As it says on my website (it used to called my manifesto)

“We believe that what you need & want from your contracts is not what you get. We believe:

  • You should only sign contracts on the dotted line when you can read, understand and use them.
  • You can write simple contracts (perhaps, 500-word ones) that safeguard your business.
  • Your contracts can build trust throughout the contracting process (plan, make and use).
  • Your contracts should never annoy your clients.

Contracts can be simple and effective. We believe in simple. Do you?”

Tessa Manuello as part of her Legal Creatives Academy challenged me to refine those ideas into this transformative mission statement:

WHY? Construction contracts do not meet users needs. They are written by lawyers for lawyers. They do not change behaviours, they stifle change, they stoke mistrust and fail to manage projects. They are legal enforcement tools to safeguard one party’s interests.

HOW? I will nudge the industry to understand what contract users are really signing up to and demonstrate that there is an alternative approach to contracts that will safeguard their interests without annoying their clients.

WHAT? I create DIY resources (in the form of books, checklists and other free stuff) and offer training and consultancy services to companies without the time or confidence to do it themselves.

What should you do?

If this sounds like someting you’d like to know more about, give me a ring or send me an email. If you know someone who might be interested, introduce us or connect with me on LinkedIn.

Like this article?

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Share on Pinterest

Leave a comment