Why Financial Transparency Benefits Law Firms and Clients
The nation’s largest law firms have no obligation to report their financial results to the public, however, in the today’s climate, financial…
August 24, 2017 at 09:17 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The nation's largest law firms have no obligation to report their financial results to the public, however, in the today's climate, financial transparency is becoming more and more important. Clients are asking more details today about the financial state of their law firms, and even potential hires are interested in taking a closer look.
David Goldenberg, founding partner of VLP Law Group, sat down with Inside Counsel for an exclusive interview about the importance of financial transparency both for law firms and their clients and how firms like VLP are successfully implementing this practice.
“Law firms have no obligation to report their financial results to the public and while that sounds more ominous than it is, it's because they are private partnerships,” Goldenberg said. “Some of this information, such as profits per partner, is publicly disclosed, but these are often reported according to an industry standard rather than from actual data. For instance, several corporate law firms typically publish annual revenues and profits.”
Since there are no third-party standards, each firm may report information differently, making it hard to make industry-wide comparisons. Historically, the legal industry has looked to some of these legal outlets for financial information about the country's largest law firms. Unless you dig in to how the survey was conducted, there can be pitfalls with relying on that information. Following the financial collapse of some large firms, more firms are reporting because clients are asking more questions about the financial state of the firms they employ and prospective hires are also looking closely at firms' finances before making career decisions.
In today's changing climate, according to Goldenberg, a culture of transparency is good for business. As law firms have grown in size and complexity, the contract between firm and attorney has eroded. Firms are now run more like corporations and attorneys are making a financial decision when joining a firm. Transparency helps create an atmosphere of trust throughout this process. And, clients now have power in shaping the attorney-client relationship and are asking law firms to provide more value at a reduced cost.
“Increasingly clients across the board want to see more value for what they spend on legal services,” he explained. “These shifts in the profession have prompted firms to take a hard look at how they provide legal services. This focus and value has challenged law firms to review and change their business models. Smart firms continue to embrace the changes in the legal profession, which can only increase their business development opportunities.”
Most large law firms use variable compensation – what partners earn is based on the firm's profitability and lawyers don't always know how much they will earn until the end of the year. In addition, many larger firms are now run by a small management group comprised of partners in management roles and the firm's business executives. In many firms with this management structure, partners may be some of the last to know about the firm's finances. The collapse of large law firms, the prolonged fights for clients, profits and with creditors, have had many attorneys questioning the financial transparency of their own firms.
“Partners who know and understand how their firm allocates resources will be better attorneys and help create better law firms,” he said. “When a firm's finances are transparent, attorneys will be more able to focus on practicing law, rather than being distracted by financial issues.”
More openness when it comes to the law firm's financial goals can encourage an important discussion, advised Goldenberg. The financial model will point out the amount of revenue needed to achieve the firm's goals for the year and how the firm expects to achieve that revenue broken down by month.
He added, “These goals are essential to achieving desired results and it keeps everyone involved in the challenges of meeting the law firm's goal. This sharing of information can promote better collaboration and sharing of work to keep everyone more productive and the firm on track.”
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 AllTrump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
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