The Next Steps: What the Industry Needs to Do to Move Forward
The American Lawyer's editor-in-chief reflects on a week thinking about the big picture at the Legal Business Strategy conference.
March 02, 2020 at 12:45 PM
3 minute read
After spending several days in intense conversations with key stakeholders in the legal industry ecosystem at our Legal Business Strategy conference, the future of the delivery of legal services appears to come down to a few core themes and some important hurdles to overcome.
This is all based, of course, on the assumption that things do need to change—that, as some have said, the glacier is melting from below and even though the top looks solid, there will come a time when the foundation starts to melt away.
Law departments' needs are evolving. Yes, legal expertise from skilled lawyers will always be critical. But clients also want business guidance; tech access and support; benchmarking services and guidance in structuring their departments; data analytics to improve processes and outcomes; preventative law; and perhaps some matchmaking with other clients. This all adds up to sound a lot more like a consulting firm than a traditional law firm.
Even putting those "extras" aside, within traditional legal work, the concept of disaggregation is real, and happening in some counterintuitive ways. Axiom said it was recently hired by a large law firm to partner on a matter, at the direction of the client. Axiom's senior, on-demand lawyers handled the higher-end work, while the law firm sent its junior associates to work on smaller pieces of the matter and gain experience. Clients are buying services differently.
While clients are looking for a variety of service offerings, and a variety of prices within traditional offerings, one thing that became clear during our discussions was that they do not want to manage so many providers. They want their law firms to bring them prepackaged solutions.
Law firms have to get better at a few things: offering multidisciplinary services; collaborating with other providers; and the biggest challenge—figuring out a business model that allows them to do all this under one roof. The skill sets needed for legal service providers to effectively compete are evolving. And they can't all be charged out by the hour or at the same price and profitability model.
The legal service providers of the future may look a lot different in terms of the people they employ, how those people are charged out and who they work with. That, by extension, requires existing staffing levels to change, as well as pricing and compensation models.
There is significant change afoot in traditional law firms. It wouldn't be fair to suggest they aren't trying. But to make these changes and rely on the same workforce, pricing and comp models currently in place seems untenable to me.
There were more key takeaways from our Legal Business Strategy conference. Pay attention to deregulation of the law firm ownership rules in the United States—the Big Four certainly are. Pay attention to what law companies are doing and who they are partnering with. Focus on the skills needed for your attorneys and professionals to solve your clients' problems. Manage change from the bottom up, starting with small groups of evangelists. Find ways to invest in research and development. Think of your organization not just as a law firm, but a solutions provider. Does that change how it looks?
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 AllAI's Place in Big Law Broadens, As Firms Embrace Fresh Uses of the Technology
'Nerve-Wracking': Fires Disrupting but Not Halting Work of Distributed Firms' LA Lawyers
3 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