Ironclad, from the company of the same name in San Francisco, is designed to streamline every part of the contract process—so users can focus on legal work, not paperwork.
N/A
Kira
Score 7.6 out of 10
Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
Kira, now from Litera (acquired August, 2021) is software that searches and analyzes contract text. Kira offers pre-built, machine learning models covering due diligence, general commercial, corporate organization, real estate and compliance. Using Kira Quick Study, anyone can train additional models that can identify any desired clause. Kira can be deployed on virtual data rooms and other large repositories of contracts, creating summary analyses.
IronClad is a comprehensive platform that allows legal teams, cross functional teams and approvers to keep track of the suggestions and changes made to legal agreements. It keeps everything in a single place, however it lacks the simplicity and practicality of DocuSign …
Ironclad is a well-designed product, especially for a very configurable workflow designer and team collaboration feature. In addition, DocuSign has a critical issue, which is a multi-instance account issue. If you have multiple contracts with Docusign including design and CLM …
We initially chose Kira because of the Quick Study feature and because we trust Noah. We've since evaluated Diligen--its features have grown substantially over the past year. We've also tried ContraxSuite, LawGeex, Evisort, Luminance, eBrevia, Heretik, Blackboiler, and many …
We evaluated a number of other products such as Luminance, Leverton, etc. Kira covered off more of the whole requirement set across our international business than other products, although each has their strengths and weaknesses.
The most important reason for selecting Kira was its commercial range. We observed that Kira was used worldwide and by the largest law firms in the US, so we presumed it had better features than Luminance. Other than that, Kira seemed to have more tools for training clauses in …
Kira offers a lot more out of the box than other providers and is also more flexible around integrations. This, plus the clear pricing structure, is why we went for it instead of (or as well as) others.
I believe the version of RAVN is Extract rather than Insight. In this regard, Kira stacked up well. UI is much better, and the support and expertise seem to be of a much higher level. Kira seems to be more mature as a product and company in this area. Luminance seems to provide …
I think it worked realllly well at my previous company where we used it for a very simple form that just required one simple signature from both sides- this was a form used to record custom pricing/discounts for a product that typically was not discounted. In my current role, there are many more required fields on the form/contract, and can be multiple levels of approvals on one side, and then possibly multiple levels of approvals/signatures on the other side. I've never used another solution in the exact same way (like DocuSign) to be able to compare experiences, but on Ironclad, understanding where I am in the completion process can be confusing. Within the app, I wish it was more of just a checklist or schedule of what needs to happen, but it's not written out that clearly. Lastly, there is something wrong with our notifications (I'm not sure if this is specific to my company's settings)- I frequently get 'contract completed' or 'contract signed' email notifications even if that hasn't occurred. They seem to correlate with updating the form or refreshing the sync from SFDC.
Kira is a great due diligence tool and can be well utilised on both large and small transactions. It also has good application if you are looking to compare multiple documents against a model form document or market standard templates. Kira is less useful if you are looking to review emails (e.g. as part of a disclosure exercise); or if your review involves non-Latin based script languages.
I think it does all the things I need, and it can be simple to use, but it can also be confusing and not intuitive the more functionality you take advantage of. I am especially frustrated by false "form completed" notifications that I receive not only when forms have actually been completed, but also when they've been refreshed from SFDC or otherwise updated.
If our firm had more contracts in English, the usability of Kira would be rated higher. However, since we have to train clauses in Portuguese in order to use Kira, it makes its usability lower. We still are not able to fully use Kira for reading contracts in Portuguese. It takes a long time and many associate hours to make Kira usable in other languages.
I haven't used the support services for IronClad, but I understand from our legal team, the support is very good, they have replied and provide solutions quickly and effectively. I have used the documentation and support pages which are very complete and which have been updated given the user interface updates.
There was an email sent out with technical questions that was not attended to. However, Kira support has been good in general in that emails are well attended to overall, the Kira support portal is great and regular meetings are held.
IronClad is a comprehensive platform that allows legal teams, cross functional teams and approvers to keep track of the suggestions and changes made to legal agreements. It keeps everything in a single place, however it lacks the simplicity and practicality of DocuSign throughout the signing process, so we usually have to use both platforms to complete a legal workforce
We initially chose Kira because of the Quick Study feature and because we trust Noah. We've since evaluated Diligen--its features have grown substantially over the past year. We've also tried ContraxSuite, LawGeex, Evisort, Luminance, eBrevia, Heretik, Blackboiler, and many others. It all comes down to the cost + feature set. We will always go with the lowest cost provider with the widest needed feature set (assuming there are no accuracy or performance issues during the pilot).
When trained to read bespoke types of documents, the accuracy can be very good and the consequential time savings very high. In this scenario we have reduced the average time of review of one type of client documents from over an hour to 15 minutes.