41. Retaining Market Position
Retention Part 3: Market Position Law firm leaders looking at retaining market position need to think in terms of long-term sustainability, not short-term profitability or rankings. Any firm can have a spike or a dip for a host of reasons, but what matters is trends over time, not this year's tables.
March 08, 2024 at 11:47 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Lean Adviser
In our miniseries on "retention" we've looked at separately at both client and talent retention. That sounds like everything, right? Keep the clients and keep the talent. Almost, but not quite. This lesson picks up on the issue which follows naturally in this flow — retaining market position.
The reason the AmLaw 100, 200, mid-market, PEP tables and every other index exists is because law firm leaders care. We can debate how much it means to clients — less than you'd assume — but it matters for sure to law firms.
So, at a time of client volatility, when Big Law is losing business among themselves and to the midmarket, in-house and ALSPs, the focus on retaining market position has never been more acute.
Retaining market position in a challenging climate is a familiar theme for us at Lean Adviser. Take our very popular discussion on future proofing as an example, and you can see how it's the rationale for so much of what we do here. (We summarized the start of the Future Proofing series thusly: "Future Proofing is about reframing the way law firms align themselves to clients, deliver services and support talent. This lesson starts with Future Proofing fundamentals for law firms — technology, real estate and people — and how to anticipate the future and protect against it.")
Our steer for law firm leaders looking at retaining market position, is to think in terms of long-term sustainability, not short-term profitability or rankings. Any firm can have a spike or a dip for a host of reasons, but what matters is trends over time, not this year's tables.
In his book "The Infinite Game", Simon Sinek explains it like this: "An infinite mindset embraces abundance whereas a finite mindset operates with a scarcity mentality. In the Infinite Game we accept that 'being the best' is a fool's errand and that multiple players can do well at the same time."
The point for us is that the difference between a blip and a sustainable trend isn't about having clients and talent, it's about having the right clients, the right talent, and how you invest in them. Here's an easy quiz to help you see where you are on this journey:
- Are we a client-facing organization that looks to solve problems and build durable relationships, or are we willing to churn and burn to keep up?
- Do we achieve profitability by investing in people and tech or by making cuts?
- Do we see our associates as learners or just earners?
- Do our clients exist to support our rankings, or do we exist to support their businesses?
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
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