Connecting the Dots: Carrying Costs, Outsourcing, Contract Lawyers and Working from Home

Within hours of publishing my article reacting to Yahoo's reversal of a longstanding work-from-home policy, I was engaged in a lively debate with a law firm managing partner regarding the benefits of a distributed workforce. He posed a simple question, one that I didn't fully address in my earlier article:  Why would a law firm allow any employees to work offsite when collaboration and, more importantly, instant availability when clients call, is so critical? Interestingly, many of his points mirrored those of another law firm managing partner from a separate discussion last week who scoffed at the mere notion of using contract lawyers or outsourcing in his firm, for fear that quality would suffer. The two issues are very much related and I appreciate the opportunity to connect the dots.

Ship in BottleCompanies are in the business of making cars or furniture or software or bed linens or rust-resistant rivets used on ocean liners or x-ray film or lunch meat or ships in bottles or countless other offerings. Most businesses find forays into non-core areas dilutive to earnings, so they hire others to mow the lawn at the company headquarters and manage the company cafeteria or make the coating that they apply to the rivets and so on. Every business eventually encounters a need for legal advice yet few have lawyers on staff. And those companies with enough scale to have in-house lawyers generally hire quarterbacks to manage outside specialists rather than to hire one lawyer for every specialized legal need they might ever encounter.  In a word, the legal needs are outsourced -- first to in-house counsel, when available, and then to outside counsel. The primary reason for existence for most, if not all, law firms is to serve as an outsourcing provider to clients who do not have and do not want to maintain this function as a core competency.

So the law firm leaders who immediately dismiss outsourcing as a tool in their own arsenal are short-sighted. If it weren't for outsourcing, many lawyers would not be nearly as gainfully employed. The reason outsourcing works is a simple economics term: carrying costs.  There is a recurring cost to establish and maintain any function, and some services are needed frequently enough that incurring this cost as overhead is more desirable than hiring one-off experts. But not every business reaches the same conclusion for each function. Some hire salespeople, others use third-party channel providers; some hire accounts receivables clerks, others rely on an outside agency to perform this task; some hire a full-time marketer, others bring in experts on an as-needed project basis.  Sometimes this "make vs. buy" decision is straightforward, other times the addition of an FTE (full-time employee or equivalent) is a big deal that requires deeper analysis.

Yet many law firm partners, especially in Biglaw, have become enamored with the idea of the "instantly hot" water supply -- you know the kind, no matter which faucet or what time of day, the moment you turn it on you get hot water without delay. "The ability to mobilize instantly and staff a complex matter literally overnight is our greatest asset," reported one law firm leader in an interview I conducted several years ago.  In layman's terms, law firms are like the supermarket with 20 checkout lanes, with every lane staffed and open at all hours, every day, all year, regardless of demand, just in case a client might call.  Upon closer inspection, however, we might find the law firm's checkout lanes staffed by guys who normally collect shopping carts in the parking lot, stockroom clerks, butchers and bakers, in addition to specially trained cashiers. This is the result of hiring untrained associates and making them available as a general resource to any partner that needs a body.

We've all been frustrated when forced to wait in line at a supermarket, everyone crowding into three checkout lanes while 17 remain closed. While this memory is vivid, the statistical reality is that we rarely face this delay at our busier stores because they employ statistical modeling called "queuing theory" to estimate peak and slack times, and they staff accordingly. No supermarket would be profitable if it incurred the carrying costs of staffing every checkout lane at all hours, and it would be similarly unprofitable if it constantly forced buyers to wait, which would drive buyers to seek alternatives.

