For the information industry, this definition implies that the negotiated terms are mutually acceptable to both provider and licensee with the result satisfying the profit requirements of the provider, as well as the needs and concerns of the library community. The process of dealing with consortia and licensing is both laborious and time consuming and, if managed poorly, can severely erode the profitability for the vendor and frustrate the customer. The approach for ISI has been a team effort, involving the expertise of sales, contract management, customer education and support staff, and senior management with constant communication between these areas being key to the success. While BIDS has been a leader in these types of national licensing agreements, it has been followed by other agreements with national consortia such as those that serve the countries of Denmark, Korea, Ireland, and Taiwan. Negotiating agreements with consortia representing a national entity are sometimes completed more rapidly than those involving more decentralized consortia.
National consortia tend to be highly centralized with regard to funding and negotiating authority.
Parameters for the license such as number of sites participating, depth of backfile, or even the fixed length of the contract may have already been determined by the governmental body which is providing such funding. Frequently, speed of closure as a factor is due to a fixed date imposed by a government or legislature by which funds must be expended or else the funding may be lost. ISI has revised its contracts several times to simplify the terms and language. It has been involved with and supported the library community's efforts to standardize licensing language for most electronic resources. Differences in contract languages among these templates revolve around the specific information product under consideration and the mode of delivery for that product.