It's tempting to conclude that the lesson here is to get your lawyers involved early and often in order to come up with ironclad contracts that simply can't go wrong for you. While early legal work may be a good investment, it is not entirely realistic to think it can prevent all problems. If the basis of the understanding is flawed, no contract will make it much better. Therefore, rather than focusing on the contract as legal instrument, we choose instead to turn your attention to the understanding at the heart of it. When parties develop a real commonality of interest, all is possible.
Litigation becomes less likely and success more likely.
The project may not go smoothly from beginning to end, but it will tend to respond constructively to the problems it encounters and have the best chance of delivering a useful and effective system. This is the kind of contract you must avoid, even if your organization is the putative winner. But this sounds crazy. Too often it is, but such contracts usually turn out badly. The only contract that is really healthy is one where you would feel good signing either side.