InnovAction Awards 2013 Call for Entries

COLPM LogoI'm pleased to announce the call for entries for the 2013 InnovAction Awards, a program I'm chairing once again.  The InnovAction Awards, conducted annually by the College of Law Practice Management, is a world-wide search for lawyers, law firms, law departments and others in the legal services field that have invented or successfully applied new business practices to the delivery of legal services.  The goal of the InnovAction Awards is to demonstrate to the legal community what can be created when dedicated professionals with big ideas and strong convictions are determined to make a difference. Who Should Apply?

Loyal readers from the law firm, law department and legal service provider ranks, take a look at your own organization's offerings, products, services or businesses practices. What approaches have you employed this year that have produced fantastic results?  What efforts have resulted in higher client satisfaction, generated more leads, provided a substantial number of people with access to justice, improved efficiency, improved quality, generated a buzz, positioned your organization for future success, developed stronger leadership, leveraged existing knowledge or opened new markets for your services?  Innovation can take many forms.  You can read about the winners here and browse the Hall of Fame to learn more about past Award recipients.

What are the Judging Criteria?

  • Disruption: does this entry change an important element of the legal services process for the better, and marketplace expectations along with it?
  • Value: is the client and/or legal industry better off because of this entry, in terms of the affordability, ease, relevance or its effect on legal services?
  • Effectiveness: has this entry delivered real, demonstrable or measurable benefits, for the provider, its clients, or the marketplace generally?
  • Originality: is this a novel idea or approach, or a new twist on an existing idea or approach?

Who's Eligible?

Any individual lawyer or law firm, practicing anywhere in the world, or any business providing services to lawyers, law firms or consumers of legal services, is eligible. An individual or firm may submit more than one entry so long as they are not duplicative.

 Only entries submitted in accordance with these instructions will be considered. We reserve the right to disqualify, at any time, any and all entries that do not comply with these instructions. All entries and supporting documents are subject to verification. Once submitted, entries become the property of the College of Law Practice Management and will not be returned. All entrants must be willing for their entries to be the subject of articles published in legal and business media. All entrants must be available for interviews and provide requested information in connection with verification of entries to The College of Law Practice Management. Any entrant who fails to comply with the foregoing will be disqualified.

Law firms employing members of the Board of Trustees of the College of Law Practice Management or members of the InnovAction Award Selection Committee will be ineligible for consideration.

How Do I Apply?

The deadline for submissions is June 30, 2013.  Interested in the nominations process?  Visit the How to Enter page to learn more.  Click here to download the 2013 InnovAction Awards application.

Ten Things I'd Do Differently as a Law Firm CEO

There are many good reasons for law firms to adopt business practices from other industry segments.  As has been made abundantly clear, the laws of economics apply equally to law firms as to other businesses.  Faced with declining demand and an oversupply of providers, law firms are experiencing unprecedented downward price pressure and clients are aggressively seeking substitutes.  Law firm leaders who have reduced overhead to maintain profit margins have learned that this approach falters when adverse economic conditions persist.  Many law firm leaders now struggle with what to do next to survive.

 Alternative fee arrangements are still considered necessary evils, rarely embraced but reluctantly accepted upon client demands.  Growing top line revenue through lateral recruiting remains a risky proposition because there is no guarantee a lawyer's clients are as portable as the lawyer.  Too, a lesson most of us learned as teens applies to lateral love affairs:  the pretty girl too popular to commit to one guy is, statistically speaking, unlikely to stay with you for very long either.

Lawyers, not unlike their forbears in other industries facing massive upheaval, tend to do more of what they know rather than proactively seek change, and as a result simple techniques to improve client satisfaction and retention -- efforts that in other industries are generally called "sales" -- are discarded as unseemly or unnecessary for educated professionals to take on. Law firms are not mere factories, churning out countless replicas of a popular product.  Nor are they think tanks focused on producing thought leadership for academics to ponder.  But law firms are somewhere on that continuum, subject to market forces, facing changing client needs, price pressure from entrenched competitors and constant innovation from new entrants.

Few law firm leaders have sufficient experience to navigate this maze.  But there is hope.  Unlike the leaders of, say, print encyclopedias, whose business model was disrupted by the unprecedented speed and force of the Internet, law firm leaders have plenty of corollary lessons to draw on to chart a course from fear to prosperity.  To be clear, I don't believe a law firm should be run primarily as a business.  I've been a CEO of a publicly-traded company and I climbed the corporate ladder in divisions of private and public multi-national corporations and there is a common thread:  the business school maxim that earning a profit is the primary goal is interpreted primarily as a toxic quest for short-term profits above all else, including the long-term health of the business, typically because executive incentive plans are pegged to short-term profit measures.  