What does this mean for our law firm leaders?  Clients do indeed call and request assistance on a moment's notice. But why not explore a model that allows the firm to quickly access scores, even hundreds, of well-trained, specialized, experienced lawyers, some of whom are nearby, some of whom are remote, all of whom are connected via high-speed Internet access to phones, computers and possibly video, but who prefer not to embrace the daily life of a Biglaw associate?  The carrying costs of the combined salaries, benefits, real estate, equipment, subsidized food and late night transportation of associate employees are enormous compared to the $0 carrying cost of for contract lawyers.  In some cases there will be higher transactional costs ramping up contract lawyers, but as the outsourcing providers have demonstrated beyond any doubt to in-house counsel who regularly hire them, the higher up-front cost is more than recovered by improving the quality of the work product and the reduction in repetitive rewrites, among other factors.  And, by the way, the traditional associate locked in the library for hours on end conducting research isn't collaborating as much as we think she is.

Now, before the ATL crowd overreacts, I'm not advocating the elimination of associates on the law firm payroll. But I am suggesting that many of the unhappy and unproductive associates who are on the payroll today would enjoy doing creative and challenging work from the comfort of their own home office, without the many distractions incumbent in working every day in a law firm, especially if making partner isn't in their future.

It's simple economics. Savvy law firm leaders long ago recognized the wisdom of outsourcing non-core back office functions. The progressive leaders have begun to embrace the use of work-from-home lawyers, contract lawyers and outsourcing firms to provide "instantly hot" services with lower carrying costs, and found that this approach can provide access to greater experience and more productive lawyers too. Whether or not you embrace a work-from-home policy that reduces your overhead while increasing productivity, or establish a network of contract lawyers to serve on a moment's notice, or contract with an outsourcing provider to fill specific needs on an ongoing basis, is a decision only you can make and only after reasoned analysis. You can cling to the notion that quality only results from the Ivy League-to-Biglaw-partner-track staffing model, and you can cling to the notion that 20 open checkout lanes at 3 AM is a wise allocation of resources, or you can apply some established business analytics to your own enterprise and make informed decisions. The choice is yours... until your clients make the choice for you.

Timothy B. Corcoran delivers keynote presentations and conducts workshops to help lawyers, in-house counsel and legal service providers profit in a time of great change.  To inquire about his services, click here or contact him at +1.609.557.7311 or at tim@corcoranconsultinggroup.com.

The Butterfly Effect of Delays and Overbilling

In a recent Legal Project Management workshop that I conducted, several law firm partners and I were discussing the importance to clients of predictability in their legal budgets.  Most agreed that if a couple dozen outside law firms submitted invoices that were delayed and over budget by even a modest amount, the aggregate impact would be troubling to the client.  However, few agreed that on an individual basis, any one invoice could cause much harm.  I explained that something as simple as a $15,000 surprise on a legal invoice on a $100,000 matter could have far-reaching impacts.  Those familiar with chaos theory recognize the butterfly effect as the potentially large impact of seemingly innocuous small actions, popularly characterized as the flapping of a butterfly's wings leading some weeks later to a hurricane in another corner of the globe. There was also a popular film of the same name demonstrating this concept.  The partners found it helpful for me to illustrate mathematically how this concept plays out in a corporation. I won't go into great detail into corporate budgeting here, but let's stipulate that businesspeople spend a lot of time building budgets for every function, for both the cost and revenue sides of the ledger.  And then they hold periodic "re-forecast" reviews to address the inevitable changes that take place, such as revenue for Product A coming in under budget, revenue for Product B trending well above budget, personnel costs below plan, supply chain costs above plan, and so on.  Imagine it's late November and Big Co. has just concluded its final re-forecast session of the year and all changes have been noted and locked in.

Smith & Jones LLP, is one of Big Co.'s trusted law firms, and has been handling a thorny litigation matter for the better part of a year.  The firm sends Big Co. an invoice for $55,000, which is $15,000 more than the relationship partner estimated at the last budget review meeting in September.  There has been no update since.  The invoice reflects billable hours conducted in September and October, and because of the usual delays in collecting daily time entries and the arduous pre-bill review process, the invoice isn't sent to the client until late November.  The General Counsel is aghast and reacts pretty strongly, even though the invoice reflects reasonable fees for legal work that was essential to achieving a favorable outcome in the litigation, though admittedly this includes some work that the firm did not anticipate back in September.  The billing partner is baffled by the GC's reaction, because the firm achieved the outcome that Big Co. wanted.  Let's examine the chain of events this delayed over-billing triggers.

