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
© 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
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