Which issue indicates a lack of defined responsibilities in a CLM workflow?

Which issue indicates a lack of defined responsibilities in a CLM workflow?

• A. Missing SLA
• B. Unclear ownership
• C. Poor testing
• D. Overly long templates

Answer: (B)

In a CLM workflow, clearly assigning who is responsible for each step ensures accountability and smooth handoffs. When responsibilities aren’t defined, it becomes unclear who owns a task, who makes decisions, and who approves the next stage. This lack of defined ownership leads to delays, confusion, and tasks slipping through the cracks because there’s no single accountable person for each step. That’s why the issue described is the one that indicates a lack of defined responsibilities: unclear ownership. It directly signals that there isn’t a clear person or role responsible for ongoing actions, accountability, and escalation. Missing SLA points to timing and deadlines rather than who is accountable. Poor testing is about quality assurance and catching defects, not about who owns responsibilities. Overly long templates speak to complexity and efficiency, not to ownership.

In a CLM workflow, clearly assigning who is responsible for each step ensures accountability and smooth handoffs. When responsibilities aren’t defined, it becomes unclear who owns a task, who makes decisions, and who approves the next stage. This lack of defined ownership leads to delays, confusion, and tasks slipping through the cracks because there’s no single accountable person for each step.

That’s why the issue described is the one that indicates a lack of defined responsibilities: unclear ownership. It directly signals that there isn’t a clear person or role responsible for ongoing actions, accountability, and escalation.

Missing SLA points to timing and deadlines rather than who is accountable. Poor testing is about quality assurance and catching defects, not about who owns responsibilities. Overly long templates speak to complexity and efficiency, not to ownership.