First, the GC's compensation includes a meaningful portion based on the ability to remain within budget.  Had the GC been aware of the potential over-billing even a few weeks earlier, she could have worked with the Chief Financial Officer to shift priorities and funds to address the need.  Now, sadly, the GC is likely to lose some personal compensation because the surprise occurred so late in the fiscal year... there goes the shore house rental next summer!  Secondly, the GC has to visit the CFO with hat in hand and sheepishly admit that she didn't really have a handle on the legal budget that was reviewed in exhaustive detail mere weeks before.  By contrast, her colleagues managing Big Co.'s supply chain were able to reasonably estimate the immensely variable costs of shipping, manufacturing and labor, and her colleagues managing Sales were able to forecast revenue in a very competitive marketplace within a small margin of error.

What options does the CFO have at his disposal to deal with the overage?  Most good CFOs employ clever hedging strategies that can produce emergency funds in a pinch.  But so late in the fiscal year, there aren't a lot of options.  He can consider a layoff, but to net $15,000 in payroll savings in the coming month, after severance costs, would require a fairly sizable layoff of junior employees, or showing the door to a highly compensated individual or two.  But Big Co. doesn't relish the optics of conducting a layoff in the middle of the holiday season, so that option is off the table.  The CFO then looks at other expenditures to see what can be eliminated, but his insistence that every function phase the budgets precisely means that no functional budget has any excess unspent funds at this late date.  So we have to look at generating new revenue to cover the shortfall.

Let's imagine Big Co. operates with a gross margin of 10%.  This means that to cover a $15,000 expense overage, it must generate $150,000 in gross revenue. If Product A has a unit price of $10,000, Sales must move 15 new units in the next four weeks. Of course we can't forget the 5% commission associated with the sale of each new unit, so we need to bring in another $7,500 in revenue, for a total of 16 units, to cover this cost.  As it turns out, the sales cycle for Product A is typically 3 months, and the Sales team has by this point in the year picked all the low hanging fruit.  To move new units in the compressed time frame of one month requires an additional 5% commission incentive and a 10% price break.  Now we need to sell 18 units to cover the legal invoice over-billing.  But let's not forget that revenue for Product A can't be recognized all at once.  This product has a revenue recognition schedule of 50% at sales closing and 50% at final delivery, which is typically 6 months later.  Since only half the revenue can be immediately recognized, now we must sell nearly 40 units or almost $350,000 in the next four weeks.  Imagine the delight of the Vice President of Sales when the CFO calls to demand 40 additional sales of Product A with less than a month left in the fiscal year, a period which includes a fair amount of down time due to the holidays.

The CFO is not pleased with the GC's performance; the Sales VP is extraordinarily displeased with the GC -- the department that already slows down every sale by requiring grueling contract reviews; the GC's family is unhappy because the summer break will now consist of a staycation; and the GC is unlikely to retain Smith & Jones LLP again because of this transgression.  Yet the the billing partner remains blissfully unaware, because in his mind the firm achieved the desired outcome through good lawyering, which is what should matter most to the client.  Had the partner alerted the GC in September, or even October, that some additional wrinkles in the litigation would incur some additional hours, then this overage could have been addressed in the re-forecast exercise.  Had the firm employed some process improvement techniques to reduce the delays between posting time and invoicing, the GC would have had an early warning.  Had the firm relied on a budget and legal project management tools, the deviation from the expected course would have been obvious to all immediately, not months later.

