Client Alignment Tool
The Client Alignment Tool establishes the anticipated range of outcomes and includes costs, strategies and unknowns.
April 05, 2018 at 03:15 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Lean Adviser
The creation of the CLIENT ALIGNMENT TOOL establishes the Anticipated Range of Outcomes and essentially is a plan of action shared with and agreed to by the client. The CLIENT ALIGNMENT TOOL ensures that both parties have the same expectation as to the result of the project. The CLIENT ALIGNMENT TOOL should include the objectives of the project as well as costs, strategies, and unknowns..
Checklist:
|- Begin investigation and planning based on KICK-OFF MEETING PLANNER.
- Investigate, Analyze, Reconsider (Doubt)
- Identify and ascertain material facts using PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION CHECKLIST.
- Identify critical matters and critical facts
- Ascertain manageability of each component
- Identify matters outside of your control
- Identify goals of the client.
- Reach conclusion or consensus on Anticipated Range of Outcomes.
- Identify specific resources needed using TASK ASSIGNER.
- Human, financial, and material resources
- Create Internal and External Strategic Plan using the STRATEGY AND TACTICS CHECKLIST.
- Identify tactics using the STRATEGY AND TACTICS CHECKLIST.
- Develop activities flowchart, task list, and timeline incorporating resources, costs, and time required.
- Meet with client and present Anticipated Range of Outcomes.
- Adjust planning and expectations as necessary.
Lean Routine:
|- Is there a clearly defined process established?
- Has the KICK-OFF MEETING PLANNER established at least a draft or "rough" Anticipated Range of Outcomes?
- Is the planning process logical and based upon results of the preceding phase?
- Does the planning consider possible outcomes and recoveries, costs, amount of time, as well as other factors?
- Does the planning process incorporate "doubt" to revisit and question assumptions? (Investigate-Analyze-Doubt)
- Does the planning consider the goals of the CLIENT?
- Is the process easy to follow and charted?
- Has the planning process defined the desired outcome?
- Have critical players/resources been analyzed and identified?
- In allocating resources using the TASK ASSIGNER, are internal legal teams/staff attorneys included?
- In allocating resources using the TASK ASSIGNER, are other key players included, such as business managers, expert witnesses, and PMKs?
- Have unimportant and irrelevant materials been identified and eliminated through the use of the PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION CHECKLIST?
- Have material facts been identified and ascertained?
- Is the internal strategy sound and based on ascertainable facts?
- Have you considered all possible strategies?
- Will the strategy allow you to create an alignment tool that clearly communicates to the client an "Anticipated Range of Outcomes"?
- Does the Anticipated Range of Outcomes anticipate client reaction?
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
A Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute read
Plaintiffs Seek Redo of First Trial Over Medical Device Plant's Emissions
4 minute read
How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'Be a Good Partner and Colleague,' Says Logan Drew of Robins Kaplan
Trending Stories
- 1Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 2The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 3Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 4For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 5As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
