Read the model first
The tool is slow — or is it the model?
A contract runs across five lanes before it's signed. When review drags, the reflex is to buy a CLM platform — but the tool inherits the model it lands on. This is a real (anonymized) actual-state read: 106 pain points across five lanes and the five GSDPI stages, weighted by severity × frequency. It's what stopped one CLO from digitizing a broken model.
No lane is clean — the pain is systemic, not local. It's heaviest at Do (27) and Prove (24): where contracts are reviewed and where risk must be proven — not where a repository tool would help. Tint depth = concentration.
Surfacing this stopped the CLO from digitizing a broken model. Correcting the gaps — not the tool — is what protected the platform spend and let the rebuild target the outcomes above. A Zero-Based read across GSDPI maps the pain before the platform decision; the Traceability Ratio then holds the rebuild to a governed origin. Read the model first. Then buy the tool.