>

My experience in negotiating contracts was that they could always be
negotiated more quickly when the two people negotiating the contracts were
both attorneys.  They are able to discern the difference between
substantive legal issues from form issues.  Many industry persons
negotiating the contracts are not attorneys, and in order to be able to
speak directly with a sponsor's legal department, the person negotiating on
behalf of the Research or Academic Research Institution must be an
attorney.  Typically, when dealing with a sponsors non-attorney contract
negotiators, they typically cannot make any decisions with regard to
substantive legal issues regarding the contract.  When requests are made
for substantive changes, the contract is forwarded to the sponsors legal
department. After the sponsors legal department reviews it and changes are
suggested, it goes back to the contract person who in turn relays their
legal department's changes to the lay person negotiating on behalf of the
research entity.  Again if there is no meeting of the minds, it invariably
goes up to the research entities legal department, where eventually the two
attorney's iron out their differences, or decide not to go forward with the
project.

I understand there are Research Institutions or Academic Research
Institutions where all contract review, revisions, and negotiations are
done under the aegis of an attorney who is part of the legal department.
These entities are probably able to negotiate contracts faster and more
effectively, than entities whose contract negotiators are not a part of
legal or who do not have attorney's on hand and available to expedite them.

======================================================================
 Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
 subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
 via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================