When I walked through this anecdote with the partners at my workshop, I relied on several pages of a flip chart, lots of barely legible scribbling and some off-the cuff calculations.  We had some fun doing the math and acting out the reactions of the various parties.  But make no mistake, this is a deadly serious issue.  As a Chief Legal Officer reported in a client interview I conducted for a law firm client some months ago when we discussed billing policies, "The first time a law firm makes the mistake of over-billing without notice, I'll scold them and give them another shot.  If they do it again, I'll write down the invoice and simply refuse to pay it.  If they do it a third time, I will not use the firm again and I make it a point to tell my colleagues in other companies of my experience."  I asked the CLO if he tells firms when they're fired under these circumstances.  "Never," he declared.  "They probably assume they're still on the short list but that I just don't have any relevant matters.  Or maybe they assume some competitor has undercut them on price.  Rarely do they even call to find out why I haven't hired them lately.  And those that do call, I don't have the time to explain how their delays and over-budget fees complicate my life. Instead I just tell them their rates are no longer competitive."

Law firm leaders, as you look at your own operations, it's important to know the consequences of your firm's actions.  Like the butterfly flapping its wings and causing a tsunami a world away, do your actions -- or inactions -- create devastation that you never see or hear?

 

Timothy B. Corcoran delivers keynote presentations and conducts workshops to help lawyers, in-house counsel and legal service providers profit in a time of great change.  To inquire about his services, contact him at +1.609.557.7311 or at tim@corcoranconsultinggroup.com.

Law Firm Management Science: Ignore At Your Peril

"Imagine this business school case study:  A global business is managed by part-time leaders with minimal business training.  The business offers different products to different customers depending on the varying skills and interests of the local service providers, who also serve as the salespeople, project managers and product managers.  Pricing is customized to each transaction and rarely follows a cohesive strategy, save for the fiat that prices must increase each year.  Marketing consists of promoting the business’s capabilities, which are presented as vast and unparalleled.  Customer demand has been a constant for as long as anyone can remember.  The challenge:  Customer demand shifts overnight from a constant to a variable, with immense competition for declining customer budgets.  What should the leaders do first to ensure the survival of the business?" Welcome to the dilemma facing law firm leaders today.  How would you respond?  See my recent article here in the ABA's Law Practice Today ezine.

Advice for a new CEO

In a recent column, the well-respected Financial Times business journalist Stefan Stern discussed research findings suggesting that "CEOs who carry out a big deal in their first year outperform their peers in the long run."  Stern quotes research from the Mergers and Acquisitions Research Centre (Marc) at Cass Business School in London, which studied the relative performance of 276 CEOs in 171 European companies. I thought of this when a business colleague informed me that he was taking on his first Chief Executive Officer role, after years of climbing the corporate ladder.  Having already made this leap some years ago, it occurred to me that few of the many business books I own and little of the friendly advice I received from peers were very helpful when I finally sat in the chair.  "Now what?" I recall thinking.  With that in mind, here are 15 practical lessons I've learned along the way that new CEOs might find helpful.

Bold actions speak loudly to the market. Just as Stern reports, many business leaders become constrained by their environment, burdened by the many internal forces striving to maintain the status quo.  Often a new leader can walk in the door and see an obvious course of action over which the previous leader endlessly hemmed and hawed.  Just as often, the metrics by which the new leader are measured offer greater flexibility than those constraining the previous leader.  In my own experience, my team and I pitched our corporate parent for years to obtain capital investment for our slowly dying business, but as the cash cow we were required to fund every other risky investment.  Years later the business received its capital investment, but only after losing tens of millions in revenue (essentially reducing the business by half), and even then it required a bold new CEO to drive through the necessary changes.  New CEOs have the ability to make bold moves, so instead of wasting time in analysis paralysis, study the data already available and make a move.

Small actions speak loudly internally. Global strategy is important to analysts and shareholders.  Having a clean restroom and a snow-free parking lot mean far more to the staff.  A CEO must consider these as priorities too, despite the temptation to delegate all minutiea.  You'd be surprised what one can learn when interacting directly with staff on issues that matter to them.

