Articles

Apprenticeship for Lawyers

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

Competency of lawyers – Solo and otherwise

It has been suggested that I was a bit harsh in asserting that sole practitioners are not competent.

Far from that! Many sole practitioners are the leading experts in their practice area. In fact, most lawyers are sole practitioners, even those that find themselves in BigLaw environments. There are few law firms that are truly collegial in nature.

Nor do I think that law school graduates leaving school to start their own practice immediately are necessarily incompetent. What is true, however, is that they are less competent than they will be a few years hence … and generally they have few, if any, colleagues to guide them through the murky competency waters of law practice. That being said, however, the nature of the cases “new” lawyers take on tend to be matters where they can learn the needed skills as they grow in their practice, without prejudice to clients. And everyone is benefited, the client who may receive service at a lower price and the lawyer who learns on the job … the point being that he/she learns and is better for the following client.

Because of the financial difficulties faced by law firms in the last couple of years, with declining client demand, declining revenue and declining profitability, the nature of the profession is changing … and private apprentice programs are being developed. If these are successful … and I have every reason to believe that programs like Howrey’s will be … law schools and bar associations may be motivated to participate in developing meaningful apprenticeship programs and perhaps even change the requirements for becoming a lawyer.

Something to watch on the landscape while others such as Richard Susskind actually challenge the very foundation of today’s law firm business model.

As an aside, but on the subject of the economic impact of being a sole practitioner, I encourage you to participate in an upcoming West LegalEdcenter tele-seminar on the issue of required disclosure to clients of the lack of malpractice insurance. This is a topic that impacts, almost exclusively, about 20% of the lawyer population, almost all solos, in approximately 23 states.   These State Bars have given only lip service to helping sole practitioners while at the same time adopting mandatory malpractice insurance disclosure with significant economic consequences, among many other similar increased cost programs.

I also encourage you to join our new community for lawyers at http://www.lawbizforum.com and invite your colleagues as well to express your legitimate opinions and concerns of the profession.


View page

Recalibration of law practice economics

NALP survey suggests that 2% of 2008 graduates opened a solo practice within 9 months of graduation! That’s a lot of folks who will be representing clients without prior experience either in the management of a practice or much experience in the technical practice areas (tax, family law, bankruptcy, etc.).

I wonder what kind of representation their clients are receiving … and how does one interpret or define "competence?”  What do you think?

There is a movement afoot to create an apprenticeship program for lawyers.  Georgia and Utah both require first year associates to enter a mentor program; of course, there is no requirement that senior lawyers be mentors, so I’m not sure how their programs work in actual practice.

And Howery has recently announced an apprentice program that is getting a lot of attention. Their new hires will split their time between shadowing senior partners, taking classes and working on "low-grade" client matters, being billed out at very low rates.

The recession/depression ("The Great Reset") has provided the excuse for a recalibration of the economics of law practice by many, both clients and law firms.


View page

Knowledge management is the difference between thriving and failing.

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

Billable hour – Almost dead?

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

Layoff summary

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

Layoffs can hurt

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