A law firm can generate a healthy profit, which is not a shameful goal, while simultaneously improving client satisfaction and work product quality, and building a sustainable culture for the long haul.  But how?

Here are ten ideas drawn from my own corporate experience that law firm leaders can embrace to improve the fortunes of their firms.

Change the governance model.  Let's first dispense with the arcane notion that a partnership is an effective or efficient management structure.  Notwithstanding any potential tax or liability benefits of the business form, it is ridiculous to believe that all partners should have an equal say in the operations of the business, particularly after an organization reaches a certain size.  Nor is a dictatorship acceptable, even when led by a benevolent leader, because such organizations lack sustainable business processes and falter when the leader inevitably departs. Identify a core leadership team at the firm and practice group level and give them the authority to lead.  Stop allowing the blowhard down the hall to substitute his childish behavior for sound business practices.  Stop crowd-sourcing important decisions.  Speed up the decision process by eliminating needless voices.  Let the lawyers practice law and the leaders lead.

Productize the offerings. Every law firm has products, we just choose the collective delusion that legal services are unique and non-repeatable actions.  Sure, some matters require unique tasks, but every legal matter includes tasks that have been done before, usually many times before.  Figure out which products -- or service offerings if you will -- the firm produces profitably and effectively and commit these to a repeatable series of actions.  Repeatability leads to improved profitability and improved quality by reducing variability.  And yes, there will still be plenty of unique matters that only highly-trained and creative minds can tackle.  If you can find a matter or task that's so unique that it's never been done before, bill for it by the hour.  Otherwise...

Strategic Pricing

Strategic Pricing

Embrace strategic pricing.  Here's a revelation: clients will care less about the mechanics of your invoice, whether you bill by the hour, by the word or offer flat fees based on astrology charts, so long as the value delivered is commensurate with the price paid.  The practice of issuing invoices with “services rendered” didn’t die because clients grew smarter; it died because law firms grew stupider and adopted billing practices with perverse incentives.  The idea that a law firm might not need a fax machine if not for client demand, and therefore we charged $1 per page sent or received until the fax machine earned in excess of 100,000 times its cost was idiotic.  Thankfully, we learned the lesson and today don’t charge per email.  Or view legal research as a profit center… wait, what?   Learn what it costs the firm to produce and deliver its legal services.  Accept that there’s no “perfect” way to allocate overhead.  Determine the differential value your firm offers against the competition, if any.  Determine the client’s perceived value, if any.  Establish a price that covers your costs, delivers value and generates a profit.  If you can’t figure this out, hire a new finance team. If you can’t find a profitable price, focus on lowering your cost of delivery, not just your overhead. Or accept that the client may not place the same value on the offering that you do and find something else to offer that has greater value.

Reduce inefficiencies.  Law firms carry extraordinarily wasteful overhead.  If you want fine art in your Italian granite-tiled restroom, go for it.  If you want to sponsor every 5k run or splash your logo on every cocktail napkin offered and pretend it's a wise marketing investment, go for it.  But say no to the partner who demands his own graphic designer and high-capacity printing operation on the off chance he might leave a key proposal to the last second and need to run an after-hours-all-hands-on-deck fire drill to generate a boilerplate RFP response.  Stop running the same conflict checks on the same conflicted prospects, or their subsidiaries, by investing in a data cleanup operation, adding in corporate trees and linking your CRM system to your billing system and the conflicts database.  Improve your RFP win rate by requiring the lawyers adhere to best practices, instead of repeating the same mistakes.  Look at every single process in the firm's back office and find ways to eliminate redundant and wasteful steps.  Don't know how? Hire a firm that specializes in business process improvement (BPI) to do it for you, or to train you to do it.  Or hire a business process outsourcing firm (BPO) and let someone else manage your accounts payable function. On second thought, cease the silly sponsorships unless you secure a substantive speaking role and categorize the 5k run as a charitable donation or brand building exercise, not a business development activity.

