Articles
Question:
Can you sell your City #1 law practice, move to City #2, approximately 150 miles away, and then work for a third party in City #2?
Answer: Yes, providing you don’t directly compete with the purchaser.
Question:
Can you sell your City #1 practice and go to work for somebody else in the same city with the same kind of practice that you’re selling.
Answer: Aside from the fact that that probably would be a violation of contract law (especially with a covenant not to compete), I believe this probably would be OK under the rules of professional conduct since you’re selling substantially all your practice. The issue might come up under the guise of retiring from the practice. One’s particular jurisdiction would have to be consulted for the definitive answer to this.
But, if you sell your current practice and then, 10 days later, decide to start back in your own practice, solicit previous clients, I believe this would be violation of both contract law and the rules of professional conduct. The code is relatively clear in that the intent is that you must retire from the practice of law.
View page
If you want to be successful by choice not by chance, you have to arrange your priorities in such a way that you have time to do the necessary outreach, the necessary article writing, the necessary speaking, the necessary networking and the like in order to let the world know that you exist. Beyond just existing, the world must know what you do; and beyond just what you do (a features element), the world must know what you can do for them (benefit orientation). One way to implement this is to do is look at your calendar, reserve one or one and a half hours three or four times a week for these efforts.
Yes, this does cost something. But, realistically, you are leveraging skills of others at a cost of $X and charging that work out at your billable rate. The profit to you is substantial ($Y-$X) while at the same time getting something done that is very important to your future pipeline of work.
View page
“… whereas coaching was once viewed by many as a tool to help correct underperformance, today it is becoming much more widely used in supporting top producers. In fact, in a 2004 survey by Right Management Consultants (Philadelphia), 86 percent of companies said they used coaching to sharpen the skills of individuals who have been identified as future organizational leaders.”
The Harvard Business Review has an interesting article about “executive coaching.” The principles apply to coaching lawyers as well. (more…)
View page
In yesterday’s USA Today, the paper took a snapshot of “outsourcing” saying that 47% of legal service firms have outsourced a portion of their business. This is a huge number but bodes well for future efficiency in law firms.
“Outsourcing” does not necessarily mean that the work was sent to India (or elsewhere) as GE does. Many firms, both large and small, use “contract lawyers,” back office services (e.g., Pitney Bowes and others do mail room work) and what is now called “virtual assistants.”
It makes sense to focus on your core capabilities. During the era of mega-mergers, Corporate America forgot this. When financing (and profits) became more difficult to attain, business began to look for ways to shed unprofitable activities. That’s when “returning to one’s core skills” became a popular phrase.
The principle remains the same: Do what you do best and let others (even if outsourced to another company) do what they do best, most efficiently and at least cost to both you and the client.
This is not a new principle but one that law firms are becoming more focused on as law firms realize that they, too, are a business and must provide the best services at the least cost for the benefit of the clients they serve.
View page
Alan Weiss, a well-known management consultant, wrote some prophetic words recently: We’re all human, he says, and that means we’ll make mistakes. We tend to be tolerant of other people’s mistakes. We know the mistake was not intentional, by definition.
The real issue is what we do after we make a mistake. Do we cover it up? Do we exacerbate it by seeking to focus responsibility for the error elsewhere? Or, on the other hand, do attempt to make recompense?
For example, if a hotel makes an error in the reservation, do they accept the mistake and then provide you with a free night’s lodging? If a restaurant server spills coffee on you, do they “comp” your meal and offer you a free meal for your next visit to them?
As lawyers, in situations other than missed court filing dates and the like, what do we do for our clients to assure them they will be served effectively … and, when we err, what do you we do to “make up” for our mistake or our staff’s mistake? That is where the client really understand our superior service … and our intent to be world class in serving their needs and wants.
View page
Tom Kane, yesterday on his very fine blog, said nice things about our book, “The Profitable Law Office Handbook.”
“I have seen the table of contents of the workbook and it looks pretty darn good, and very well organized. No, I still have not been offered a cut to recommend it. But, I do. Now, how about it, Ed?”
Tom, thanks for making referrals to our book — it’s part of the series that has been called “the Bible for running a law practice.” I know you respect my objectivity, and I yours. Thus, it would be difficult to give you a piece of the action … it would appear as a bribe! And I know, as a marketing guru, you understand the importance of appearances. Too bad our politicians don’t listen to you … they would understand the importance of appearances and then might actually do what they say they will do. What a novel concept that is!
To my readers: I again recommend that you check out Tom’s blog. It’s well worth your reading.
View page
The common addage is that you shouldn’t go to a banker when you need money. That’s the time when they won’t lend you money. Sort of perverse, but that’s the reality.
When you have lots of money and don’t need them except as a depository for safe keeping, that’s when many bankers will be on your doorstep asking to be your supplier of choice to borrow money.
Mark Twain probably said it best when he said: (more…)
View page
Terry Brock, an Orland, FL techie guru, had the following observation:
“In Miami, Florida today, even minimum wage truck drivers are required to have three important skills, 1) Fluency in English, 2) Fluency in Spanish, and 3) Fluency in Computers. That industry requires the driver to be aware of computers, how to use them and not be afraid of them. This is for a job that starts at minimum wage and increases to $7.50 to $8.00 per hour. Check your local paper and notice how many jobs are available that don’t require a knowledge of computers. Not many!”
While Terry’s comments pertain to computers and today’s technology, they also apply to lawyer education in general. (more…)
View page
One more perspective on the new world of blogs from Kevin Maney, writer on technology for USA Today since 1985. The following appeared in USA Today on May 24, 2005: (more…)
View page
A recent discussion on the ABA’s Solosez concerning whether to lick a stamp and put it on an envelope or purchase postage electronically (franking) was of interest. And, one of the participants, Becki Fahle, of San Antonio, TX, gave me permission to quote her:
There are very good reasons to use stamps rather than franking: (more…)
View page
