Mimicking Clients, Barnes & Thornburg Launches Legal Ops Department
The name represents an effort to more broadly integrate the use of legal operations skills across the entire firm, such as bringing specialized pricing staff into client meetings.
March 08, 2019 at 01:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
Indianapolis-based Barnes & Thornburg is borrowing in-house terminology to better align itself with clients—and to try to stand out from other firms in the process.
The Am Law 100 firm is launching a “legal operations department,” mimicking language that has been used on the in-house side to describe a suite of efficiency-focused services such as budgeting, project management and technology-supported legal work.
The name represents an effort to more broadly integrate the use of legal operations skills across the entire firm, such as bringing specialized pricing staff into client meetings.
Law firms have used a menagerie of terms and titles to indicate they are trying to work more efficiently: Appointing pricing directors, chief innovation officers and chief value officers, for example.
But a growing list of firms are embracing the “legal operations” tag. Baker McKenzie last year hired David Cambria, sometimes referred to as “the godfather of legal operations,” as the global firm's first global director of legal operations.
The firm is not starting from scratch. Its newly named department will consist of six staff members at the firm who have already made up its BT ValueWorks brand of services. That offering, launched in 2015, provides firm lawyers help on pricing and alternative fees, budgeting and forecasting, matter management software and more.
Jared Applegate, previously the firm's pricing director and co-founder of BT ValueWorks, will have the new title of chief legal operations officer.
Scaling up the use of efficiency-focused disciplines such as legal project management is a challenge that many law firms have faced after finding pockets of success. Those challenges are not strictly internal to law firms. Many clients do not require their firms use things like budgets or alternative fees.
But Applegate and others said the latest move at Barnes & Thornburg was a response to the growing ranks of “legal operations” professionals inside clients' legal departments.
“We have seen our clients' approach and evolution with legal operations, and those individuals are now having a seat at the table,” Applegate said. “And we wanted to make it crystal clear that this is exactly what we have been doing at BT ValueWorks.”
|
➤ Want to read more on the evolving legal services industry? Check out The Law Firm Disrupted, a weekly email briefing from Law.com. Learn more.
The firm said that its BT ValueWorks launched in 2016 and has managed more than 370 matters. Last year it managed work accounting for more than $100 million in revenue at the firm—making up about a quarter of Barnes & Thornburg's $406 million in total revenue in 2018. The firm had 557 lawyers last year, and it says more than 200 have undergone training on legal operations.
|In the Pitch Meeting
Connie Lahn, the managing partner of Barnes & Thornburg's Minneapolis office, said she won a bankruptcy matter after bringing Applegate into a pitch meeting last year.
Having a legal operations focus in the meeting changed the nature of the conversations, she said. The client, who also had a legal operations professional involved, essentially had two discussions: One with Applegate about the financial metrics the legal department was looking to show to its business partners; the other with Lahn about her plan for the legal work.
“They would tell Jared: 'Here is what we need to report to our board, so how can you help us do that?'” Lahn said. “They wouldn't say that to me as the lawyer. They would say, 'Our direction is to maximize our recovery.'”
Since that experience with Applegate, Lahn, co-chair of the firm's asset revitalization and special servicer teams, said she has brought him into meetings with clients who don't have legal operations professionals. She has also become more comfortable discussing the business side of legal work, which is a conversation she said has felt “untoward or non-professional” in the past.
“It's part of the relationship, so we should be comfortable talking about money. But for some reason, we're not,” Lahn said.
She added that she was currently working on sending out or revising budgets for three different matters. “This is the way we probably should have been practicing law many, many decades ago,” she said. “It allows us to be up-front about cost.”
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Offices & Dragons
- 2Patent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
- 3Transforming Dispute Processes in Law: The Impact of Large Language Models
- 4Daniel Habib to Serve as Next Attorney-in-Charge of NY Federal Defender Appeals Unit
- 5Protecting Attorney-Client Privilege in the Modern Age of Communications
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