Strategic planning and innovation in the legal industry
To be truly innovative means looking outside ones industry and studying other successful business models to determine how they may transfer to the legal industry.
November 21, 2013 at 07:00 PM
9 minute read
Innovation is a word we hear quite frequently, specifically in the context of law firms needing to find ways to beat the competition and face a maturing industry's challenges head on in order to keep their firms alive. To be truly innovative means looking outside one's industry and studying other successful business models to determine how they may transfer to the legal industry. This is difficult to do even in the most strategic and visionary of companies, never mind adding a layer of skepticism, cynicism and disinterest in changing the way things work right now. It takes a thoughtful, patient and visionary leader to accomplish these goals.
Seyfarth Shaw's Chairman, Stephen Poor, has led his firm through a cultural transformation using education, Lean Six Sigma processes, technology investments and an emphasis on continuously improving on success along the way. His firm created new delivery models for its services in alignment with client needs through its Seyfarth Lean approach. When asked about his perspective on innovation, Poor comments, “Why have more law firms not been innovative in the broader, more classic sense of the term? Until recently, the market has not required anything approaching innovation. Think about the string of years from 2002 and 2008. All you had to do was get bigger and charge more money—that's hardly a business driver for innovation. You put together the lack of a burning platform along with the fact that most lawyers really resist change and it lays the foundation for why there has not been more innovation.”
General Counsel of FMC Technologies Jeffrey Carr agrees. “There is tremendous resistance to change. It really goes to the point of if you talk to a lawyer about being innovative, they seldom think of it in terms of reducing the demand for their services—reducing their billable hours. In my view everything the legal industry does falls into one of four boxes—process, content, advocacy and counseling. The latter two involved the truly distinguishing features of a lawyer—judgment.”
Carr adds, “We have a legal industry focused on the bottom two boxes, process and content, because those yield the most billable time. True innovation will occur when people realize that what customers want is value—which I define as obtaining the desired results—effectiveness with efficiency…. If firms increase throughput while decreasing waste and time, the firm may well make the same amount of money by focusing on profitability as opposed to top line revenue. Find ways to streamline and reduce the costs of the process and content parts, weave in alternative pricing for the judgment to the advocacy and counseling boxes, and now the new formula can change what you might charge for what a client highly values. That's a home run.”
This is assuming that clients and law firms are talking and aligning their goals with one another.
Adds Steve Poor, “It's different now than when we started down this path 10 years ago because there is much more of an external business case. For lawyers, the most important voice is often the voice of the client and it hits home when your clients are telling you the way you need to deliver services. That client voice has gotten much louder and many firms haven't been listening carefully. In two years, there have also been new entrants in terms of service providers which have changed the dynamic for a lot of firms, setting forth a new groundwork against which they need to change their business model.”
Jeff Carr adds, “The next stage of innovation comes with a focus on efficiencies—on taking the hour delivery cost reductions and multiplying that with absolute hourly reductions. Where will we see that next? Perhaps in contract review—using artificial intelligence to take time out of the process and increase the quality and repeatability of results. Does it need to happen? Yes. Will it happen? It already is. Should this mantra apply to all legal services? Absolutely. Will it? Perhaps.”
Innovation is a word we hear quite frequently, specifically in the context of law firms needing to find ways to beat the competition and face a maturing industry's challenges head on in order to keep their firms alive. To be truly innovative means looking outside one's industry and studying other successful business models to determine how they may transfer to the legal industry. This is difficult to do even in the most strategic and visionary of companies, never mind adding a layer of skepticism, cynicism and disinterest in changing the way things work right now. It takes a thoughtful, patient and visionary leader to accomplish these goals.
General Counsel of
Carr adds, “We have a legal industry focused on the bottom two boxes, process and content, because those yield the most billable time. True innovation will occur when people realize that what customers want is value—which I define as obtaining the desired results—effectiveness with efficiency…. If firms increase throughput while decreasing waste and time, the firm may well make the same amount of money by focusing on profitability as opposed to top line revenue. Find ways to streamline and reduce the costs of the process and content parts, weave in alternative pricing for the judgment to the advocacy and counseling boxes, and now the new formula can change what you might charge for what a client highly values. That's a home run.”
This is assuming that clients and law firms are talking and aligning their goals with one another.
Adds Steve Poor, “It's different now than when we started down this path 10 years ago because there is much more of an external business case. For lawyers, the most important voice is often the voice of the client and it hits home when your clients are telling you the way you need to deliver services. That client voice has gotten much louder and many firms haven't been listening carefully. In two years, there have also been new entrants in terms of service providers which have changed the dynamic for a lot of firms, setting forth a new groundwork against which they need to change their business model.”
Jeff Carr adds, “The next stage of innovation comes with a focus on efficiencies—on taking the hour delivery cost reductions and multiplying that with absolute hourly reductions. Where will we see that next? Perhaps in contract review—using artificial intelligence to take time out of the process and increase the quality and repeatability of results. Does it need to happen? Yes. Will it happen? It already is. Should this mantra apply to all legal services? Absolutely. Will it? Perhaps.”
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
© 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 All3 GOP States Join Paid Sick Leave Movement, Passing Ballot Measures by Wide Margins
5 minute readQuantum Computing Company to Part With General Counsel
Ten Best Practices to Protect Your Organization Against Cyber Threats
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Lock-Maker's Veteran GC Takes Old Job Back After Successor Lasts Just 3 Months
- 2Judge Sets April Retrial Date in Sarah Palin Defamation Action Against NY Times
- 3HSF and Kramer Levin Leaders Set Out Merger Timeline, Structure
- 4'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
- 5Doctrine of ‘Practical Location,’ Breach of a Commercial Lease: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
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