Reduce the cost of goods sold.  The way to productize your offerings is to embrace legal project management and process improvement.  The techniques used to identify and reduce inefficiencies in the back office can be effectively applied to a legal practice.  When faced with flat or declining revenues, the sustainable way to maintain or grow profits and to defend against predatory competitors is to reduce costs at a faster rate.  If you've advised 100 clients on over 1,000 class action defense lawsuits, what are the specific factors correlated with defeating class certification?  If you've filed 500 appeals with the state's regulatory authority, what are the specific steps correlated with success?  Whether in litigation or transactions, there are repeatable steps on the critical path to success and excess steps that may be deemed helpful or necessary by risk-averse lawyers, but are not statistically relevant to risk-taking clients.  If all tasks in all matters are of high value to the client, then your realization rates would approach 100%.  If your realization rate is lower than 95% (or closer to the new normal of 85%) then by definition you are billing for steps that are either unnecessary or that the client deems unnecessary.  Learn how to talk to clients about budgets on every single matter -- how can you possibly employ strategic pricing otherwise?  Undergo a rigorous examination of your processes and develop project plans that reflect successful and profitable approaches.

Invest in knowledge management.  Back in the day, knowledge management (KM) meant writing summaries of notable briefs and memoranda and indexing and filing them away in a database for later retrieval in order to save time, which combined a task that no one liked with a result that no one wanted.  KM should be synonymous with a learning curve, or the economic principle that what we've done multiple times we can do more efficiently.  If your pricing analysis tells you the maximum market appetite for service X is $5,000,  then find ways to produce and deliver service X for far less than $5,000, relying on past experience to inform the process.  Poor leaders believe KM is a technology problem and will invest millions in tools that the lawyers happily ignore, but wise leaders recognize this as primarily a cultural problem.  Also, if you're lamenting the decline of associate training fully funded by clients, you'll be pleased to learn that a KM culture both accelerates and improves associate education.

Don't guess.  Forecast.  In countless practice group retreats I hear the same goal: "We'll grow the practice by 20% next year."  Yet inevitably there is little rigor applied to the target, let alone how to achieve it.  Businesses thrive on certainty and generally value repeatable revenue streams over one-time transactions, and corporate budgeting is a never-ending exercise to identify revenues and expenses.  No business can operate without a clear sense of its working capital, cash flow and resource needs.  Yet most law firms employ lagging indicators such as profits per partner to determine fiscal health.  That's like driving a car until the gas tank is empty to determine the gas tank's capacity, which is then retroactively applied to the prior day's agenda to see if we should have refilled the tank before embarking upon a series of errands or perhaps scheduled fewer errands.  Create and maintain a sales pipeline, applying simple methods to target the right prospects and predict not only future engagements but the resources needed, the likely cash flow and potential profits. Implement zero-based expense budgets and hold everyone accountable.  Measure the ROI of marketing investments, and not just the ad campaign but identify the partners whose entire "marketing" spend consists of taking the same clients or law school pals to sporting events with no discernible incremental business resulting from the expense.  Not sure how?  Select a client, any client, and ask them to walk you through their revenue and expense forecasting process.  But buckle in first, as it will be quite a jolt.

Measure client satisfaction constantly. There are many ways to do this.  Hire a consultant; send your managing partner on the road; ask your CMO to conduct interviews; conduct an annual satisfaction survey; conduct an end-of-matter survey after every matter.  Whatever you do and however you do it, study it, sustain it, and act on it.  Most law firms are "too busy" to systematically gather client feedback, naively believing good legal work speaks for itself.  Many who claim to care sit on findings that are too challenging to address, e.g., toxic rainmakers, institutional overbilling, etc.  Even those who measure client satisfaction effectively well tend to do so at too-infrequent intervals.  Take a cue from Disney, Ritz Carlton, even the local hairdresser -- know why clients hire you, know why they don't hire you, know why (and when!) they fire you, know what you do well and what you can improve.  Know these explicitly and implement programs specifically designed to improve performance.

Compensate for retention and profit.  Partner compensation is often described as the third-rail of law firm management.  We can talk all day long about changing the law firm model and improving client satisfaction, but nothing changes unless the partners are compensated for doing so.  Sadly, lawyers often must choose between personal wealth and client satisfaction.  Hogwash.  Partners will obviously act in their own self-interest when there is no alterntative. So let's give them some alternatives that tie improved compensation to improved client satisfaction.  Long-term client value always trumps short-term transactional profit. Huh? Said differently, satisfied clients will generate higher profits over a longer period by lowering the cost of sales (retaining existing clients is always less costly than acquiring new clients), because of a reduced learning curve (see above), because of steady utilization and because many-to-many relationships between firms and clients magnify these benefits.  Contrast this with over-billing a client on a single matter, generating short-term billable hours and high profit, but resulting in client defection and constant utilization peaks and valleys.  Huzzah, the partner hit her billable hours target... but was doing so good for the law firm?  Businesses deal with these compensation conundrums every day.  Do we reward the high-volume hunter salespeople who bring in the most new clients but also the most unhappy clients (because of a poor fit) and who require the highest commissions?  Or do we reward the farmers who nurture key clients over time but generate less incremental revenue?  Do we compensate more for selling high-margin products, often because there is little competition, or do we compensate more for selling low-margin high-potential products, because gaining market share is more critical?  Do we compensate for profits, even though salespeople have little influence on the cost of goods sold?  It may seem complex but relatively simple calculations can help us identify the optimal approach.  At present law firms tend to maximize one factor, originated hours.  By tweaking the formula, leaders can better recognize and reward lawyers who contribute at different points in the process.

