13. Do Efficient Lawyers Make Firms Profitable or Unprofitable?
Now that building has become optional in the definition of a law firm, we can see the real essence of a law firm — people creating profit. That's it. So let's examine the relationship between people and profit.
February 18, 2022 at 09:16 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Lean Adviser
What is a law firm? The short definition used to be "a building containing people to create profit." Now that the building has become optional, we can see the real essence of a law firm — people creating profit. That's it. So let's examine the relationship between people and profit. To understand this, we need to examine the single key ingredient. It's not management, motivation or money. It's efficiency, and we ask the question: Do efficient lawyers make firms profitable or unprofitable?
Let's start by bursting the idea that professional service firms are different. They're not. In a conventional business, the key to profitability is efficiency. The formula goes like this: "use resources efficiently to satisfy customer demand with minimal wasted effort." Meanwhile law firms have people to keep busy and time-recording targets to meet. Over the years law firms have tried a variety of inefficiencies aimed at boosting profit, such as:
|- Putting more partners on a matter
- Adding research and doc prep time
- Leveraging for the sake of it
- Creating time entries through internal email
What do these law firm behaviors have in common? Recorded time goes up, value goes down and the client goes elsewhere. This is inevitable. Any recipe which says "use the resources inefficiently and fail to satisfy customer demand" is a formula for failure not profit.
So it turns out that law firms are a conventional business, the basics of economics do apply to them, and the key to profitability is having efficient lawyers. Other lessons will discuss the methods and tools to make lawyers efficient and the need to be transparent about this with clients. But for now, let's all be reminded of what efficiency isn't. You won't excite many clients by touting a new technology. Yes, technology increases efficiency, and yes, clients care about efficiency, but last year's innovation is this year's norm. The efficiency which clients want to see — and which leads to repeat business — is efficient lawyers.
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 AllGroen Strokoff O'Neill, LLC adds accomplished Trial Lawyer, William "Bill" Coppol.
1 minute readCushman Benchmark Survey (the “Sweepstakes”) Official Terms and Conditions
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 2The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 3Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 4For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 5As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
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