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
© 2025 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 AllLongtime AOC Director Glenn Grant to Step Down, Assignment Judge to Take Over
4 minute readHours After Trump Takes Office, Democratic AGs Target Birthright Citizenship Order
4 minute readHicks Johnson Promotes Lori Arakaki and Daniel Scime to Firm Partnership
2 minute readIAG Forensics & Valuation is excited to announce promotions at our firm effective 1/1/2025.
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 15th Circuit Considers Challenge to Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law
- 2Crocs Accused of Padding Revenue With Channel-Stuffing HEYDUDE Shoes
- 3E-discovery Practitioners Are Racing to Adapt to Social Media’s Evolving Landscape
- 4The Law Firm Disrupted: For Office Policies, Big Law Has Its Ear to the Market, Not to Trump
- 5FTC Finalizes Child Online Privacy Rule Updates, But Ferguson Eyes Further Changes
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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