Require leadership and management training.  There are terms and concepts above that may be unfamiliar to law firm leaders.  Indeed, many successful business leaders have strengths in some areas but not in others.  It doesn't require an MBA to lead a successful business, but it helps to be consciously competent.  In other words, know why you're successful and how to repeat it.  Many law firms and their leaders have been unconsciously competent for a long time -- successful, to be sure, but no one is quite sure why.  We believed it was because we were good lawyers offering necessary services at a fair, albeit supremely profitable, price.  But as it turns out, years of unlimited demand for legal services may have been more of a factor than our own efforts -- and when that demand disappeared, our best efforts failed.  I sat in a law firm executive committee meeting recently where the partners struggled to understand the nuances of corporate finance so they could better manage the inherent risk of alternative fees.  They were stunned to learn that others could understand, even explain, their law firm business model quite clearly.  They were more stunned to learn that by treating non-hourly fees as a risk to be minimized, they had eschewed significant profits on several sizable matters.  Your own mileage may vary.  But you don't have to do it on your own.  There are educated people who are willing to teach law firm leaders these techniques, and there are many who are eager to join firms to demonstrate from the inside. Stop treating the law firm leadership track as a hobby.  Stop hiring administrators whose primary asset is not rocking the boat.  Cast aside, or at least gently nudge, the unqualified or uninterested from the corner office and replace them with committed leaders -- at the firm-wide and practice group level -- who have or will learn new skills and who will employ experts to advise them along the way.

Contrary to what you may have heard, the law firm model isn't dead.  Nor is law firm growth.  But law firms and law firm leaders stubbornly adhering to outdated models are gasping for their last breath.  The modern law firm can thrive, but not if we pretend it's still 2007.  Or 1995.  Or 1975.  The future is now.  You can't do nothing.  Are you ready to lead?

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.

Marketing Your Law Practice With a Blog - once more from the top

In a recent law firm retreat, the partners and I discussed tactics to help boost the profile of some excellent lawyers who seem to be overlooked regularly by the various ratings and rankings publications. My first observation was that, like it or not, the ratings and rankings publications have a process to identify and evaluate notable lawyers, and the firm's refusal to play along (or more accurately, its complete ignorance of the process) puts them at a disadvantage as compared to competing firms who invest a lot of time and energy in courting the publications' editors.  The fact is, for some firms ratings and rankings publications are good investments, and for other firms there is no greater waste of time.  (More of my thoughts here).  But whether the goal is increased visibility by publishers or increased visibility by prospective clients, there are some overlapping tactics.

When I asked what speaking and writing engagements the lawyers pursued, I was told that it wasn't a focus.  It's not a truism of course that all speaking and writing engagements are wise marketing tactics, but for this firm -- at this time, and in its particular niche -- there's a clear opportunity to increase its visibility with the target market.  The firm's greatest challenge is inclusion into the consideration set, a fancy marketing term for "the list of firms that are top of mind when a prospective clients thinks about potential firms to help with a specific matter."  I did some quick research and learned that there is no other law firm publishing a blog on this firm's specific niche practice, at least not on their coast, so I suggested we think about starting a blog.

I shouldn't have been surprised after working with lawyers for all these years, but the blank looks from nearly everyone assembled led me to believe that their familiarity with blogs was on par with their familiarity with the Large Hadron Collider -- sure, they'd heard the name, seen a news article or two, but had no idea the relevance to their firm or practice.  With that in mind, I offer this article from the archives.  Portions of this article were published in the Marketing the Law Firm newsletter, an American Lawyer publication, and republished in syndication by Law.com and various American Lawyer regional publications, back in 2010 (see a review here).  Even then the topic of blogging as a marketing tactic was old news to some law firms, but with the understanding that many lawyers pride themselves more on keeping up with developments in the law rather than developments in marketing tactics, I offer it again.  A blog isn't a replacement for in-person networking, delivering fantastic client service or becoming known in your legal community in order to generate referrals.  Blogging is a complement to these activities.  Enjoy!

