Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
James Palmer’s column on Oct. 17, 2024 in Corporate Counsel, noted that “GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes.” Jason Winmill of the Argopoint consultancy described this as “utterly bewildering.” But industry analysts will tell you it’s the root cause of these rate hikes that’s really bewildering. It’s structural, it’s within law firms and it can be changed.
On the one hand, Big Law is locked in this endless struggle to compete on metrics: revenue per lawyer; billable hours; realization rates, and of course profit per equity partner. The fact that these are all the wrong metrics to define success is a separate discussion. On the other hand, many of these firms don’t have profitability models. And even those who do, struggle to implement them. This is super-important, so let’s break this down.
Growing numbers of firms are rolling out profitability models. At the heart of any good profitability model is Legal Process Management (LPM). LPM covers many attributes, but it usually sits within the pricing teams, which are part of the finance function. But then comes the bigger challenge — implementation. Without implementation, all of this goes nowhere.
Be it business or baseball, it always comes down to execution. It’s the front-line lawyers who fail to scope assignments properly, misunderstand instructions, research irrelevant issues, duplicate effort and fall into all the other error states. If you want to address unbillable time and invoice adjustments, look at the lawyers.
Our industry suffers from an epidemic of wasted attorney effort. This erodes productivity, revenue per lawyer, matter profitability and overall enterprise profitability. In this way, law firms lose incalculable sums of money every year through lawyer methods. So, what law firms do to try to counterbalance? They de-equitize partners. But you can only do that so many times. In the end, they’re left with just one tool — raising rates.
The clients, meanwhile, are commercially operated businesses. They understand efficiency and effectiveness at all levels of the workforce. No wonder they’re bewildered.
Profitability may be planned in leadership meetings, but the execution is at the working attorney level. The real challenge then, is implementation. Equipping the pricing team with LPM skills is only the start; firms also need to equip their attorneys with LPM skills. But how? How do you upskill the attorneys? Here’s our 3-step change plan to boost profitability by implementing LPM.
Alex Geisler is a London-based litigation partner with Duane Morris. His Lean Law Program, www.lean.law, goes back to his early representations of auto manufacturers, a clientele known for its embrace of lean manufacturing principles. Lean Law can be used to acquire the untaught skills and learn how to practice law the way clients want: Efficiently; Effectively; Transparently. He can be reached at [email protected].
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A federal district court in Miami, FL, has ruled that former National Basketball Association star Shaquille O'Neal will have to face a lawsuit over his promotion of unregistered securities in the form of cryptocurrency tokens and that he was a "seller" of these unregistered securities.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?