1. Provide Value Before and After the Work
It is entirely within the power of law firms to understand the needs of the client and be able to add consistent, additional value throughout the relationship.
April 16, 2021 at 07:05 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Lean Adviser
The guidance in this lesson distils decades of experience and, crucially the guidance that dozens of GCs and inhouse counsel have given us to share with you. This will help you deliver Value in entirely meaningful ways for every engagement.
The idea of "Value" has been a buzzword in the legal industry for several years. And it typically meant encouraging firms to move beyond the billable hour to innovative fee packaging, lean staffing and other efficiencies. However, clients want more than that. Value has developed to mean anticipating needs and providing value-added content and educational add-ons. Value-adds mean going beyond the obvious and providing non-legal business advice and support. Law firms should remember that their clients want to think of them as an extension of the company. And it is entirely within the power of law firms to understand the needs of the client and to add consistent, additional value throughout the relationship.
Introduction
What is Value?
Value is an amorphous term that can mean many different things to different people. We will look at it in two ways. The first is the Value that you bring to the relationship. This is not tied to a specific engagement, it is the creation of the context around the relationship. It is how you are perceived and how you become a go-to firm for many issues, not just those specific to the matter at hand.
The second way we will look at it is the approach you bring to a specific engagement.
Providing Value Outside of the Specific Engagement — Making Value Infuse the Day-to-Day Relationship
In order to be known as a lawyer who provides Value, you will need to deliver thoughtful contextualized guidance before, during, and in-between specific engagements. If this is your aspiration, and it should be, you will need to put together a plan for providing some or all of the following Value components. Having sketched out the plan, don't guess which components the client will actually want, pick the phone up and ask.
Monthly personal email update with information relevant to the client with additional context about the potential implications for the client's business. Often your firm will have the information, you just need to contextualise it for the client.
For example, you can use Law.com Radar to follow your client as well as its industry, and summarize relevant federal litigation and deals. Obviously if it's significant, don't wait for the monthly update.
Of course, don't bill for this outreach.
- Targeted educational programs. As you've been watching key developments in your client's industry, and increasing your understanding of the client's business priorities and potential areas of risk, you can use your growing specialization in the client's affairs to organize targeted educational programs. These can be delivered at the convenience of the legal department and other stakeholders. The programs must be bespoke. So for example:
- if the client is losing talent, they might value a session on protecting intellectual property when employees leave.
- if there are recent or upcoming regulatory changes affecting the client industry, they might value a 'just in time' and 'just what you need to know' review of regulations and implications;
- if there is a spate of cases recently filed around areas of interest, such as product liability, then maybe offer a roundup and context-based analysis. Again, most firms tend not to charge for these programs.
- Issue Audit: Another way to demonstrate Value is to perform an Issue Audit. Again, this is related to what you've learned about the client, but potential topics are:
- document retention policies
- social media policies
- crisis management planning
- diversity & inclusion policies
- whistle-blower policies
- business interruption planning
- corporate governance
- designing in regulatory compliance.
Issue audits can be billable, often at a fixed fee. They can prove highly valuable if, for example, the GC is concerned about various departments not complying but hasn't been able to focus on the issue.
In conclusion, the consistent theme from the GCs and inhouse counsel who have shared insights, is that they openly express their desire for this type of proactive value add activity by outside counsel, and they will readily tell you where they need help and what would be appreciated.
Obviously, you will be working with the GC to determine if this is an area in which he or she does want help, but we have certainly heard clients openly express their desire for this type of proactive recommendation and support by outside counsel.
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 Narrow Path Back From Disbarment: 'You Have to Really Want to Be a Lawyer Again'
5 minute readNew Jersey Law Journal Names Mike Zogby Office Managing Partner of the Year
2 minute readTrending Stories
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