Marketing Your Law Practice With a Blog

The primary objectives for networking by lawyers and other business professionals are to increase visibility and demonstrate credibility with clients, potential clients and peers. In a world where the claim of expertise is often indistinguishable, at least on the surface, from actual expertise, it’s critical to clearly exhibit subject matter expertise to the target market. Instead, so many lawyers fall into the trap of describing their attributes and accomplishments as a proxy for demonstrating expertise.

A more compelling approach is to find ways to clearly demonstrate that expertise. In this article, we discuss a subject that is at once overplayed and misunderstood: the art and practice of blogging. To those not paying attention in recent years, a blog — short for Weblog — is a commentary published online with no barrier to entry other than a keyboard, an Internet connection and something useful to say. (However, in some cases that last item is in short supply!) A blog is in many ways an improvement to the rules of traditional publishing because anyone can author and publish a blog, the content can be short or long, simple or complex, the topic can be limited to a narrow subject area or cover a wide range of topics, it can be published on any schedule, or no schedule at all, and the format invites commentary and interactive dialog. Imagine having the opportunity to chat at length with the authors of your favorite books, a process that can bring you into the topics on a more visceral level than merely reading can accomplish. As a result of this interactive nature, and this simplicity, and the low barriers to entry, many legal professionals regularly publish blogs on a wide variety of topics.

Should You?

First, let’s discuss the mechanics. Most new technologies can appear daunting at first, so while publishing a blog can appear complex, it’s actually quite simple. To publish a blog, one needs a blog platform, which is roughly analogous to selecting a word-processing application. There are several free platforms, including Blogger, an application offered by Google; WordPress; and Typepad. Each has some unique characteristics but each essentially serves as a writing platform with one-click ability to publish to the Web. Each platform allows customization of the resulting blog Web page, ranging from a very simple text-heavy, one-column, chronologically-ordered presentation to a graphic-rich presentation offering archives, indexes, keyword searches and multiple “widgets.” The latter are optional components offering added functionality, and there’s a wide variety from which to choose to customize one’s presentation.

A blog can be “hosted” by one of these providers, or an author can choose to host his or her own blog — though if you’re like most of us and you don’t know what this means or where to go to do your own hosting, then the turnkey operation offered by most blogging platforms may be sufficient. Wherever the blog is hosted, it’s beneficial to secure a custom Web site address and enhanced Web traffic reporting, among other options. Here again the turnkey solutions offered by blog platforms are an easy starting place, and by delegating all of the technical issues the new blog author can focus solely on generating content.

What Kind of Content?

So what sort of content is suitable for a blog? Herein lies the beauty of blogging. While a litigator who has developed a niche specialization in products liability for furniture manufacturing may have some difficulty finding a traditional forum for a series of articles on the topic, a blog offers unlimited flexibility. And while there may be multiple bloggers opining on case law changes in the State of California and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, each may have as unique a perspective on the topic as do sports commentators when broadcasting a major sporting event. Some blog authors choose to write in-depth, substantive well-researched articles, whereas others offer limited commentary on breaking news, as evidenced by the wide range of blogs addressing recent Supreme Court rulings. Some bloggers generate minimal new creative work, and instead summarize or consolidate headlines on a narrow subject matter.

How often?

Some blog authors are prolific, publishing several times a week, even several times each day. Others take weeks to offer new commentary. Sadly, many blogs launch with great fanfare and expectations, but fizzle out after a while because the contributing author, or authors, finds it difficult to carve out sufficient time on a regular basis to publish new items. And just as an out-of-date “What’s New” page on a traditional Web site is a terrible message to send (you knew this, didn’t you?), a blog that hasn’t been updated in months perhaps sends the message that the author has less expertise than promised. But there’s a balance and a pace to be achieved, as with a long distance runner who must be careful not to tire too quickly.

Marketing

By publishing a blog, a lawyer can create and/or change market perceptions. Some lawyers with long experience have a difficult time growing their practice outside their natural geographic or personal networking borders. Others invested time developing a reputation some years prior and do little marketing now, but as client loyalty wanes and market dynamics interrupt longstanding law firm/client relationships, a veteran lawyer with a steady book of business can be suddenly faced with competitive threats from all sides. It can be cost- and time-prohibitive to market one’s practice on a regional, national or even global scale. But one compelling aspect of authoring a blog is the simplicity of generating broad awareness amongst a target market on a wide geographic scale. After all, with the Internet qualified buyers everywhere potentially have access.

