Category: Management
Regular readers may recall my strong belief that young lawyers do not learn in law school the fundamentals of what they should know to practice law. In contrast to doctors (who put in years of residency, hospital and clinic work, and other apprenticeship before they begin their own practices), young lawyers begin their professional careers with little hands-on experience in “The Business of Law”® or practical client service. The result far too often is unhappy lawyers, unhappy law firms and unhappy clients as the young lawyers try to learn in “the school of hard knocks” what law schools did not teach them.
I’ve written about many possible models to provide this training – articling programs in Canada and the U.K., pro bono internships, law firm training apprenticeships, CLE specialist education, and more. Recently I surveyed the readers of LawBiz® Blog and asked whether they thought on-the-job training of new lawyers before they enter practice was a good idea. The unanimous answer was “yes.” As to what form this training should take from a variety of options presented, nearly 60% of respondents said that law firms over a certain size (revenue or head count), as well as public interest law firms, should be required to engage a pro rata number of graduates, whether they end up working for those firms or not. An even higher percentage of respondents, nearly 85% suggested that the courts (both trial and appellate) should make available clerkships for the graduates, or that law schools should create seminars and practicum programs to teach the skills lacking in the normal curriculum.
Especially interesting were a number of other ideas that the survey participants suggested. These practicing lawyers had some excellent thoughts on the type of training that would benefit those entering the profession:
Work at a company under the direction of an in-house lawyer (admitted to practice in the state where the work is done) with management responsibility within the legal affairs department.
Externships at government agencies such as the SEC, state securities commissioners, the Patent and Trademark Office, state corporations departments, state revenue departments, state legislatures and accounting/audit firms of a certain size.
Law school placement of third year students in extern programs, with the success and extent of the placement becoming a major criterion in evaluation of the school’s performance by U.S. News & World Report, Barron’s and others that evaluate law schools.
Requiring that all law school graduates who pass the bar exam serve an apprenticeship program under the direct supervision of a member in good standing of the bar who shall, at the conclusion of the apprenticeship, attest to the legal proficiencies of the new lawyer and recommend to the state bar that the apprenticeship be considered successfully concluded
Turning the third year of instruction in law school into an apprenticeship program, replacing the courses that are taken in the final year just to fill out the time
If you have other ideas, I’d welcome hearing them. Perhaps together we can begin a groundswell of opinion in which real lawyers, rather than just law school professors, have a say in legal education.
View page
Yesterday, a jury rendered a unanimous verdict in a very much watched criminal trial in Los Angeles Superior Court. This wasn’t so spectacular as the O.J. Simpson trial, but to those involved, it was equally dramatic.
The courtroom gallery was filled to capacity Monday as a jury of seven women and five men announced it had convicted former emergency room doctor Christopher Thomas Thompson of assaulting a pair of cyclists last year by abruptly stopping his car in front of them. The jury found that Dr. Thompson ignored the rules of his profession and allowed road rage against cyclists in general to get the better of him in attacking two cyclists in particular. He will now pay the penalty.
So, too, lawyers must share the road … involve staff and clients in the development of strategy and implementation of tactics in order to provide the best and most effective representation for the client. As I said in another context, there is no "I" in Team … and teams almost always achieve better results.
View page
It’s always gratifying when one’s opinions receive outside support. Sometime ago, I wrote that law schools really don’t teach the day-to-day aspects of being a lawyer – interacting with clients and running a practice – because such skills are seen as too “trade-oriented.”
That viewpoint was echoed in a Wall Street Journal column by Cameron Stracher, professor at the New York Law School. Stracher observed that law school students are “reading about the law rather than engaging in it,” with the result that “when they graduate, young lawyers rarely know how to interview clients, advocate for their positions, negotiate a settlement or perform any number of other tasks that lawyers do every day.”
What especially struck me in Stracher’s column, as I noted in previous writings, was the observation that, until our modern era, most lawyers learned their profession by apprenticing themselves to practicing lawyers, learning from them by watching and doing. It brought to mind the difference between the way lawyers and doctors are trained. Doctors, of course, put in years of residency as part of their training. They work in hospitals and clinics, treat patients, observe other doctors as they go on their rounds. Most doctors begin their medical careers with a very good idea of what they will face.
