Wash. Rinse. Repeat. How law firms 'yesterday' usage of today's attorney is a recipe for failure.

sta·bil·i·ty :

the quality or state of something that is not easily changed or likely to change.

the condition of being reliable or unlikely to change suddenly or greatly.

Let's review the typical line for the typical associate at a BigLaw firm. Associate with excellent credential's joins law firm. Associate comes in at 9:30 am and stays until 11:00pm creating the appearance of being one of the hard workers, in hopes of ingratiating him or herself with the powers that be at the firm. Associate works really hard, sacrificing time with friends and family, because as the saying goes in BigLaw "firm first." Mentor-ship is limited for the hardworking associate; business development training is non-existent. All of the associates firm time is spent servicing the clients of the partner for whom that associate works for clients that the associate rarely, if ever has contact with. Three years pass and the associate is working as hard as ever. Four, five, six, seven, and then year eight comes. That's when the the review comes and the associate is taken into a room and told that all thought they are a good attorney who does good work, they are not going to be considered for partner because the firm feels the associate lacks business development acumen. You have not developed client service skills. That the partners feel that you haven't set yourself apart from your fellow associates when it comes to leadership. Thank you for your service. Goodbye. Time to bring on a new class of associates.

Now what happens when these firms go out with the old and in with the new?  Some firms have a smooth transition buts most, and far too many require 'ramp up time' for these new associates. The client is now being charged for time that an associate needs to work on the case and review case matter that had previously been reviewed. Paying twice for the same service. No one wants that would you pay from some one to clean your shirt that you just brought home from the cleaners? Many of the  Biglaws clients never catch on to this rouse, but with those who do, the firm client relationship usually doesn't end well.

There is also a client relationship issue that comes along with this formula. Some of the more senior associates, become the point of contact or the day to day intermediary between the client and the firm. The client talk get to know these associates and become comfortable interacting with a particular person or persons only to find out that one day that person has been asked to leave the firm in a month or two.This erodes at the bonds of the clients loyalty, making it easier for that client to consider taking future elsewhere when a new suitor firm comes along asking for the business.

This practice is also not cost-effective. To pay out severance for the former associates and turn around and pay for orientation and working the new associates up to speed is a flawed.  For about 1/4 of that cost the firm could invest in the associates professional development and create a line of capable, disciplined attorneys who groom clients in a consistent manner. What it would also do is strengthen loyalty with the attorney ranks, so when that alternate opportunity comes around when that attorney is a partner with the firm, that person will have a stronger bond to stay with the firm because they will have a stronger belief that their current firm was and still is an integral part of their practice being successful.

Reputation and associate loyalty also takes a hit as well. Once a firm gets a reputation of a 'churn and burn' the associates inside that firm begin to plot the mass exodus after year two or three. This leaves a gap in skillful 'home grown' talent that in a supportive environment could be groomed to be loyal and consistent assets to the firm. Image a class of associates that where 75-80% of those associates spend 15 or more years with that firm, helping to shape and maintain firm culture and standards. A firm where the clients can breathe easy and rely on long lasting and consistent relationships with the attorneys that service their business.

Law firms need to pull away from the 1980's law firm culture. Churn and burn is not a recipe for success in the 21st century. Associates have changed, they value fulfillment more than monetary gain. Corporations and clients have changed, they value relationships, communication and specialized service. This is more important to clients than the 101 year old reputation of a firm with bloated fee rates.

So BigLaw, before you stick that seventh or eighth year associate in the dirty bucket maybe you should be sure that you have exhausted all means of helping this attorney be successful because you just may be throwing the keys to the long term success of your firm in the wash unknowingly.

Gregory Copeland is Executive Vice President of Reuben/Alan LLC, a legal consulting and strategy firm, He is also Managing Partner of its sister company Marshall Graham, an attorney search firm. 

The Millennium Falcon is in Cloud City- Law Firms Need to Join Them.

There is a growing disconnect between the evolving and emerging workforce and traditional law firm operation, and I think this is a battle the law firms will lose. So rather than stay with the Old Republic, law firms need to join the group of progressive thinkers in Cloud City.

What am I talking about? Let me start off giving you an example that may help see where I'm going.
I was working with a very talented corporate attorney in the Midwest who maintained an impressive portable book of origination that exceed a 2 million dollar value. His book business was all national in nature, not tied to a specific region. To most firms in the BigLaw world, this is a valuable and viable candidate, particularly in the corporate realm in an economy that is finding its way back to pre-2007 form. This particular attorney had a residence in the southwest and was seeking to relocate. This attorney had a child in high school in the Midwest and for a year he would have to split his time between his homes in the two regions.