One of the first company-wide edicts I made as a new CEO was to eliminate our "no blue jeans" policy.  Our main facility was part production plant, with big whirring machines and forklifts and trucks coming and going at all hours, and part cubicle farm.  While clients and potential clients regularly toured our facility, I felt my staff was quite capable of judging when to dress up and when to dress comfortably, so I removed a rule I felt was paternalistic and unnecessary.  In another example, a telephone agent cautiously approached me on behalf of a wheelchair-bound colleague who had difficulty accessing a shared fax machine.  The worker's teammates had designed a lower shelf configuration using existing interchangeable cubicle materials and identified a new fax machine with controls on the side rather than on top. But since it would cost a few hundred dollars and require several levels of management approval, the proposal languished for months. I approved the plan on the spot. In a final example, I took over a team that spent all day every day marking up documents, yet the manager would allow only two new pens or pencils each week, the distribution of which was tightly controlled.  If you needed another pen during the week, you had to bring one from home!  When my new team told me this I laughed, thinking they were being facetious.  They weren't.  So we dispatched some folks to Staples and they returned with a huge box of pencils and pens and notepads and sticky notes and staple removers and other odds and ends.  Total cost was maybe $500, but the loyalty it created was priceless.

Care about everything. All CEOs rise through the ranks with expertise in some business functions and blind spots in others.  But a CEO has to be fluent in everything, even when there are good lieutenants responsible for the various business functions.  In fact, the greatest risk for a new CEO is to trust too much that the lieutenants have everything under control.  As a new CEO I cared about all that I could manage until I felt comfortable with how things were progressing and with the person in charge.  Until then, despite the hurt feelings and nasty looks I received from my senior managers, I cared about the menu for the holiday party, I cared about the high turnover in the call center, I cared about the aging machinery that frequently led to 3rd shift downtime, I cared about the building sign with the perpetually burned out lights, I cared about the low activity exhibited by our newest salesperson, I cared who was selected to throw out the first pitch on employee night at the local baseball field, I cared to inquire why the vending machine guy had his own key for our supposedly secure facility, and on and on.  Care about too much at first, rather than too little.

Finance is your friend. And your enemy. Without question your CFO or head of finance will be one of your most important allies. You don't have to be best friends, but you do have to have mutual trust. Sooner or later your CFO will gloss over a detail or two, explaining that the result is what matters not the underlying calculation. Or maybe she'll present a forecast with several nested assumptions that can't be readily explained.  Stop her right there and don't proceed until there is full transparency. Corporate finance is challenging. Even with an MBA and a lifetime in business, few new CEOs are readily conversant in every nuance. But you must be a master of your P&L, especially the numbers reported to the parent company, to the board or to the market.  In my own experience, a long-standing President who reported to me took it upon himself to protect me from the messy calculations necessary to produce our monthly financial dashboard, and my repeated attempts to learn more were thwarted. Only during his vacation was I able to scare the finance staff into revealing all of the complicated machinations, only to learn that (a) it wasn't rocket science, and (b) many of the assumptions were flawed.  Yet as CEO my signature and my signature alone was on the SEC filings. Don't leave a stone unturned when it comes to understanding the numbers that matter most.

Manage by sitting down. We all recall the management philosophy "management by walking around," which I quite obviously believe in.  But walking around isn't enough.  Sit down too.  Have lunch in the cafeteria occasionally with people you don't know.  Arrange for periodic informal breakfast sessions with random employees.  Go to the company-sponsored softball game and buy a round of drinks after.  If you have the skills (and whether I do is questionable), don a jersey and play in a game or two -- just don't wait until the playoffs.  Don't worry, few will be bold enough to criticize your performance!  (But if someone does, call on them for honest opinions on other matters too.)  I used to regularly don a headset and listen in on calls in my company's call center. And not the escalated calls that required a senior manager.  Just everyday calls from everyday customers with everyday issues. A half hour now and again is quite an education, and it sends quite a strong message to your staff.  (Incidentally, the TV show "Undercover Boss" effectively demonstrates this philosophy.)

