Are Consultants Making Law Firms Worse?
First, please allow me to acknowledge that no, I am not particularly into self-denigration. I am also well aware that I am, in fact, a consultant to the legal industry. This article is not intended to be an attack on any individuals or even the profession as a whole. Think of it instead as a reset; as an opportunity for reflection and advancement.
September 27, 2017 at 04:44 PM
6 minute read
Smart Strategy
First, please allow me to acknowledge that no, I am not particularly into self-denigration. I am also well aware that I am, in fact, a consultant to the legal industry. This article is not intended to be an attack on any individuals or even the profession as a whole. Think of it instead as a reset; as an opportunity for reflection and advancement.
Many law firm consultants and management teams are experts in the mechanics of law firm financials—RPL, PPEP, utilization, realization and the like. They wax poetic about the value of originations and working attorney figures, advocate formulaic compensation models, debate the merits of two-tier partnership structures and guide law firms through facilitated discussions of strategy and practice management. What if the truth is that none of these matter—or, more accurately, they matter a lot less than they used to? What if tomorrow's law firm simply didn't have any of these—no more measuring of time in six-minute increments, no more quibbling over origination credit, no more hardline divisions between practice areas (gasp!)?
As with many adages, “you are what you measure” speaks truth when it comes to law firm management. The persistent, and seemingly unflappable, connection law firms—and many of their consultants—have to yesterday's metrics and methods of performance fly in the face of achieving many, if not all, of the changes demanded by new law firm economics. Encouraging lawyers to put more hours on the board will not drive lasting results. Nor will measuring performance based solely on year-over-year gains in revenue, or maintaining formulation-based compensation structures that value production hours over origination (often by a factor of 2:1). All of these approaches emphasize quantity over quality.
This content has been archived.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 AllRemembering Am Law 100 Firm Founder and 'Force of Nature' Stephen Cozen
5 minute readEckert Seamans Snags Reed Smith Global Financial Intelligence Director
3 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