A lawyer who authors commentary on a regular basis in an area of law in which she or he has useful information to impart can quickly become well-known. The viral nature of the Internet, or in other words, the ability for one to quickly share interesting content with others, can quickly lead to ever-growing concentric circles of readers. Naturally, a blog author with hundreds, even thousands, of regular readers will be afforded more respect as an expert than one who toils silently in the corner office, relying on referrals and word of mouth alone to generate new business.

Expertise

A very common concern many lawyers express when discussing blogs is how frequently supposed non-experts hold themselves out to be experts. Set aside for a moment the use of “expert” as a term of art indicating the achievement of certain qualifications that are recognized by the Bar. In the vernacular, an expert is one deemed to be capable of providing informed counsel on topics relevant to the buyer. More than a few television weather broadcasters are not trained meteorologists; more than a few talk show therapists have no training in medicine or psychology or psychiatry. So it should come as no surprise that a lawyer with five years’ experience in a practice may be seen as a peer to a lawyer with 25 years’ experience, based primarily on perceptions shaped by visibility, visibility influenced by a well-read blog.

Now, of course the goal isn’t to use a blog as a platform to hold oneself out as something one is not. But the simplicity of incorporating a blog into one’s business development toolkit allows lawyers who are in the early stages of a learning curve to have equal opportunity as those who have long mastered the subject. In the end, those with clear, concise, authoritative and easy-to-read prose will outshine those who have little to say. In this way, the world of blog publishing is self-regulating.

Outsourcing

Some firms outsource blog content to expert writers from outside the firm or from within, and the lawyer reviews the work before publication. While this can be an efficient way to generate regular content — which is by far the most challenging aspect of maintaining a blog — one critical element that is lost in such an approach is “voice.” The most popular bloggers insert their own personalities into their writing, and it’s as much the style as the content which attracts and retains readers. When a blog becomes a sterile conduit for corporate speak or legalease, then it may impart information but fail to attract a loyal following.  In addition to content, one can outsource the entire blog setup and technology.  As an independent consultant, I don't promote individual products or services but it may be helpful to look at some of the more notable providers in the space, many of whom are led by friends of mine (here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here -- this last one provides generous strategic and technology support for the blog you're reading!).

Conclusion

There are many marketing and business development tactics competing for busy lawyers’ time. There is a constant struggle to network to one’s target market. Blogs have proven to be an effective tactic to establish subject matter expertise, and the Internet search engines which are designed to promote sites with frequently updated content can help reach a target audience on a scale that other networking tactics, and traditional publishing venues, may not. But publishing a blog requires discipline, a regular influx of new ideas, and desire. With these, plus a simple and easy-to-use blog publishing platform, any lawyer can achieve credibility and visibility with ease.

© 2010 American Lawyer Media, reprinted with permission

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.

New Group to Address Client Value - Pricing, Project Management, Process Improvement

Those of us who have spent years in the trenches helping law departments obtain more value from outside counsel, and helping law firms better profit while delivering more value to their clients, have long lamented the lack of an organized effort to share best practices with others facing the same challenges, particularly with regard to best practices in pricing, project management and process improvement.  Our wait is over:  the international Legal Marketing Association (LMA) announced the formation of a new "Client Value" Special Interest Group (SIG) with a charter to network, educate and share best practices among law firm, law department and service provider professionals who focus on pricing, project management and process improvement.  The SIG is one of several offered by LMA; the others focus on Competitive Intelligence, Small Firm/Solo Marketing, Service Providers, Social Media and Chief Marketing Officers. I've faced these issues from all angles -- in my role leading business development for a global law firm, I was constantly faced with drafting RFPs that were client-focused and priced to win while also maintaining law firm profitability; as a CEO and senior corporate executive, I was regularly battling the in-house legal department for more transparency on budgets and risk management, and hiring outside counsel who took a "you need us more than we need you" approach to client interaction; as an executive with several service providers, I've brought to market products and services designed to help law departments and law firms forge stronger and more collaborative relationships; as a management consultant, writer and frequent keynote speaker, I am constantly addressing audiences of in-house lawyers or private practice lawyers struggling with adapting to the enormous changes taking place in the legal profession.  One thread has been constant in every one of these interactions:  no one can do it alone!  It's critical for clients and providers to get and stay on the same page to ensure that both parties enjoy a mutual and financially lucrative relationship.