You are not the top salesperson. This might be surprising coming from me, since my background is in sales. I pride myself on being the top salesperson in the room, knowing not only how to understand the client's needs but how to tie these to the benefits of my company's offerings, or knowing when there isn't a tie-in.  I'm good at it.  But there's nothing more disappointing to me than learning I have to be the best salesperson because no one else gets it done.  CEOs should be in the field regularly, far more often than most are.  In some cases it's ceremonial -- trot out the big cheese so the customer will see how important they are.  In many cases it's for someone else's benefit -- such as a sales manager or salesperson who stages a performance with you as the audience.  But as good as you may be, learn how to hire top sales leaders and salespeople and then work to support them from your position as CEO, not as top salesperson-in-chief.

Find a common enemy. One of my former CEOs taught me this lesson.  I was his first appointment on his first day, hours before anyone else arrived at the office.  My division was in trouble and I had made it abundantly clear to him during the interview process and to the corporate parent's CEO who was doing the hiring that my division needed attention.  He listened and within weeks we had a common enemy.  Ours had to do with some internal supply chain issues which were causing significant strife with our key customers, issues I had been railing about to deaf ears internally for some time.  Within weeks our new CEO created a company-wide slogan and an aggressive timetable to fix the issues, along with a public progress meter.  Then he did what I could not do with my peers -- he based a large chunk of the executive team bonus on solving the problems.  I won't go into details, but suffice it to say our battleship was spinning pirouettes in very short order, even though the management team had previously said it couldn't be done.  Your particular enemy may be a competitor, a technology challenge, a new product launch.  Anything that can be made tangible is fair game. Too many CEOs waste this tool on a too-common problem: they want more revenue or they want lower costs, so they try to pull out all the stops to work harder or to do more with less.  This isn't inspiring.  Of course some companies need a kick in the tail.  But if your main contribution as CEO is to suggest everyone work harder, then perhaps you too can work harder to identify something to rally around.

Good ideas may be right in front of you. Years ago our corporate parent hired a consulting firm to drive innovation among the various divisions.  They toured the world asking us for ideas we hadn't thought of, using a formulaic approach to "ideation" (consultant speak for brainstorming).  The main rule was one could not suggest an idea that in some form or another had been suggested previously.  The assumption was that our wise leaders had already discarded these old ideas after careful consideration, and as if to prove the point Exhibit A was the absence of the idea in action.  Trouble is, many of our good ideas had never seen the light of day in the normal course of business, whether due to politics or inept management or distractions.  So these consultants spent millions of our money to collect new ideas when there were thousands of solid ideas readily available if only the right level of management could see them.  As a new CEO, you will be approached by many people with agendas.  Learn how to filter out the noise and the self-promotion and you will absolutely find game-changing ideas already well-formed in the minds of your people who live and breathe these issues all day long.

CEOs learn to eat alone. If you believe in management by walking around (or sitting down) then you really shouldn't eat alone very often.  But you will find that nearly everyone you meet has an agenda for self-promotion.  They nearly always start the same way, praising everyone and everything and then slowly they begin to criticize everyone and everything.  Some are blatant, some are more subtle, but nearly everyone hopes that you'll intervene in their particular problem.  And this is not directed solely at junior staffers -- I'm referring to the executive management team!  If we could harness the energy of the animosity typically found between fellow executives, then we could provide sufficient electricity for the eastern seaboard for several months.  If you befriend one, you make an enemy of another.  If you befriend one of their staff, they begin to harass their staffer. If you let slip some gossip or a dig at a colleague, it will be shared before the day's out.  Sadly, you can be great acquaintances with your staff.  But you can't truly be friends.  For me, playing pickup basketball after hours with the inside sales and mailroom guys was a way to interact as "just one of the guys," once the guys learned I didn't expect to be passed the ball when I didn't deserve it, and it was okay to call fouls on me when I did deserve it.  But for many CEOs, they find companionship in peers at other businesses because as CEO you can never really let down your guard.

