The lack of usability in the agreements causes problems. The two biggest ones are probably that the chords are not read and misunderstood. Because fundamentally structured communication is structured communication designed to reconcile the expectations of the parties, hard-to-understand agreements increase the risk. Misunderstandings and differing interpretations lead to disappointed expectations. And in time, you can have an argument. Apart from the fact that most common law agreements are lengthy, a common denominator in the above agreements appears to be that the more recent agreements are longer than the older agreements. Some of this amount is now due to more complex deliveries than before. However, I think the main reasons are those mentioned above, particularly the influence of the common law. A Memorandum of Understanding is legally unenforceable, but it describes the terms of an agreement between or between two or more parties to cooperate or cooperate in one way or another. These agreements do not involve trade – if they did, they would be contracts.

The guidelines for reading a Memorandum of Understanding are essentially the same. These are usually not written in definitive language and can be very simple, so reading and understanding them can be much easier. Even if it is not a legal document, a Memorandum of Understanding is a promise and should be treated by the signatories in the same way as a treaty: you should feel bound to it and, if you sign it, you should do everything in your power to meet its conditions. Tool Box believes that most small organizations, whether they design contracts or agreements, have already discussed the terms with the contractor or signatories and that there will be no surprises for anyone in the final document. This type of open and collaborative process makes everyone`s life easier and increases the chances that the terms of the contract or agreement will be respected. Even if the amount is small, it is important to have a treaty rather than a memorandum of understanding or no document at all. It is reasonable to assume that more professional partnerships, collaborations and other organizational and individual relationships are ruined by money issues than by the next ten cases. The reason is often that the parties have different interpretations of what is expected, or that one party simply ignores the agreement between the two, that the other thought has been set in stone. The first step towards simpler and more understandable agreements could be to take into account the tradition of the Nordic agreement. The traditional Nordic agreement was short, clear and modular (i.e.

subdivided into annexes). This reduced transaction costs and allowed lay people to understand – a necessity for small economies. A Memorandum of Understanding (Memorandum of Understanding) is a kind of agreement between two (bilateral) or more (multilateral) parties. It expresses an agreement of will between the parties and indicates a planned common course of action. [1] It is frequently used either in cases where the parties do not involve a legal obligation, or in situations where the parties are unable to enter into a legally binding agreement. It is a more formal alternative to a gentlemen`s agreement. [2] [3] One of the best-known examples of a radical simplification of agreements is the fruit-harvesting contract of South African Robert de Rooy.6 The challenge was that workers did not understand employment contracts.