18. Know the Innovations Clients Don't Want
Some ideas aren't really innovations, and some others are, but they don't hit the spot. The big disconnect is around the right innovations, so let's try to identify the innovations which clients really want.
September 02, 2021 at 09:37 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Lean Adviser
There is no substitute for legal talent, but legal talent isn't enough, it's how you apply it. This is where innovation comes in. But not all innovations resonate with clients. How many of us have proudly touted the firm's latest game-changing innovation to a client or prospect, only to be met with stony faces? Why, because some ideas aren't really innovations, and some others are, but they don't hit the spot. The big disconnect is around the right innovations, so let's try to identify the innovations which clients really want.
The concept of innovation may seem out of place in the legal sector which is steeped in tradition. But it's very much part of the current narrative. The word 'innovation' was a warm button before the pandemic and it's been a red hot one ever since. GCs tell us repeatedly that they demand meaningful innovation from law firms and are willing to change counsel to get it. It's not that law firms are unaware of this. They know that the choice is stark, either find meaningful and relevant innovations, or fall far behind in getting new business, and keeping the existing book. As the great innovator W Edwards Deming once said, learning isn't compulsory, but neither is survival.
There are some initiatives which were once innovations, but are now the norm. Document review software is an obvious example, since it's now a common tool of the trade. Another more striking example is ALSPs. They were once an innovation, and a big wake-up call, but now they're part of the daily landscape. Then there are other initiatives which are truly current and maybe even groundbreaking, but of no direct value to clients.
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 AllAm Law 100 Partners on Trump’s Short List to Replace Gensler as SEC Chair
4 minute readAbout the Awards: Florida Legal Awards 2025 Q&A with Regional Managing Editor Katie Hall
Trending Stories
- 1Litigators of the Week: A Trade Secret Win at the ITC for Viking Over Promising Potential Liver Drug
- 2Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 3'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Match Group's Katie Dugan & Herrick's Carol Goodman
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Eric Wall, Executive VP, Syllo
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