The Anticipated Range of Outcomes (ARO) is revisited at the end of the planning stage, just before execution. This is the time to revisit the client's goals and parameters. If they all still appear to be realistic, then all is well. But if not, there has to be another conversation and some realignment before execution can commence. This is the last chance the lawyer will have to manage expectations, so let's make use of it.

One element of this work involves introspection. Some law firms want to do everything for clients, and institutionalize them. A better ambition is to focus on the areas which the firm can do well — and has demonstrated repeatedly that it does do well, and let go of other work. This means a victory for realism over ambition, and it's a victory worth winning, because it creates long-term trust with clients. We often hear from clients that their go-to firms will tell them what areas they are best suited to and will make recommendations of lawyers in other firms best suited to address other issues. (This makes for optimal relationships with clients — and repeat business. We hear this repeatedly in interviews with general counsel.)

Above all, client goals need to be understood and then managed with care. The reason for this goes back to the important distinction between manufacturing and services. If the project is to manufacture a perfect Toyota Prius, then the goal is precise. It won't change. The plant either will or will not deliver a correctly manufactured Prius, on time, on budget. Toyota doesn't look for a range of outcomes that includes a perfect Prius. Nor do they settle on a percentage probability of doing so.