A number of larger law firms have or are creating education programs for their new, and even some continuing, associates. Just this morning, I learned from an “alumna” of the former Thacher law firm that she enjoyed her time with Big Law because this firm believed in continuing education for its associates. Also, Howrey recently announced the creation of an apprentice program for all of its new associates, rather than delaying their new hires as other large firms have done. And, in both Canada and England, there is a tradition of “articling,” very similar to an apprentice program. In other professions, such as accounting, an apprenticeship is required before granting the Certificate. There are other examples.
Should we return to an apprentice system for law school graduates before licensing them as lawyers? What’s your opinion? Click here to take our short survey. Our survey will end at midnight, November 11th.
View page
Today, I talked with a solicitor from London who is studying knowledge management and its implementation in UK firms to increase profits. Since much of their work is based on fixed fees, any improvement in efficiency will go directly to the bottom line.
They even employ a group of lawyers whose primary function is to improve their knowledge base, organize it and make it more searchable, all with the view to reduce the time needed to create documents for a new transaction and increase the margins of profit. These lawyers do not engage with clients; their focus is on the infrastructure of the firm and its improvement.
Since her firm (she says most are like hers) uses only the fixed fee billing model, there is no focus on the billable hour; this, then, allows the focus to be on efficiency. Thus far, American law firms do not use this model much … and thus their focus on cost cutting today is primarily because of the decrease in demand they’ve experienced from the crises of their clients. That is a far cry, however, from having a focus on efficiency … Cost cutting and efficiency are not necessarily the same.
An interesting contrast presented today by the solicitor: Increased profit by increased efficiency under a fixed fee engagement agreement. While the American law firm model is increased profit by incresing the hourly billing rate. As clients begin to revolt at annual price increases, American law firms will need to look at alternative fee arrangements to keep clients … then, their focus might turn to efficiencies in the delivery of those services.
My wife is fond of say, "there is no free lunch." The fixed fee approach is not necesarrily a panacea for profitability. With a fixed fee, there is the inevitable pressure to reduce that fee and squeeze the firm’s profit margins. It’s an easier target than is the billable hour (where the number of hours can be fudged without much challenge). But, that’s another story for another day.
View page
There’s much talk about the end of the billable hour. Because it’s easy to administer, it will be stay around so long as clients accept it.
This highlights the difference between the large firms and others. The large firms deal with large clients … who have purchasing power others don’t.
The real question is not whether large firms will accept this new way of billing/pricing, but rather whether small firms will create a laundry list of unbundled services and fixed prices/fees. If they all do, then the consumer of these services may ultimately have more power … by walking among lawyers to opt for the least expensive … Until then, there are few ways, if any, for the consumer to make price comparisons among small firm or sole practitioners.
If they all don’t, my prediction is that the billable hour will remain as the last vestige of a maturing legal community. On the other hand (said like a true lawyer), perhaps some will break with tradition and create that laundry list in order to differentiate their law practice from others … and urge clients to come to them so they can know, in advance, what their cost exposure will be and so they can budget for their legal cost.
Where do you think your firm is headed? … to undbundle and create fixed fees as in a laundry list … or retain the billable hour? Please comment with your prediction.
View page
A recent quote from Associated Press: "The economic downturn has meant less work for law firms, fewer experienced attorneys leaving jobs and thousands of lawyers laid off. From August 2008 to August 2009, total law office employment fell by nearly 26,000 jobs, a mere 2 percent but striking for an industry accustomed to constant growth."
Of course, these figures ignore the larger impact on the profession: small law firm lawyers who are being laid off, sole practitioners and small firm lawyers who are experiencing lower demand for their services and law school graduates who are not finding work in any size law firm.
Just today, I met someone who, in frustration, said to me that he’s a college graduate, yet has to sell vacuum cleaners. Will today’s lawyers find themselves in a similar state? How can today’s law graduates who don’t find immediate work and lawyers who have been laid off take advantage of their legal education and still feel good about their vocation?
I do believe times will be better. But, having gone through the last great meltdown after the Vietnam war, I believe it will take more than ten years to forget the current recession/depression … For some, there are great opportunities even today; for others, adjustments will be needed, and the passage of time.
