Successful Contracts: Integrating Design and Technology

  • Thomas D. BartonEmail author
  • Helena Haapio
  • Stefania Passera
  • James G. Hazard
Part of the Perspectives in Law, Business and Innovation book series (PLBI)


Commercial contracts are sometimes ruefully described as “documents written by lawyers, for lawyers,” artifacts of a negotiated exchange wrapped tightly in pages of clauses intended to insulate the agreement against litigation attacks. Yet this verbal padding decreases accessibility, functionality, and efficiency. Reforms to the classic forms and mentality surrounding contracting have recently been proposed, several of which look to insights and methods outside the legal system. This chapter describes two branches of those efforts: information design and computer codification. Considered separately, each could be helpful. When combined, however, and especially when employed using the values and goals of Proactive/Preventive Law, these methods can enhance communication, participation, and usefulness across the entire life-cycle of contracting: assessment of needs, gathering background resources, negotiation, commitment, implementation/monitoring, adjustment, and sometimes dispute resolution. Although challenging to integrate, better design and codification re-conceptualize contracting as a process for gathering and sharing information toward generating value and managing human and business enterprise.


Simplification Codification Design Legal information design Legal technology Contract automation Smart contracts Proactive/preventive law 


  1. Adobe Legal Department Style Guide (n.d.) Accessed 25 June 2018
  2. Aurecon (2018) Australia’s first visual employment contracts launched. 5 May. Accessed 25 June 2018
  3. Barton T-D (2009) Preventive law and problem solving: lawyering for the future. Vandeplas Publishing, Lake MaryGoogle Scholar
  4. Barton T-D (2016) Re-designing law and lawyering for the information age. Notre Dame J Law Ethics Public Policy 30:101–134Google Scholar
  5. Barton T-D, Berger-Walliser G, Haapio H (2013) Visualization: seeing contracts for what they are, and what they could become. J Law Bus Ethics 19:47–63Google Scholar
  6. Barton T-D, Berger-Walliser G, Haapio H (2016) Contracting for innovation and innovating contracts: an overview and introduction to the special issue. J Strateg Contract Negot 2(1–2):3-9 Accessed 4 Jul 2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barton T, Haapio H, Borisova T (2015) Flexibility and stability in contracts. Lapland Law Rev (2):8–28,,-2015. Accessed 18 June 2018
  8. Berger-Walliser G (2012) The past and future of proactive law: an overview of the development of the proactive law movement. In: Berger-Walliser G, Ostergaard K (eds) Proactive law in a business environment. DJOF Publishing, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  9. Berger-Walliser G, Barton T-D, Haapio H (2017) From visualization to legal design: a collaborative and creative process. Am Bus Law J 54(2):347–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berger-Walliser G, Bird R-C, Haapio H (2011) Promoting business success through contract visualization. J Law Bus Ethics 17:55–75Google Scholar
  11. Botes W-M (2017a) Using comics to communicate contract cancellation. Comics Grid J Comics Scholarsh 7(1):1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Botes W-M (2017b) Visual communication as a legal-ethical tool for informed consent in genome research involving the San community of South Africa. Doctoral thesis, University of South Africa, 15 Nov 2017Google Scholar
  13. Brown L-M (1950) Preventive law. Prentice-Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Brunschwig C-R (2001) Visualisierung von rechtsnormen – legal design. (Doctoral dissertation). Zürcher Studien zur Rechtsgeschichte, 45. Rechtswissenschaftliche Fakultät d. Universität Zürich. Schulthess Juristische Medien, ZurichGoogle Scholar
  15. Brunschwig C-R (2011) Multisensory law and legal informatics—a comparison of how these legal disciplines relate to visual law. Jusletter IT, 22 February. Accessed 4 Jul 2018
  16. Clack C-D, Bakshi V-A, Braine L (2016a) Smart contract templates: essential requirements and design options. Version v2, 15 December. Accessed 4 Jul 2018
  17. Clack C-D, Bakshi V-A, Braine L (2016b) Smart contract templates: foundations, design landscape and research directions. Version v2, 3 August. Accessed 4 Jul 2017
  18. Conboy K (2014) Diagramming transactions: some modest proposals and a few suggested rules. Tenn J Bus Law 16(1):91–108 Accessed 4 July 2018
  19. Creative Commons (n.d.) About the Licenses Accessed 25 June 2018
  20. Dirk N (2016) Comic Contracts to keep employers honest. IOL, 14 July. Accessed 4 Jul 2018