I presented this attorney to one of the three firms in which was interested in to both of our surprises the firm rejected the candidate because he would not be located in the Southwest city immediately.
The entire conversation that I had with the law firm recruiting director was ridiculous. The powers that be at the firm were almost offended that I would present a candidate that would have to split his time between the Midwest and Southwest. This was unheard of. It was unthinkable. Imagine, someone working from a location where the firm had no brick and mortar office? That's not how that hiring committee had been programmed in their traditional legal careers. That's not how they made their bones. You had to be in the office where someone can physically see you be productive. No, No. No. This won't work at all.

In true disbelief, I asked my contact if they ever had attorneys who would work while on vacation or did the attorneys just go dark when they left the office? The answer, of course was "Yes." Of course, I had to ask "where is the difference?"  I know that a vacation is only temporary, what I was asking is was there any difference as to how the means of communication were delivered or how information was shared when someone was on vacation. Did the law firm lack a secured network or was there no access to the work email server once the attorneys left the brick and mortar? I was told "Well, of course they work off a VPN."

Let that soak in for a minute. So the firm has the means and tools in place for their attorneys to work out of office, yet they are not open to providing flexibility for a season and proven attorney who would bring so many positives to the firm. Now you may say that the firm doesn't want to open up a can of worms. That they don't want to go down that slippery slope. Next thing you know because one is allowed to, so many more will want to be afforded the same opportunity to work from home or off-sight. Think of all the "OOO" return emails.

Let me let you all in on a secret. This is 2016, not 1988. Gone are the days when a person had to actually be in the office to perform office functions. I understand wanting the junior associates to be in the office so that they can learn the ways of the force, but for a seasoned partner who has a proven track record and reputation of gaining, developing and producing? That is ridiculous.

For Millennials, who will soon enough comprise the majority of the workforce, flexibility with work hours and personal fulfillment take precedence over anything else- including money. It will be common twenty years from now for a successful law firm attorney to work off-site the majority, if not all of the time. Why are law firms so hesitant to begin that cultural transition now? It will be those slow to the party that will struggle to hold on to top talent in the coming years. In these era when staying with IBM for forty years doesn't exist anymore, firms need to realize that this is a candidate's workforce. Making yourself more attractive and flexible to top talent will be essential to survival as we move further into the 21st century and shed out 20th century standards. It is time that law firms move of the ice planet Hoth and head over to Cloud City where the citizens welcome the future.

Law Firm Fee Flexibility Will Attract The New Generation of Rainmaker

Flexibility:  Susceptible of modification or adaptation; adaptable.

As I speak to junior partners and senior associates who are soon to be eligible for partnership, one topic that seems to frequently cross the minds and lips of these talented attorneys is the concern that the rigid fee structure of their current firm will hamper the potential of their client and business development. As I hear this more and more, it is a concern that is very real and very important to the future of the modern firm to remain viable and avoid the pitfalls that many firms will face as this world's economy changes. Unfortunately, the powers that be at many of the current  Biglaw firms do not seem to concern themselves much with this matter. The rise of the emerging technology, a new generation of idealists, and a movement towards true flexibility will  be some of the determining factors that a new generation of rainmakers will consider as they decide where to move and park their business as they search for a platform that will be compatible with their up and coming client base.

As more effort is put in to create the latest apps and the next great social networking site. As investors invest in ventures such as biometrics, wireless energy transfers, and artificial intelligence, corporations both emerging and established are more and more seeking to cut the costs of their ventures. One of the first places that corporations look when seeking to trim costs is the cost of legal fees. Now more than ever corporations are making decisions based on the ability of law firms to be fee flexible. Though we are seeing a trend of large firms mergers and the acquisitions of local firms, if you look carefully there is also a trend of partners and groups breaking off to form their own boutiques in an effort to preserve their clients with the offering of fee flexibility that most mega firms will not allow those attorneys to maintain.

We will soon be entering the age of the Millennials as more and more young millionaires sprout for the age of technology. This young money comes with no loyalty to "my father's firm." They don't care what color you claim your firm's shoes are. Millennials have less loyalty to tradition and are drawn more toward flexibility and convenience. The traditional law firm pitch won't work on them. You will not get their business just because you are who you say you are. The stiff collar old school model of law firm turns this group off. The stiff collar old school firm only attracts the stiff collar old school client. Old money eventually dies.

