34. Law Firms Use All the Wrong Metrics to Define Success
There isn't a client anywhere who allocates work based on "revenue per lawyer" or "profit per equity partner." These things may be the results of good performance — but they don't define performance. Even so, these metrics are firmly established as the tools which law firms use to judge their own success.
October 03, 2024 at 04:05 PM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Lean Adviser
"Your success will always be measured by the quality and quantity of service you render" — Earl Nightingale, Radio presenter and author
What truly defines success for law firms? This is the question posed by Caroline Byrne this week in an article on Law.com International. Caroline's piece helpfully identified the usual metrics which law firms use to define success. These include:
- Revenue;
- Headcount growth;
- Revenue per lawyer;
- Billable hours; &
- Profit per equity partner
Sound familiar? But from a Lean Adviser standpoint, one thing immediately jumps out. Law firms use these metrics to measure performance and success, but clients do not. This matters because these measures may say something about progress against peers, but they don't say anything about performance.
There isn't a client anywhere who allocates work based on "revenue per lawyer" or "profit per equity partner." These things may be the results of good performance — but they don't define performance.
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
Former Federal Judge Christopher Conner Joins Saxton & Stump as Attorney and Shareholder
2 minute read
Fellows LaBriola LLP is Pleased to Announce that Alisha Goel Has Become Associated with The Firm
1 minute read
'Where Were the Lawyers?' Judge Blocks Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Data Disposition—Conquering the Seemingly Unscalable Mountain
- 2Who Are the Judges Assigned to Challenges to Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order?
- 3Litigators of the Week: A Directed Verdict Win for Cisco in a West Texas Patent Case
- 4Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 5Womble Bond Becomes First Firm in UK to Roll Out AI Tool Firmwide
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
