What Clients Really Want From Outside Counsel
It doesn't take a magic formula or a lengthy pitch to impress clients, just master these five fundamentals.
May 31, 2018 at 07:45 AM
4 minute read
EDITORS NOTE: This is an excerpt from Lean Adviser Legal, a new program from Law.com with more than 150 lessons, tools and videos to help lawyers deliver better outcomes, improve efficiency and boost client satisfaction. Learn more. In total, clients want five things: Reliability, Transparency, Utility, Tranquility, and Relationships. Lawyers who tick those five boxes for their clients get repeat business from them. The Lean Law Program offers a set of learnable methods to tick every box. First, we need to focus on reliability and transparency. As you can see from below, reliability and transparency have their own ingredients. In the client's mind, reliability means:
- the right outcome, within a range of circumstances, to be jointly pre-defined;
- on budget, which includes overall value;
- and on time.
This calls for effectiveness in the sense of the right outcome, and efficiency in the sense of no waste. This is why the Lean Law Program contains methods and tools to operate in a lean way. There are steps to investigate all of these aspects with clients at the outset, and then to monitor progress and make corrections. Lastly, being reliable means performing consistently, and as we shall see, this is why lawyers need tools. Transparency is different, but equally important. As we shall discuss, in most projects the client cannot and will not monitor progress. They see it as the lawyer's job, and they're right. The lawyer has the best view of progress and problems, and this is just one reason why clients expect us to be transparent and accountable. As the chart above suggests, in the client's mind that means tell me the truth and don't blindside me. What else? You might disagree about the priorities here, but I would suggest that utility, tranquility, and relationships sit in the secondary batch.
Utility is about being a useful resource. Being available is the entry point of course, but it goes a little deeper. Commercial clients operate in business environments and come to lawyers with problems. Sending a client just legal advice, in the sense of a dense legal treatise, however academically brilliant, won't solve the client's problem. Mostly, what clients find useful is business advice on a legal basis, complete with alternatives, recommendations, and an appraisal of risks. That is what clients want. To achieve that, the lawyer may need a range of talents, such as business acumen, vision, and creativity. Tranquility is next. Clients have busy stressful lives. They often have boards or business owners to report to, and they have budget restraints and other pressures. As we shall discuss, what matters to a client about the project is the project, not the lawyer. But then again, clients want real time updates. We have to be sensitive to all of this and find lean ways to engage with them. That is what they like. When and where do clients want to see these traits in us? The answer is always clients want us to bring these attributes to every stage of the project, to the overall project, and to every project. They want consistency, and there is a lesson devoted to just that. All of the boxes we have discussed so far are the challenges, and this program helps with all of them. The last box is the good news. Clients want to give us repeat business because they like stable relationships with lawyers they can trust and rely upon. When it comes to being a trusted adviser, specializing in the client sector is a start, but it is not enough. What clients want us to do is specialize in them.
We hope you enjoyed this excerpt from Lean Adviser Legal. Click here to learn more and download another Lean Adviser lesson.
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 AllThe Path in the Multiverse: Rethinking Client Engagement Through Gamification
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1US Law Firm Leasing Up Nearly 30% Through Q3, With a Growing Number of Firms Staying in Place
- 2SEC Targets Rising Crypto Financier in $115 Million Securities Fraud
- 3Musk Avoids Sanctions for Skipping SEC Testimony for Rocket Launch
- 4On Advice of DOJ Office, Special Counsel Moves to End Trump Prosecution
- 5Stars and Gripes: Merging Firms Need a ‘Superstar Culture’ for US Success
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