The question for you and you firm is do you want to be Las Vegas or are you going to be Atlantic City? There was a time when both Las Vegas and Atlantic City were boom towns for gaming. Over the years, Las Vegas has continuously reinvented and transformed itself, adding attractions other than the casinos and adapting to the ever- changing trends of social evolution. Atlantic City on the other hand refused to expand beyond the casinos and tourism began do die down. Why go to AC if I don't gamble? I hear it all the time. Why go to Vegas if I don't gamble? There are hundreds of reasons why, and those who frequent the town will be more than happy to explain. This is the challenge for today's Biglaw. Do you want to adapt to the wants and need of the new generation and provide your attorneys with the 'entertainment ' of fee flexibility? Or will you stay stuck in your old Atlantic City ways and hope the those old 'casinos' of traditional fee structures won't lead to a lot of abandoned 'used to be.'

How will your firm attract the new generation of  rainmaker? Will you provide that platform of true fee flexibility, or will you allow the future of your firm to move to a platform that offers multiple forms of success? Decide now, because in five years it will be too late. Ask Atlantic City.
.


             

Making yourself valuable: What young attorneys need to know but are never taught about developing a practice.

We have all seen the movie- good, bad, or indifferent. Something out of the ordinary happens in a trial or legal setting and one attorney turns to the other and says matter-of-factly "They didn't teach us that in law school." It all ends in a quick chuckle. Good filler, but hat line is not so funny when it is being uttered  by a young attorney when he is approached by firm leadership regarding the ability- or inability to develop his own clients when consideration for partnership becomes a factor.

Since the economic downturn of ' 07-09, the legal landscape has changed and in particular firms have been asking for and putting value on added skill set of an associate's ability, or potential ability to develop, build and nurture a client base. Unfortunately, for some reason, far too many attorneys haven't gotten that memo.

As a  recruiter I engage in conversations with a several attorneys on a weekly basis. As I speak to these attorneys and potential candidates, many reasons are given for why they are exploring career options. In the last four years, one of the most common, if not the most common reason given to me by attorneys who are at year nine and beyond is "My firm is changing its business model." on the surface it sounds very general but with in a few questions what I already know is usually confirmed. This person is a senior associate or partner that has very little or no originated business and their law firm is putting the squeeze on them to start developing business or they will be in danger of being let go.

The issue here is that this attorney has spent the last ten years of his legal career depending servicing the practices of others. Now this attorney has become too expensive, drawing a too high of a salary to just be servicing the business the others bring in. The time has come for her to begin pay for herself- and this attorney has no clue how to do so.

A few months ago I sat with the Miami office managing partner of a global firm and in our conversations he expressed to me how he was perplex that so many mid-level  and senior attorneys had no idea how important it was to develop business and build their own book. When I asked have you expressed to the attorneys upon hire that this is a very important skillset that they should develop to be successful? His response was " This is something that attorneys should know once they enter a firm. The importance is present in front of them daily. For someone to not know this by year six or seven is a total lack of awareness."

I could not argue with that. Yet, I still have several conversations a month where a candidate tells me. "I don't want to develop business. That's not what I do." My common response is that it's what you need to start doing if you want a lengthy and stable legal career. I can't even begin to tell you the number of  "partner level"  who are out on the street looking for a firm, or those who are currently at a firm but unhappy and in limbo because they have no or a very insignificant portable book of business. Far too many attorneys fail to grasp the importance of developing their own business and thus increasing  their value in the career marketplace. It's a tough conversation explaining to someone that in many ways they have made themselves expendable. The following are the reasons why I stress to these candidates on why developing business is so important:

When you develop business you can set yourself for a position of leadership within your firm. Young associates please take a careful look around your firm and try and count how many attorneys in your firm that do not have a significant book of clients hold a substantial position of leadership in your firm? How many of these attorneys are making the game changing decisions. If there were many, your firm would not be "changing its business model." Law firms,   no matter how idealistic we all were about the law coming out of law school, are a business. Not unlike so many other organizations, those who posses the ability to bring the most profit to the company hold the most influence. This is why the partner with the three million dollar book is given the more autonomous latitude than that guy whose been at the firm for twenty years and only services the work of others. If you have a desire for firm leadership; If you want to be considered valuable to your firm; If you want to help dictate firm policy- you have better have a book worth listening to.

In a crisis market, you can save yourself. If history has taught us anything its to be prepared. When 2008 hit and the mass layoffs led to a market flood of partner level attorneys with no client base, one trend we did notice was law firms willingness to hold on to and gamble on those partners who may have lost the actual fee generation but had a track record of or displayed  a strong future potential to develop business. These attorneys were allowed to stay and wait out the downturn and even had the option to work on the matters of attorneys who had not been as affected by the crisis. Those who can hunt will be the last one's thrown from the village.