This issue of mutual advantage, in my opinion, has been lacking from many of the existing perspectives:  whether it's the standard client panel filled with self-important General Counsel providing endless anecdotes of law firm foibles, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that the their own internal corporate clients are just as unhappy with the law department; or the various caucuses of in-house counsel defining the new normal as "law firms made enough money, now it's our turn" as if their collaboration was somehow an ever-shifting zero-sum game; or law firm leaders who refuse to acknowledge the very real impact of economic forces on their practice; or my fellow consultants who have great depth of expertise to advise either law firms or law departments, but not both -- because they've never worked with "the other side" except in an adversarial capacity.  This era is ending.

My expectation is that the new SIG will is represent all stakeholders - lawyers from law firms and law departments, of course, but also business professionals managing corporate budgets, e.g., procurement; pricing experts retained by law firms to better link price, cost and value; vendors building tools to analyze and manage complex matters; business development and marketing professionals who are increasingly asked to differentiate law firms on factors such as budget predictability, use of alternative fees and project management rather than just size and practice mix.  What these professionals can do together is establish an ongoing dialog, define and improve industry metrics, better define for vendors what to build and why, and provide a roadmap and best practices for those who have been heretofore reluctant to join the fray.  Just as other industries have settled on standard technology formats, a common vocabulary, licensing protocols and educational tracks for newcomers, the legal marketplace can greatly benefit from such interaction.  (And for the occasional detractor who assumes any interaction between buyers and sellers or among competitors inevitably leads to collusion or anti-trust concerns, I say "You are more than welcome to remain on the sidelines and keep out of our way!"

So join me in congratulating the Legal Marketing Association for proactively embracing one of the critical four P's of Marketing (product, place, promotion, price) and launching the new SIG.  And join me in thanking the many busy professionals who have, informally and formally, collectively and individually, led these efforts prior to the formation of the SIG, most notably Toby Brown, Director of Pricing & Strategic Analysis at Akin Gump, who will head the new SIG.  Also, thanks to Aleisha Gravit, President of LMA, and Betsi Roach, Executive Director of LMA, for making this happen.  I look forward to a new chapter in the growing book about the business of law.

Full Disclosure: I am a member of the Board of Directors of the Legal Marketing Association and contributed to the effort to form the new SIG.
 
 
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.

 

Better Rainmaking Through Relationships and Data

I was recently interviewed by Bloomberg Law for its Behind the Headlines series.  In the interview (click here to view), host Lee Pacchia and I discuss the evolution of rainmaking -- otherwise known as business development or sales -- in law firms.  In the heady days of yesteryear, rainmaking involved networking, establishing and nurturing relationships, ensuring that when clients and prospective clients encountered a legal issue, the rainmaker was top of mind and received a call.  Of course it's slightly more complex than that, as good rainmakers will say that you also have to be credible and competent in your field.  Others will say that working the cocktail circuit isn't enough, particularly with sophisticated buyers, so coming to the table with industry knowledge and solutions in mind is important.  All of this is true.  It's also true that, for the most part, successful rainmakers are a relatively small segment of the Biglaw population.  Most successful partners have had some success in bringing in work, and while many can cover their own compensation and overhead, quite a few don't generate enough business to make a dent in the typical large firm's overhead.  A disproportionately high percentage of revenues are concentrated in a relatively small number of business generators.  And these rainmakers know it, hence the heavy courting of laterals with portable books of business. The essence of the interview is describing how rainmaking has become more challenging in the tougher economy.  Clients are severing long-standing relationships to seek lower-cost providers.  Others are putting immense price pressure on traditionally premium practices.  Still others are demanding budgets and certainty and project management expertise in order to minimize surprise and manage change.  The stereotypical gregarious rainmaker with a winning smile and a firm handshake who can work a room like nobody's business is giving some ground to a more sophisticated, data-driven approach.  This is good news, because as rainmaking evolves more partners have a greater chance to succeed.  Here are five additional thoughts to the points I made in the interview:

Don't chase every dollar.  Revenue is not the same as profit.  In the traditional law firm financial model, the way to generate profit is to bill hours.  The more hours billed, the more profits generated.  This works... to a point.  Most firms track their top clients by revenue.  This is a nice starting point but as a data point to guide future business decisions it's incomplete. Without understanding the corresponding profit for the matters, we might be celebrating dollars that are dilutive rather than additive to the firm's PPP.  So many firms have some version of the top rainmaker handsomely rewarded for bringing in a $5 million client... that costs the firm $5.5 million to service.  When we look at lifetime value of a client, which incorporates repeat business, cost to acquire new engagements, depth of practices engaged by the client, and more, we find that some business is not worth pursuing. It's critical to analyze which work is profitable, which clients are profitable, and devote greater resources to winning and keeping work that is lucrative.