You are the CEO of Human Resources. If you haven't read Robert Fulghum's fantastic book "All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten" then run, don't walk, to buy a copy.  If you've reached CEO status, then you've spent years in executive management where you learned that much of your day is spent addressing petty squabbles among your staff, including even senior (in rank and age) people.  As CEO, you may be surprised to learn that the only thing that's changed is the titles of the combatants include "Vice" and "Executive" and there is no higher court than you.  Much of your time is spent dealing with H.R. issues that will distract you from the real business at hand, but if left unattended will get out of hand.  But H.R. issues are not all bad.  One primary role of CEO is to find quality talent.  I recall hearing that Jack Welch, the famous (former) head of GE, spent half his time on people management.  As a young manager I found this preposterous.  But as CEO I realized there was almost no action I could take that would have as lasting an effect as finding the right people and eliminating the wrong people.  So as much as you like strategy or operations or sales or finance or IT, get used to H.R.

Value your secretary... from a distance. A good assistant is hard to find.  They combine a talent for time management, logistics, politics, scout leader and mother. Some secretaries come with the office, and they have the advantage of knowing the ins and outs of the organization and how to get things done. Some you bring with you, and they have the advantage of knowing how you operate. Most are quite capable of acting on your behalf, though some go too far and act as if they're second-in-command.  I grew up watching television secretaries like Betty, at Bewitched's McMann & Tate, and I recall thinking that asking your secretary to handle anything but work-related tasks is demeaning, until I met Arleen, my capable assistant of several years, who went out of her way to handle small errands and other minor personal business for me so I could focus on the job at hand. With time being a CEO's most precious commodity, I learned that it's okay on occasion to ask your secretary to handle some personal business, so long as she (or he) is okay with it.  Needless to say, when you spend a lot of time with someone in a work setting it's necessary to maintain certain boundaries. An assistant is a valued employee, not a serf, and not a "companion" in every sense of the word. One of my prior executive secretaries was a paid informant for the parent company's leaders, which was helpful when I needed to "send a message" through back channels but challenging when my every move was recorded and reported. Find what works for you, find someone you can trust and delegate to in verbal and non-verbal ways, and then treat him or her very very well.

Everyone is someone's Assistant Brand Manager. I learned this maxim from a former CEO who rose through the ranks of Proctor & Gamble's well-known executive development program.  In consumer products parlance, an assistant brand manager (or ABM) is the grunt who does all the work while the brand manager gets the glory, the worker bee who keeps things moving behind the scenes. However, even when you reach the CEO suite, the one with the kitchen and the private bathroom and shower (I've had this and it's as cool as it sounds!) and you believe you've finally arrived, it's helpful to remember that you are still answerable to someone. There will come a time when you can't delegate some menial task, when the Board or the parent company CFO comes calling, and you have no choice but to roll up your sleeves, edit that acquisition justification memo, tweak the quarterly earnings PowerPoint, add up the proposed savings in the departmental budget submissions, and so on. No matter how important you are, or how important you think you are, someone will always consider you their go-to person, their assistant brand manager. And you had better be ready to answer the call.

Embrace the We. At times a new CEO, particularly one joining from outside the organization, will slowly ease into using terms like "our business" and "our markets" so as not to offend the insiders. I'm sure we can all dig into our past to recall hearing a new leader use a phrase like "our products" and finding it odd, even offensive, that this person claimed ownership of our output on day one. The reality is that it's healthy to take ownership right away -- of the failures and the successes, of the future and the past, of the team and the offerings. Like a star athlete who joins a new team, displacing the existing captain and becoming the new face of the franchise, a new CEO must take charge because he is in charge. There is no time to waste on blaming the last guy or whine about fixing the last guy's mess. There's only time to focus on our problems, the ones we're facing right now.

Act. When you're in the CEO seat, there's no time to gently ease into anything. Whether you're in a position to strike a sizable deal or a substantial acquisition as Stefan Stern reports, or merely take ownership of existing work streams, Stern is absolutely right:  CEOs who take immediate action are more likely to succeed than those who take their time getting up to speed. It's easy to select a CEO from the existing executive ranks, one who knows the culture, the markets, the products, one who won't disrupt too much while perhaps incrementally improving the business. But CEOs are expected to drive change, and you can't drive substantive, sustainable change if you don't act quickly and boldly.

