As a real estate lawyer, I’d address the stalling by setting up a call with the key stakeholder to understand their concerns directly. For instance, I’d say: "I've noticed we’re facing a delay in contract approval. I’d love to discuss any hesitations or questions you may have so we can move forward smoothly." Providing clarity or potential amendments that meet their needs often breaks the impasse, ensuring they feel heard while keeping the deal on track. A sense of urgency, paired with active listening, usually helps push the contract forward.

When a contract approval stalls, treat the delay as a chance to regroup and realign. Start by reaffirming the shared objectives and how the agreement moves those forward. Ask pointed questions to uncover underlying concerns, showing you’re genuinely listening. Rather than pushing for an immediate resolution, outline the next steps clearly and precisely. If needed, involve others in the decision-making process to smooth the path forward. Delays are part of the process—use them to strengthen the relationship and clarify expectations, not just close the deal.

La première étape et le plus important est d’avoir une communication proactive par exemple envoyer un rappel clair et respectueux ou appeler directement la personne et cela afin d’identifier les obstacles et ainsi clarifier les freins potentiels. Deuxième étape est d’apporter des solutions et impliquer d'autres parties si nécessaire. Troisième étape est de Planifier des échéances équilibrées et mettre à jour les timelines. Lors de toutes ces étapes il est très important de documenter les interactions soit garder une trace écrite des échanges.

I would start by understanding the root cause of the delay through direct communication, identifying concerns, and clarifying ambiguous terms. Address these issues by proposing tailored solutions, offering alternative language, or providing data to build confidence in the agreement. Create a sense of urgency by emphasizing deadlines, potential business impacts, or external pressures like market conditions. If needed, involve senior management or key decision-makers to expedite the process. Simplify the approval path by presenting a concise summary of key terms or proposing conditional approval tied to specific milestones. Maintain empathy and collaboration, ensuring the stakeholder feels supported and valued in the decision-making process.

It is important to keep key stakeholders engaged and informed on how things are going throughout the negotiation. Clear and consistent communication leads to easy decision making. When you communicate both ways, it’s gives stakeholders the ability to address questions and concerns ahead of key decisions they are asked to make.

To break through the delay, I would first schedule a direct meeting with the stakeholder to understand the root cause of the hold-up. I’d emphasize the urgency and benefits of the contract for both sides. Then, I’d propose potential solutions to address any concerns or obstacles. I’d also involve key decision-makers, if necessary, to expedite the process. Finally, I’d offer a clear timeline and emphasize the importance of moving forward for mutual success.

If there is stalling on contract approval from a stakeholder, apart from setting deadlines from the beginning and using the option that states if there is no response by the deadline, it will be considered as “tacit agreement,” I would take additional steps. As the deadline approaches and no response has been received, I would contact the stakeholders to ask if they need any clarification. I would then follow up again at the deadline, reminding them that a response—whether positive or negative, and justified—is required.

When a key stakeholder delays contract approval, the legal team must step in as negotiators and problem-solvers. Imagine a mid-sized facility management firm, waiting on an AMC with a state university where the Vice-Chancellor isn’t signing off. Here we can start by sending a polite but firm nudge before delays pile up. Communication is the key. A small push from one side can reveal where they are stuck or if they're sleeping over a file. Let's say they’re worried about liability clauses. In that case the respective legal teams can pair up and tweak terms to ease their concerns while protecting our interests. If silence persists, we escalate, outlining financial risks under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

1. I do agree that having an open discussion is the fundamental process to address your concerns of the delay, and at the same time, to understand what's causing the delay. (Note: Sometimes a sudden tip-off can affect a stakeholder's action or decision.) 2. Other than offering solutions, stating possible delay impact and contract risk is equally important. 3. Once all laid out in #1 and #2, set a timeline to decide - either to proceed with approval or not.

Understanding the stakeholder is key. Often, you’ll know their priorities or recurring concerns in advance. By identifying and clearly highlighting the clauses most relevant to them, you can streamline the review process. Additionally, when dealing with sign-off processes where each stakeholder is only responsible for approving clauses within their area of expertise, it’s essential to ensure those sections are crystal-clear and preemptively address potential concerns. This targeted approach minimizes confusion and accelerates overall approval.