Another often overlooked advantage to developing your own client base is the ability to be mobile with your practice. Let's not sugar coat it. Things happen. A firm doesn't have flexible rates,  has adverse political ties, doesn't have the proper resources to cross-service etc...These are the issues that arise for attorneys and their practice. These are the issues that often times force attorneys to look for an alternate platform. Competing firms want and need these attorneys who may be able to diversify or strengthen the firms service groups. Those with a book, in particular a significant book will always hold the flexibility to be able to explore alternate platforms or negotiate a better situation for themselves at their current firm. Kelsey Grammar continues to have options for television shows, George Wendt- not so much.

Stay valuable to your firm, position yourself for leadership and develop and maintain the ability to be mobile of the need arises. This is what should be taught in a seminar for third year law students who dare enter the world of Biglaw. Make yourself valuable so that you don't regret going to law school ten years after the fact when you are out on the street with no firm because your cost outweighs your value. Take control. That's what they didn't teach us in law school.

Legal Arena Starting to Look A Lot Like Sports (A Revisit)

"I've never seen anything like this." How many times have you been in a conversation with someone and either you or that person had said that when talking about the current economic market and its impact on BigLaw? With all of the dynamic moves of partners, the freeze on hiring associates, the firm collapses such as the most recent examples of Howery and Dewey and even with people such as Marc S. Drier driving his firm into the ground, this all seems strange and foreign to us- but is it really?
I can't but help thinking that we have seen this all before, only in a different market....sports. I know you may think I'm crazy, but let's just compare and contrast for a minute.
For those of you who are sports fans let's float back to a time when the baseball players had a reserve clause and when you were with an NFL team, they owned you for your career- or until they didn't want you anymore. That's how it was in the early days of Biglaw. An Associate, would come into the fold, work his or her way up to Partner and retire as Of Counsel. There was little movement from firm to firm except for those exceptional few- the Babe Ruth's of the legal world if you will.

...and then came Curt Flood

All of a sudden in the 90's with the Biglaw's love affair with the lockstep, Associates began to firm hop. Three years here, four years there. With the pay mostly in unison , associates could take that step and test free agency knowing that if they moved to a competitor they would be compensated the same. The risk of moving was lessened. Loyalty was gone. Johnny Damon moved to New York. Brett Farve was trying to play for the Vikings. Associates began to test the market more and more and asses their value to both there firms and their competitors. The talent wars, which had historically occurred in the law schools and amongst that group, had now spilled out into the "street" of firm life.

.....and then came Nick Saban and Larry Brown
With the Players all jumping ship after "Plan B" free agency, the fans could never depend on the loyalty of a player again, but one thing they could always count on is that the captain of the ship, the head coach would be there through and through for the team....That is until Nick Saban and Larry Brown came around-the genius coach that could turn any team around- for the right price. What we are seeing now in these slow times is a drop in the stock on the "player" or the Associates and a rise in the stock in the "coaches"- the Partners.

Partner recruiting is now hotter than ever, and in the past 24 months there has been a record number of lateral moves by senior and junior partners. So not only are Nick Saban and Larry Brown changing teams, but so are the Tom Creen's and Norv Tuners of the legal world.The times of loyalty and and the 20-year stay are gone. We just have to get used to attorney movement and accept it as a part of the business, just as we have to accept that Jay Cutler plays for the Bears.

So the next time you or your friend say "I've never seen anything like this," all you need to do is turn on ESPN and you will have it right in front of you.

HEY?! WHO IS INTERVIEWING WHO?

We all have been in an interview at one time or another in our professional careers. We have all felt that anxiety build before, during or after the interview. "Will they like me?" "Do they like me?" " Did they like me?" The interview process is is the most crucial step in a new career or in a career change. A career decision is one of the most crucial steps a person will make in there lives. An employer takes the time to thoroughly screen a potential employee (most anyway). Interview questions, background checks, reference checks -some even ask for credit checks. They are even throwing away privacy taboos and asking for Facebook and email passwords to check up on candidates and their personal habits (more on this some other time). That employer wants to take very step to insure that they are hiring the right person into their company. For the most part, employers are not afraid to ask the tough questions....So then why are job seekers?



