capacity, less licence cost: €13,885

Your result at a glance, per year

€15,625

Capacity recovered

500

Hours recovered

€1,740

Software cost

€13,885

Net benefit

And the cost of doing nothing

Your case also prices what deferring costs. Across 600 live contracts, roughly 11 a year renew without anyone deciding to renew them, and that is before the questions an auditor could ask today.

Preview of your document

1. Summary

Our organisation handles roughly 200 contracts a year. At 3 hours of administrative handling each, that is about 600 hours a year spent moving documents rather than acting on what they say.

Consolidating drafting, review, signing and renewal tracking into one system recovers an estimated 500 hours a year, equivalent to €15,625 of working time, against a licence cost of €1,740 a year for 5 users.

Value of recovered capacity, net of licence cost: €13,885 a year. After first-year rollout effort and the ramp to full run-rate, the first-year position is €9,932.

The ask: approval for €1,740 a year in licence cost, roughly 8 person-days of our own time in the first quarter, and a decision before the next renewal cycle rather than after it.

2. The problem today

Contracts sit on a shared drive. Storage is solved, retrieval is not: a folder tells you a document exists, it does not tell you what is in it, when it renews or whether the terms are ones we would still accept.

The mix is the ordinary one: customer agreements, supplier contracts, NDAs and employment paperwork, each with its own approvers and its own renewal behaviour, and none of them tracked in the same place.

The sharpest cost is that we cannot answer questions about our own agreements. Obligations we committed to, terms that vary by customer, exposure to a single clause across the portfolio: each is answerable only by opening contracts one at a time.

At 200 contracts a year across an organisation of 50 to 250 people, this is a structural problem rather than a discipline problem. No amount of care makes an unindexed pile searchable.

3. The numbers

Based on 200 contracts a year, 5 people involved in handling them, and an average monthly salary of €4,000.

Value of recovered capacity, less licence cost

€13,885

€15,625 of recovered working time, less €1,740 in licence cost. This is capacity valued at our own salary cost, not cash returned to the budget.

First-year position:

4. The cost of doing nothing

Deferring this is a decision with a price, and the price is not zero. Four things continue if nothing changes. None of them is an addition to the time saving in section 3, and none should be added to it.

Renewals that pass by default

Contracts renew whether or not anyone reviewed them. Across 600 live contracts, assuming 35% carry automatic renewal and 5% pass their notice date unnoticed, roughly 11 a year renew without a decision. What that costs is not the value of those contracts, it is whatever we would have renegotiated or cancelled had somebody looked. Add an average contract value to size the exposure.

Questions we cannot currently answer quickly

The test is not whether the documents exist. It is whether we can produce, within a working day, every contract containing a given clause, every agreement with a specific counterparty, and every obligation falling due this quarter. If the answer is no today, it is no during an audit, a due diligence process or a dispute, when the deadline is set by someone else.

Value leaving quietly

Entitlements bought and never used. Price escalators applied on schedule and never questioned. Volume discounts earned and never claimed. Two teams paying for overlapping tools because neither could see the other's contract. None of this appears as a loss in any report, which is precisely why it persists.

Capacity spent on administration

The 500 hours above are roughly 0.3 full-time equivalents of skilled time spent formatting, chasing and filing. That is not a cash saving and this case does not present it as one. It is capacity currently unavailable for work only these people can do.

5. What adoption actually looks like

Realistic sequence, with the effort this requires from us rather than from the vendor.

Weeks 1 to 2: setup and templates

Account configuration, user and permission structure, and the three to five agreement types we issue most often turned into templates. Effort on our side: roughly two to three person-days, mostly from whoever owns the current templates.

Weeks 3 to 4: bring in the existing contract base

Import existing agreements and extract key dates, parties and terms so the back catalogue becomes searchable rather than only new contracts. Effort on our side: collecting the files. This is the step that pays for the renewals argument above.

Weeks 5 to 8: first workflows live

One agreement type end to end: draft, review, approve, sign. Start with the highest-volume, lowest-risk type so the process is proven before the difficult contracts arrive. Effort on our side: one owner, part time.

Ongoing: renewals and obligations

Deadlines, notice periods and obligations tracked automatically, with owners assigned. This is the part that keeps returning value after the initial rollout attention fades.

6. Questions this will raise

We already have a shared drive. Why is that not enough?

A drive solves storage. It does not tell us what we agreed to, when it renews, or which agreements contain a term we would no longer accept. A folder confirms that a document exists; the questions we actually get asked are about what is inside it, and today those are answered by opening contracts one at a time.

Can this wait for the next budget cycle?

It can, and waiting has a price. Every contract signed before then joins the same unmanaged pile, and every renewal that falls in the meantime renews on its existing terms by default. A six-month deferral costs roughly €7,813 in handling time alone, before any missed renewal is counted.

These savings are soft. They do not show up as cash.

That is correct, and this case should not pretend otherwise. Recovered hours are capacity, not a line in the P&L. What is cash is the renewal we do not miss, the escalator we question, and the tool we do not pay for twice. The hours figure is here to size the problem, not to be banked.

7. Assumptions

Every figure above comes from these. Change any of them and the case changes with them.

Three choices here are deliberately cautious rather than flattering: a productive month is counted as 160 hours rather than every paid hour; the licence is priced at monthly list price rather than the lower annual rate; and the first year carries the whole rollout effort plus the 3-month ramp to full run-rate.