  21. Haapio H (2006) Introduction to proactive law: a business lawyer’s view. In: Wahlgren P (ed) A proactive approach. scandinavian studies in law, vol 49. Stockholm Institute for Scandinavian Law, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  22. Haapio H (2013) Next generation contracts. Doctoral dissertation, University of Vaasa. Lexpert Ltd, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  23. Haapio H, Barton T-D (2017) Business-friendly contracting: how simplification and visualization can help bring it to practice. In: Jacob K, Schindler D, Strathausen R (eds) Liquid legal—transforming legal into a business savvy, information enabled and performance driven industry. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  24. Haapio H, Hagan M (2016) Design patterns for contracts. In: Schweighofer E, Kummer F, Hötzendorfer W, Borges G (eds) Networks. In: Proceedings of the 19th international legal informatics symposium IRIS 2016. Österreichische Computer Gesellschaft OCG/, WienGoogle Scholar
  25. Haapio H, Passera S (2013) Visual law: what lawyers need to learn from information designers. VoxPopuLII Blog post, May 15. Cornell University Law School Accessed 4 Jul 2018
  26. Haapio H, Passera S (in press) Contracts as interfaces: exploring visual representation patterns in contract design. In: Katz D-M, Bommarito M, Dolin R (eds) Legal informatics. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Haapio H, Plewe D-A, de Rooy R (2016) Next Generation deal design: comics and visual platforms for contracting. In: Schweighofer E et al (eds) Networks. In: Proceedings of the 19th international legal informatics symposium IRIS 2016, Österreichische Computer Gesellschaft OCG/, WienGoogle Scholar
  28. Haapio H, Plewe D-A, de Rooy R (2017) Contract continuum: from text to images, comics and code. In: Schweighofer E et al (eds) Trends and communities of legal informatics. In: Proceedings of the 20th international legal informatics symposium IRIS 2017. Österreichische Computer Gesellschaft/, WienGoogle Scholar
  29. Hadfield G-K (2016) Bozovic I (2016) Scaffolding: using formal contracts to build informal relations to support innovation. Wis Law Rev 5:981–1032Google Scholar
  30. Hagan M (2016a) 6 core principles for good legal design. Legal design and innovation (Stanford Legal Design Lab’s Medium publication), 7 November. Accessed 25 June 2018
  31. Hagan M (2016b) User-centered privacy communication design. In: Proceedings of the symposium on usable privacy and security (SOUPS) 2016, Denver, Colorado, 22–24 June 2016 SSRN: Accessed 14 Jul 2018
  32. Hazard J, Haapio H (2017) Wise contracts: smart contract that work for people and machines. In: Schweighofer E et al (eds) Trends and communities of legal informatics. In: Proceedings of the 20th international legal informatics symposium IRIS 2017. Österreichische Computer Gesellschaft/, WienGoogle Scholar
  33. IACCM (2017) Contracting excellence awards demonstrate outstanding contributions. Contract Excell J, 30 May. Accessed 4 Jul 2018
  34. IACCM Capgemini (2018) IACCM-Capgemini automation report. 15 May, Accessed 25 June 2018
  35. Infogineering: Surviving and Thriving in the Age of Information Overload (n.d.) The differences between data, information, and knowledge. Accessed 12 Jul 2018
  36. Kay M (2010) Techniques and heuristics for improving the visual design of software agreements (Master thesis). University of Waterloo, WaterlooGoogle Scholar
  37. Kay M, Terry M (2010) Textured agreements: re-envisioning electronic consent. In: Proceedings of the sixth symposium on usable privacy and security. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Keating A, Baasch Andersen C (2016) A graphic contract—taking visualisation in contracting a step further. J Strateg Contract Negot 2(1–2):10–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lambert Z (2018) Intro to design systems. 9 April. Accessed 25 June 2018
  40. Lee N, Barton T-D (2015) Contract flexibility through trademarks: “Branded” intellectual property licensing practices. Lapland Law Rev (2):247–279.,-2015). Accessed 18 June 2018
  41. Legal Design Pattern Libraries (n.d.) Accessed 25 June 2018
  42. Lessig L (2001) The future of ideas: the fate of the commons in a connected world. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Levy K-E-C (2017) Book-smart, not street-smart: blockchain-based smart contracts and the social workings of law. Engag Sci Technol Soc 3:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mabey R (2018) Privacy by design: building a privacy policy people actually want to read. Juro blog/Better legal design, 2 May. Accessed 25 June 2018