Relationships always matter. But not all relationships are equal.  When I work with practice groups to understand what process they have in place to identify and pursue new business opportunities, the first discovery is that few have any process whatsoever.  However, those firms that reward, and fund, business development activities (not results) will generate an exhaustive list of client lunches, event sponsorships, association dues and game tickets.  By putting in place a simple opportunity pipeline populated with a few key data points, it becomes much easier to distinguish between the lunch with Mary, the chief legal officer of a Fortune 100 company on the outskirts of town, whose company has entrenched legal providers handling most of her premium work, and very rarely encounters "bet the company" issues, and who has dined on the firm's dime 23 times in the last five years without sending a single piece of business, and lunch with Ted, the deputy GC of a small subsidiary of a mid-size manufacturer of aircraft components, who has hired the firm 4 times in the last 3 years for increasingly complex matters and whose company has been named a co-defendant in a high-profile products liability case filed after an airplane crash in Singapore... which just so happens to be where we've recently opened an office.  We may also discover that game tickets have generated, or at least been a factor in, $125,000 in new business in the last year, but our monthly breakfast briefings that cost, in total, $23,000 to produce have generated $432,000 in new engagements, 50% of which are with new clients.

Relationships can't overcome bad economics.  Every partner reading these words has had a longtime client sever ties in recent years.  These are golf partners, law school pals, people we've joined on vacations, even people whose kids' weddings we've attended.  And yet, when push comes to shove and their CFO is breathing down their neck, they change law firms in order to maintain their budget and keep their jobs.  Wouldn't it be helpful to know which clients are changing outside counsel more frequently now than they have in the past?  Wouldn't it be helpful to know if the economics of certain  industries are creating budgetary pressure on legal budgets across all competitors in the space, giving us time to prepare for the tough call?  Wouldn't it be helpful to know which practices, or even which tasks within given practices, our clients feel are declining in value and for which they will refuse to pay premium rates in the future?  This information is out there for anyone looking for it.

Don't confuse strategic pricing with suicide pricing.  It's important to understand the recent remarks made by my friend and colleague, Bruce MacEwen, who is one of the brightest minds I know.  In an earlier Bloomberg Law interview he described the suicide pricing taking place as firms offer substantial discounts to win business.  This is absolutely happening, and in time these firms will become known because they simply can't sustain their infrastructure for very long with non-profitable revenue streams.  But I am also aware of some savvy practice group chairs in other firms who are offering favorable pricing that, to an casual observer, looks like suicide pricing but in fact may be strategic pricing.  Simply put, if I can lower my cost of legal service delivery by eliminating wasteful steps through process improvement, then I can maintain profitability even at a lower price point.  Every firm has wasteful steps, as defined by the client, and this is reflected in the firm's realization rates.  Whether through undisciplined write-downs that partners take before invoicing, or negotiated write-downs after invoicing, the firm's realization rates reflect the difference between price and value from the client's perspective. And here's a scary thought - as more clients embrace billing analysis and benchmarking, it's going to get even tougher.  We're still at the nascent stages of downward price pressure in this market.

Stop smirking, mid-size law firms. You're next.  I have a number of mid-size law firm clients and they are experiencing, in general and in aggregate, one of the busiest stretches ever. As one partner said to me, "Recession? What recession? I've never been busier and I'm getting very little pushback on rates."  True.  One thing the recession proved is that there are fantastic lawyers in mid-size firms whose expertise rivals that of Biglaw. And because these mid-size firms in mid-size cities offer mid-size rates, clients are calling.  The trouble is, if there is no differential value offered by these mid-size firms other than slightly lower rates -- no project management, no alternative fees, no predictable budgets -- then the clients will eventually press forward with fee arbitrage and select firms in the next lower tranche, offering similar quality at slightly lower rates.  And the mid-size firm partners, particularly those who staffed up quickly to meet rising demand, will be left with high overhead and rapidly declining revenues.  Rinse and repeat.  And when the bigger firms start embracing process improvement to lower their cost of delivery and can thrive at lower rates, then the pressure on the mid-size firms will come from above and below.

If you aren't having these discussions in your board rooms and practice group retreats, then you had better get started.  Despite what you may have heard or assumed from the prognosticators of doom, the crisis facing the modern law firm is eminently solvable and law firms can and will thrive.  The question is, will you be on board the bus or under it?

 

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.