Concord vs. Esker

Concord is honestly suited for all types of organizations because the software is flexible in its application and very easy to implement. In addition, Concord offers exceptional customer service with professionals who will work with you to ensure success, whether it be through training, problem-solving, or even finding ways to engage employees to maximize the benefit of the software. Most appreciated about Concord is their willingness to listen to their users to constantly evolve with new features or added functionality based on customer feedback.

Incentivized

Esker On Demand is great for Sales Order Processing order creation. We use it with web services. It can make table read calls, test order creations (simulate order), and help with order creation. They are also working on change order management, but if you have multiple order entry methods or touch points, this feature may not be usable for your company.

Incentivized

• Templates are easy to create and utilize.
• Concord has its internal e-signature tool.
• Concord can group by template, active, in progress, etc. and color codes the same.

Incentivized

• Esker makes automated invoice sending very easy
• Esker tracks the sending of documents & records whether or not the message was successful
• Esker offers various reports that can be very helpful
• Esker stores all of our customers' contact info on the cloud, and it can be accessed from anywhere

Incentivized

• Make it easier to find the templates from any page
• Improve the search function--it's sometimes difficult to find specific documents when searching
• Change back to "limited editor" and "no editing rights" when sharing documents; the new term of "viewer" makes it seem like nothing can be edited at all

Incentivized

• We can't enter credit memos in Esker. Need to enter in SAP and then link.
• PO invoices that were trained to go into the PO bucket, route into the non-PO buckets.
• Freight invoices that have had hundreds going into the non-PO bucket have a tendency to route to the PO-bucket because a PO number is referenced on page 7.

Concord is extremely user friendly and saves me so much time! How else would I be able to manage all of the contracts for 9 different agencies all by myself?!?

Incentivized

Esker does everything that it promises to do, but it is very hard to figure out. I am a very tech-savvy person, but I needed extensive training to be able to use the basic functions of Esker. Once you know what you're doing, it's not too hard, but I don't understand why they couldn't make it easier to use.

Incentivized

I gave it a five because it was the closest to a neutral response. I have not had issues with Concord and have not had a reason to contact support, so I don't have an accurate opinion here. From my conversations with our legal team, it seems they have been able to work with the support team at Concord to get any potential issues resolved in a timely manner.

Incentivized

They have been very helpful and the online support site is awesome. They keep the site up to date with the latest changes and present challenges to keep learning the new updates to keep things entertaining. They are overall a great crew to work with

Incentivized

I would rather not compare apples and apples nor apples and oranges, and just share Concord has been an excellent Contract Management System for current organization.

Incentivized

I have listed a few that we considered but there were many more in the initial assessment, Esker was priced well and had the best user interface. Was really easy to use and the implementation process was well designed. It was a system that could handle a two tiered delegations of authority for project expenditure and operational expenditure.

Incentivized

• Since our implementation, I am saving a few hours a month in managing our IC contracts.
• When people have questions about contracts, now it's clear "Hey, look in Concord" versus "Hey, does John or Sally have this contract?".

Incentivized

• We now have reporting available down to the individual field level (changes, errors, etc) and can calculate cost to serve.
• It replaced on-premise hardware with cloud SaaS that is more cost effective and risk adverse.
• It is more intuitive; we can put new hires on order entry and experience less user errors. As a solution owner who fixes problems and answers questions, I don't find myself having to "think" about Esker and it has become a smaller part of my job now that end-users are more self-sufficient.

Incentivized