  45. Macaulay S (1963) Non-contractual relations in business: a preliminary study. Am Sociol Rev 28(1):55–67 Accessed 4 Jul 2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mahler T (2013) A graphical user interface for legal texts? In: Svantesson D-J-B, Greenstein S (eds) Nordic yearbook of law and informatics 2010–2012—Internationalisation of law in the digital information society. Ex Tuto Publishing, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  47. Mamula T, Hagel U (2015) The design of commercial conditions—layout, visualization, language. In: Schweighofer E, Kummer F, Hötzendorfer W (eds) Co-operation. In: Proceedings of the 18th international legal informatics symposium IRIS 2015 Österreichische Computer Gesellschaft, WienGoogle Scholar
  48. Mitchell J-A (2016) Picturing corporate practice. West Academic Publishing, St. Paul (MN)Google Scholar
  49. Nordic school of proactive law. Accessed 19 June 2018
  50. Passera S (2015) Beyond the wall of text: how information design can make contracts user-friendly. In: Marcus A (ed.) Design, user experience, and usability: users and interactions. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing, ChamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Passera S (2017) Beyond the wall of contract text—visualizing contracts to foster understanding and collaboration within and across organizations. Aalto University publication series, Doctoral Dissertations 134/2017. Accessed 4 Jul 2018
  52. Passera S (2018a) Bringing legal design and legal tech to contracts. Stefania Passera/personal blog, 28 March. Accessed 25 June 2018
  53. Passera S (2018b) Flowcharts, swimlanes, and timelines—alternatives to prose in communicating legal-bureaucratic instructions to civil servants. J Bus Tech Commun 32(2):229–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Passera S (2018c) Why the time has come for design thinking and visualisation in legal documents. Juro blog, 10 May. Accessed 25 June 2018
  55. Passera S, Haapio H, Barton T-D (2013) Innovating contract practices: merging contract design with information design. In: Chittenden J (ed) Proceedings of the 2013 IACCM academic forum. International Association for Contract and Commercial Management, Ridgefield (CT). Accessed 4 Jul 2018
  56. Passera S, Smedlund A, Liinasuo M (2016) Exploring contract visualization: clarification and framing strategies to shape collaborative business relationships. J Strateg Contract Negot 2(1–2):69–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Passera S, Kankaanranta A, Louhiala-Salminen L (2017) Diagrams in contracts: Fostering understanding in global business communication. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 60(2):118–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Plewe D-A (2013) A visual interface for deal making. In: O’Grady M-J et al (eds) Evolving ambient intelligence. AmI 2013. Communications in computer and information science, vol 413. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  59. Plewe D-A, de Rooy R (2016) Integrative deal-design—cascading from goal-hierarchies to negotiations and contracting. J Strateg Contract Negot 2(12):19–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rossi A, Palmirani M (2017) A visualization approach for adaptive consent in the European data protection framework. In: CeDEM 2017: proceedings of the 7th international conference for E-democracy and open government, KremsGoogle Scholar
  61. Rutherford Z (n.d.) Design systems vs. pattern libraries vs. style guides—what’s the difference? Studio by UXPin blog. Accessed 25 June 2018
  62. Shneiderman B (1996) The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In: Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on visual languages. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los AlamitosGoogle Scholar
  63. Siedel G, Haapio H (2011) Proactive law for managers: a hidden source of competitive advantage. Gower, FarnhamGoogle Scholar
  64. The Linux Foundation (2015) Linux foundation unites industry leaders to advance blockchain technology Accessed 26 June 2018
  65. Unsworth R (forthcoming, 2018 in this Volume) Smart contract this! An assessment of the contractual landscape and the challenges it currently presents for digital contract optimisationGoogle Scholar
  66. Vitasek K (2017) Comic contracts: a novel approach to contract clarity and accessibility. Forbes, 14 February. Accessed 25 June 2018
  67. Vitasek K (2018) Plain language contracts on the rise. Forbes, 19 March. Accessed 25 June 2018
  68. Waller R et al (2016) Cooperation through clarity: designing simplified contracts. J Strateg Contract Negot 2(1–2):48–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Waller R, Haapio H, Passera S (2017) Contract simplification: the why and the how. Contract Excell J, 24 July. Accessed 19 June 2018

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas D. Barton
    • 1
    Email author
  • Helena Haapio
    • 2
  • Stefania Passera
    • 3
  • James G. Hazard
    • 4
  1. 1.California Western School of LawSan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.University of VaasaVaasaFinland
  3. 3.Legal Tech LabHelsinki UniversityHelsinkiFinland
  4. 4.CommonAccord.orgSacramentoUSA

Personalised recommendations