White Box vs. Black Box Compensation Systems
Having a compensation system that clearly outlines partner expectations, provides the partners with the ability to validate the results by communicating the results back to them does more to build collegiality than an opaque system that, by its design, promotes distrust and ill will among partners.
February 09, 2024 at 09:19 AM
5 minute read
What You Need to Know
- A small (but possibly growing) number of law firms are moving or considering moving to a "Black Box" type of partner compensation systems.
- A Black Box system is one in which an individual partner's compensation is kept secret from the other partners.
- Trust in the leadership of a law firm is built upon the belief that compensation decisions are made based upon facts, contributions to the success of the firm, and the demonstrated support of the firm's culture.
It is early winter and amazingly cold, snowy, or rainy in many parts of the U.S. In Buffalo they recorded over 5' of snow in less than a week accompanied by winds of up to 45 mph and the Bills "was robed again" just like in 1992! Being from Western New York, I truly understand what a winter of discontent feels like.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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 All
Kirkland Is Entering a New Market. Will Its Rates Get a Warm Welcome?
5 minute read
'Utterly Bewildering': GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes
NC Attorney Earns Nearly $570K for $3.5M Reverse Discrimination Verdict, Appeal Against Health Care Employer
Trending Stories
- 1Treasury GC Returns to Davis Polk to Co-Chair White-Collar Defense and Investigations Practice
- 2Decision of the Day: JFK to Paris Stowaway's Bail Revocation Explained
- 3Doug Emhoff, Husband of Former VP Harris, Lands at Willkie
- 4LexisNexis Announces Public Availability of Personalized AI Assistant Protégé
- 5Some Thoughts on What It Takes to Connect With Millennial Jurors
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