View page
I was asked the other day whether I’ve seen an increase in lawsuits against law firms for the layoffs, firings and terminations … or for postponing start dates for recent graduates that were "hired." What has been your experience?
Such lawsuits may not yet have surfaced; it takes awhile for the public to be aware of such litigation … and statistics are hard to come by. I haven’t seen any evidence of increased litigation. There seems to be enough problems for all concerned without adding the specter of litigation.
(more…)
View page
Bullies cost you money! Addressing this topic is not a "soft skill" but one that goes right to the "bottom line." Tolerate bullying in the workplace and you will experience lost time, lost ncentive and lost resources when skilled staff take time off from work, lose motivation or suffer stress burnout and leave the job for another. The cost to business is in the billions of dollars annually.
The converse is true. Creating a culture of collegiality, cooperation and teamwork creates enhanced performance, greater successes and even higher profits.
Bullying, by definition, is unwelcome behavior including unwarranted or invalid criticism, exclusion and isolation, being singled out and treated differently, and being humiliated in front of others. One study shows that younger women suffer bullying at the hands of older women … but this phenomenon is not limited to women … and sexual harrassment is only one aspect …
Male clients find often find that how they respond to the bullying tactics of their male superiors is a critical feature of whether they succeed in the law firm and whether they make partner or are asked to leave. Irrespective of how they deal with bullying tactics such as imposition of unreal time deadlines and nitpicking of their draft documents, the psychological toll on the lawyer is humongous … including stress in their home life.
In one such experience, I helped a client negotiate his way with the supervising partner through a particularly stressful project. On its conclusion, I suggested that he stop on the way home to buy flowers for his wife. I explained that his wife had been a "passenger" through his recent difficulties … and that since he had come out the other side successfully, he needed to share some of the good times with her … She had supported him without knowing the details and deserved recognition for her efforts. He later reported that his consideration was a huge success!
Had the firm’s culture not tolerated this bully, their productivity and profitability and bonding would have been significantly higher.
Yes, bullying is exaggerated in times of recession and credit crunch, if allowed … But, it need not be.
View page
In a suit, Williams & Connolly, a D.C. law firm, is seeking payment of more than $2 million in legal fees. The client and law firm apparently resolved their differences and created a payout plan, with the client pay 1/3 of the amount … and now refusing to pay the balance or 2/3 remaining amount.
What makes this case more interesting is that a resolution of the fee dispute was achieved. And later, the client refused to honor the settlement agreement. The client ostensibly believes it can harrass the law firm and then settle again for a lesser amount.
Questions for the law firm:
1. Why did you allow fees to get so high in the first place? Collections should have been more aggressive.
2. Did you have a budget for the litigation for the client that the client accepted … or was nothing said about the extent of the legal services to be delivered?
3. Was the size of the legal fee a surprise to the client?
4. Why didn’t you fire the client before $2 mil?
5. Why didn’t you get security for payment of the settlement amount, such as a stipulated judgment in the event of a default or other guarantee such as a letter of credit?
Someone was asleep at the switch…both during intake and during the representation … and seemingly also at the negotiation for settlement of the fee dispute.
View page
News about the health care reform package is getting more interesting. As we get closer to a vote of some kind, the identities of the players and respective positions are becoming more clear.
In today’s analysis, the drug companies are joyous. If universal health care is adopted, the pharmaceutical industry benefits … with more folks insured, more drugs will be prescribed that will be covered by insurance … to their benefit. However, insurance companies will hurt a bit … no one is yet sure how much. With more people insured, their costs presumably increase. With the right to maintain – retain insurance despite the loss of employment, COBRA income goes down. With prior medical history being irrelevant for coverage, insurance carriers will have to take on some risks they would have eschewed earlier. Hmmmm. Sounds a bit like mandatory auto insurance. The details are not so significant to the ideas here and certainly not to some of the stakeholders. Can you name them all?
In your law practice, even if a sole practitioner, can you name all of the stakeholders? How do you seek to reconcile the differences among all of your stakeholders? As I mentioned in an earlier article, providing value is the name of the game in today’s world. And how much more value could you provide with the stakeholders on "the same page," all working together for you and the same goal? And with that, how much more profitable would your firm be — how much more income would you receive — if you could create harmony among your various stakeholders …. such as clients, associates, staff, assistants, et al.?
View page