I mentioned earlier that a career decision is one of the most important decisions you will make in your life. It's right up there alongside, getting married and buying a house. So how come most of us don't treat it that way? I mean, would you buy a house without seeing the inside or the backyard? Without an appraisal or inspections? Would you marry someone without seeing them with their makeup off? I hope not! Then why do we accept job offers without asking our employers the hard questions?.... Because most of us are afraid to ask those hard questions. We shouldn't be.



"I came across a few articles that stated that this company has lost profits two years in a row, Is this something I should be concerned with?"



"Is this a position where I am replacing someone or is this a newly created position? If I am replacing someone, what is the turnover rate of this position?"




"If I were to speak with former employees of this company, what do you think they would have to say about this company and its culture?"




"How often is my performance reviewed and what is the basis and method that you use as an assessment of my performance?"



Where is the wrong in asking your perspective employer questions like these? There is nothing wrong with it. In fact, you are completely in the right to do so. Most people don't because they think they will blow the interview of they do. That the perspective employer will view them as a problem in waiting or someone who will be "high maintenance." That if the tough questions are asked, the job offer will never come. I'm here to say that if that employer won't extend an offer because you ask the hard questions, then that is an offer you don't want. If that person thinks you are going to be trouble, then its no the right place for you, because eventually you will be trouble. I don't mean trouble as in a trouble maker. I mean trouble as in an unhappy and therefore not fully productive person.



Knowing who and what you company is and whether this place will be a place that fits you entirely is important for you to thrive as a professional. How can you thrive if you are worried that the company will collapse and fold in a year? Or that you could lose your job because your direct manager is never happy, or his abrasive personality chases you away like the three people who held your title before you? You can't function like that. You can't thrive- and every employer should want employees to thrive right? Asking the tough questions eliminates those little surprises that turn into large surprises that lead to employee turnover. Many of our resignations, firings, or downsizing would never have to us had we not been afraid to ask the hard questions and dug a little deeper into the resume of our employers.



Your potential employer wants to know everything there is to possibly know about you professionally and sometimes learn as much about you on a personal level before they extend an offer. What's wrong with seeing them without their make up?

How Do You Say "Conflicts" in Japanese?

It is Hot!







Electronics manufacturers, Auto manufacturers, Auto Parts manufacturers, Pharmaceuticals....all in litigation. There are so many Japanese related companies in adverse situations that I'm thinking about buying Rosetta Stone and catching a piece of the document review action that's going around.







Since the middle of last year the value of the Japanese fluent reviewer- both attorney and non attorney has risen %50. If you are fluent in Japanese, Now would seem to be the time to rack up on as many projects as possible!...or is it?







What many of the reviewers, firms and agencies have forgotten about in this golden age of Kanji that though litigation may be infinite, the number of reviewers are fixed. What ever are you talking about Gregory??? Well my friend I'm talking about a little thing called conflicting out.







Simple math will tell you that when you have a fixed number going up against and infinite pooling that the numbers are sure to repeat. ( Huh?). Sorry about that. basically when you have so many cases in need of Japanese language reviewers many of the reviewers will conflict out based on their prior review experiences. I personally have seen some of the lists that firms and companies have drawn up that will eliminate reviewers from contention. One of the firm's list was five pages long.







Worked on electronics?- sorry!



Pharmaceuticals?- Nope!



Auto- Better luck next time!







Now think about this- Most of the discovery hasn't even mad its way to the Plaintiffs in the case yet. Now how are they going to find people?... you can get Rosetta Stone for a real good price on eBay I heard.







So how do we fix this problem and save the world?...Maybe the reigns of the conflicts qualifications need to be loosened a little by the firms? Maybe exclusivity on reviewers needs to be given to firms? Some firms have asked that reviewers sign an agreement where they pledge not to take on any projects at other firms for 6-12 months. What???



This has long been a discussion amount recruiters and firms in the legal industry. Does a document reviewer electronically tagging documents actually provide the type of "representation" on a matter that would qualify as a conflict?







Well lets look at the Model Rules of Professional Conduct and figure this out. I guess the key verb in this would be "represent."

a) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.

(b) A lawyer shall not knowingly represent a person in the same or a substantially related matter in which a firm with which the lawyer formerly was associated had previously represented a client

(1) whose interests are materially adverse to that person; and

(2) about whom the lawyer had acquired information protected by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) that is material to the matter;

unless the former client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.

(c) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter or whose present or former firm has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:

(1) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as these Rules would permit or require with respect to a client, or when the information has become generally known; or

(2) reveal information relating to the representation except as these Rules would permit or require with respect to a client.

To what level of "representation" does a document reviewer's work arise?....hmmmm.

How do you say conflicts in Japanese again?

Oh yeah...

"対立"

To be continued......