Focus beyond the bonus. I grew up in Rochester, New York, the headquarters of Eastman Kodak.  My father spent 28 years toiling for the once mighty film manufacturer, which has struggled to adapt in the digital age, and my formative years were spent observing CEO after CEO miss opportunities to drive change.  I firmly believe this resulted from misaligned incentives. How can a CEO make decisions and allocate resources to build a company for the long run when bonuses are meted out based on short-term results? Many CEOs have significant compensation triggers at 3-year intervals, so they focus on short-term performance metrics and too often this omits consideration of long-term, more lucrative investments. It seemed as if no Kodak CEO would choose the long-term health of the business over short-term wealth creation and as a result the business floundered, until finally it lost enough market share and profits that there was no choice but to rebuild for the long-term.

I have similar observations about a former legal technology employer of mine. The CEO has had an unusually long 10-year reign, but he has no 10-year vision. Rather, he's had a series of short-term plans where acquisitions grow the top line and reorganizations improve the bottom line, while the business slowly but inexorably declines.  You can blame the worker bees for only so long, but I find it unconscionable that he's earned millions while the main export of the business is quality alumni.

I have absolutely lost compensation from decisions that helped my organizations in the long-run because it was the right thing to do, when I could just as easily have made a decision that earned me money and helped the business in the short term, but I shouldn't be lauded for that.  As CEO, we're expected to think long-term and it's partially the fault of boards and flawed senior management for creating incentives that emphasize the short-term.  As you ponder your strategy and investment options, try to limit the amount of influence your personal compensation will have on your decisions, and instead focus on whether your decisions will leave a healthy company 5 and 10 and 20 years out.  Obviously you can't ignore the short-term, but trust me, there are plenty of people on your team whose incentives will drive short-term performance.  Try to be the one who thinks differently.

Good luck in your new CEO role, my friend.

 

Timothy B. Corcoran is principal of Corcoran Consulting Group, with offices in New York, Charlottesville, and Sydney, and a global client base. He’s a Trustee and Fellow of the College of Law Practice Management, an American Lawyer Fellow, and a member of the Hall of Fame and past president of the Legal Marketing Association. A former CEO, Tim guides law firm and law department leaders through the profitable disruption of outdated business models. A sought-after speaker and writer, he also authors Corcoran’s Business of Law blog. Tim can be reached at Tim@BringInTim.com and +1.609.557.7311.

Legal Project Management

I've been spending a lot of time in recent months conducting workshops in Legal Project Management.  What is Legal Project Management, you may ask?  Simply put, it's the process of adapting business process improvement, resource allocation and predictable budgeting techniques to the delivery of legal services.

Some lawyers believe that the practice of law is not like other professions or business disciplines, and that therefore project management principles which work in other areas do not apply.  These lawyers are wrong.  That's not to say one can manage a complex legal matter as if it were an automotive assembly line.  But every legal matter doesn't have to be treated as a completely unique confluence of steps that has not occurred before and will not occur again.  Each of these steps can be broken down and analyzed, and when the opportunity arises for this step to be included in an engagement, there can be a greater understanding of the cost drivers. 

Understanding the assumptions that influence the cost of delivering legal services is critical to setting fees, and clients understand this.  After all, they go through a similar process when establishing their own cost and revenue budgets. My former colleague Pam Woldow and I have (literally) traveled the world delivering Legal Project Management workshops to law firms big and small, to law departments big and small, to corporate lawyers and litigators, to partners and associates, to finance and marketing staff... and our workload is increasing. 

We will be offering a webinar on Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010 at 1 PM ET to share our insights into Legal Project Management, and to address questions from those who are experienced Legal Project Managers as well as those who are just starting to explore this new frontier.  For more information, click here.

Legal Project Management is critical to managing legal work more profitably, but it's also an excellent way to achieve client satisfaction and to develop associates' skills.  We'll touch on all of this in the webinar.  If you plan to attend and wish to submit a question in advance for us to address, please post it in the Comments below.