Prepare for the worst
Few law firm managers would place contingency planning at the top of their management agenda given the current economic climate. However, a number of factors suggest that the tide might be turning and less prosperous times could be on the horizon. It is therefore vital for firms to plan now for any future downturn to ensure they are in a strong position to ride out the storm.
June 20, 2007 at 09:14 PM
7 minute read
Few law firm managers would place contingency planning at the top of their management agenda given the current economic climate. However, a number of factors suggest that the tide might be turning and less prosperous times could be on the horizon. It is therefore vital for firms to plan now for any future downturn to ensure they are in a strong position to ride out the storm.
For now, the London financial services market is thriving and has been for some time. Both the simplified regulatory environment for smaller companies offered by London's Alternative Investment Market, and the restrictive Sarbanes-Oxley rules in the US, have made the UK an attractive place to do business. Private equity and M&A activity is booming, while City bonuses have hit record levels. However, the market must peak eventually and the warning signs are already out there.
Interest rates have increased significantly in percentage terms in the past couple of years and a further rise looks probable. Leading figures in the property sector have already called the top of the market. In the US, the collapse of the sub-prime lending market has sent ripples through the economy and could further threaten the stability of the UK financial services sector. All of these factors point towards a less stable economy, and law firms, along with other professional practices, must take note.
Many law firms have not factored such changes into their financial planning. When there is a downturn in work, these firms may have little to fall back on. Failure to prepare can be caused by many factors, from simple over-confidence to a lack of resources. All partners are extremely busy, with little time to sit down and plan; and managing partners may be too involved with client work to actively 'manage' the practice.
Younger lawyers will not have experienced the recession of the early 1990s, and the high demand and profits that are currently enjoyed can lead to a false sense of security throughout a firm.
A number of dangerous practices could lead some firms to suffer more than others during a downturn. Viewing only this year's profits as the paramount consideration and setting a budget with very little put aside for future investment or for harder times is a risk. Partners may wish to maintain their current lifestyles rather than fund future uncertainties, but this short-sightedness could prove catastrophic. Encouraging fee-earners to maximise billable hours at the expense of future development may also be unsustainable and lead to disappointment when levels of work fall, even if profits are still high in absolute terms.
Law firms can also be susceptible to a downturn due to a common lack of efficiency. With no immediate crisis to handle, there is often no emphasis on leanness or efficiency and underperformance goes unchecked. Even a slight reduction in billable time could cause serious problems, especially given currently high salary levels.
With firms finding talent rather than clients to be the limiting factor, some have allowed costs to escalate and substandard lawyers to coast along on the success of others. Not only are underperforming lawyers not weeded out, but in the race to attract new talent, vast sums of money are spent on recruitment. This creates unrealistic expectations and feeds an increasing desire for higher salaries. This cannot continue indefinitely and law firms' margins will ultimately suffer as a result.
This scenario is potentially very troubling. However, there are a number of 'best practice' measures that can be implemented to ensure that firms retain their competitive edge.
Prudent, well-managed practices will have a clear and focused strategy for their future. Whatever the economic climate, a firm needs a contingency strategy, supported by partners, and reviewed frequently. This strategy should be detailed in business plans giving specific actions and these plans should be split on a departmental or geographic zone basis.
Firms should impose tighter financial management systems. Running a firm as an efficient business means adhering to a simple adage: save for the future and make every penny count. Underperforming partners must be brought to task now to ensure the firm's long-term success. Just because there is enough money to go around does not mean that some partners should be allowed to ride on the coat-tails of others.
In busy periods, there is considerable investment in time and money on recruiting new staff. In the event of a downturn, however, a consequence may be the need to be review personnel levels. Severance payments and subsequent recruitment on the next upturn are both expensive. Consideration should be given, if possible, to recruiting new staff on a fixed-term contract basis to avoid expensive commitments if present activity levels drop.
Similarly, firms should be wary of taking on additional office space on a long-term contract. To a certain extent, staff levels can be flexible (even if the cost of losing them is high). However, property obligations are usually non-negotiable and can be a huge financial burden in times of cost-cutting. This is particularly true if a firm is looking to merge within the next few years; firms with no property ties are worth their weight in gold.
As well as looking internally, firms should keep an eye on their environment. Cycles of work in the market can often be anticipated and the firm's service range can evolve accordingly. For example, in the UK there is a danger that the currently booming private equity and M&A markets will quieten, leaving corporate lawyers far less busy. But what if a firm's corporate team is bringing in the highest fees? Firms should evaluate whether or not they have become overly dependent on a service which might fall off during a downturn.
Do they have an idea of what could go wrong in their primary markets? Or know which practice group is most heavily emphasised at the moment and what sort of work will they be doing for their clients? For example, the current boom in M&A work could be replaced by restructuring work next year.
If a firm's corporate finance team can adapt to corporate recovery work, the firm will be more resilient to this change in the market.
Marketing activity continues to be as important as ever, even when firms are not actively seeking new business. Business development and the improvement of client relationships are arguably just as vital as fee-earning, even if they take up resources at a time when client workloads are heavy.
Of course, the key to all of these measures is timely implementation. Any law firm that is starting to find itself rather too settled, even complacent, should reassess its strategy as soon as possible in order to adapt effectively to whatever challenges arise. Firms which build competitiveness into their businesses will find themselves in a strong position when times are hard in the market. There is no better time to do this than now – before it is too late.
David Furst is chairman and head of the professional practices group at Horwath Clark Whitehill.
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 All'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute read'Never Been More Dynamic': US Law Firm Leaders Reflect on 2024 and Expectations Next Year
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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