Law Practice Management Asked and Answered Blog

Category:

May 01, 2012

Problem Partners – Do You Have the Right Folks on the Bus?

Question:

I am managing partner for a 16 attorney firm in Minneapolis. We have been having problems with one of our senior partners. He is our highest fee generator – both origination and generation. He operates as a "lone ranger" and refuses to work as a team member with others. He won't follow firm policy or play by the rules. We are trying to build a team based practice and this one partner is holding up our progress. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions?

Response:

Getting and keeping the right people on the bus is a key challenge for law firm management and dealing with "maverick partners" is always a challenge. Of course they seem to always be the heavy hitters and this makes it that much more difficult as often there are major clients and large sums of money at stake – at least in the short term. This can also be major issues and large sums of money at stake in the long term if you don't deal with the maverick partner as well. In addition you won't be able to achieve the vision and goals the firm is trying to achieve.

• For starters – if you have not already – create a well understood set of firm core values or code of conduct that governs behavior in the firm. For example, in most firms people are expected to work hard, be honest, and treat each other with respect.
• Partners as well as all other attorneys and staff should behave in a collaborative, cooperative, and team-orientated manner.
• Partners as well as all other attorneys and staff should comply with all firm policies and procedures.
• Enforce firm policies for all – no exceptions.
• Consider coaching, counseling or other forms of outside assistance if they could prove helpful.
• Lay down the law – confront and deal with the problem partner sooner than later – even if it means he or her leaving the firm.

Many firms have had to deal with the problem of a maverick "huge business generator" who just wouldn’t cooperate with firm policies and caused conflict and tension in the firm. It is an unpleasant task – but in the end – worth the investment. In the end he or she either conforms or leaves the firm. We have been advised by our clients that even though they may have struggled in the short term as the result of the loss of a major fee producer – in the long run the firm was better off and should have done it earlier.

Click here for our blog on partnership topics

Click here for our published articles

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Apr 25, 2012

Law Firm Partner Compensation – Why Change If We Are Happy

Question:

I am a partner in a 16 attorney firm in Memphis. Our firm has had the same partner compensation system for 20 years and we are generally happy with it. It is an eat-what-you-kill system. Since we are generally happy why should we consider changing it?

Response:

You can start with the following firm – self-test. Has the firm experienced or is it experiencing:

• Partner defections
• Firm splits and breakups
• Personal fiefdoms
• Maverick partners
• Hoarding work
• System perceived as unfair
• Problems acquiring and retaining top legal talent
• Low productivity
• Low profitability
• Client dissatisfaction
• Low morale
• Disputes with former partners

If your firm is experiencing or has experienced the above symptoms, it is time to really examine where the firm is headed and what messages your compensation is sending out to your partners. Is the firm trying to be a firm or merely a group of lone rangers? Even though your partners are content your compensation system may be holding the firm back from becoming all that it desires to be. Contentment may not be the best measure of success.

Click here for our blog on compensation

Click here for our published articles

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Apr 18, 2012

Law Firm Succession: Using Affiliation As a Phase I Pilot Test

Question:

I am sole owner of a law firm in Chicago with an elder law practice. I have two paralegals and two legal assistants. Although I want to continue to practice as long as I can I am in my late 60s and am beginning to think about what to do with my practice. I have recently had several discussions with another sole owner that is interested in buying my practice. Since I want to practice as long as I can I am concerned about the timing of selling my practice due to the current ethical rules. I also want to insure that the other firm would be the right fit for my clients and staff. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions?

Response:

Making the right decision concerning the "Who" is usually more important than the "What" or the "How". Take your time to do the proper due diligence regarding the other firm. Get to know the owner as well as the employees of the other firm. Ascertain practice, client, and cultural compatibility. If you both determine that a a deal might make sense – then move to the "How". Even though you have done the best due diligence you can – you won't really know about the other firm until you try working together. So before you jump – consider taking a few baby steps first. You might start with an affiliation arrangement (Of Counsel) as a Phase I pilot test for six months. Under this arrangement you can both refer work to each other as well as have the other attorney work on some of your client matters at your office. Outline the details of the relationship in an affiliation (Of Counsel) agreement. After six months review the success of the arrangement and whether it makes sense to take the next step. If it does – a Phase II step might be to enter into a more formal practice continuation/transition arrangement with the other firm. Phase III would be either the eventual sale of your practice or merger with the other firm. Taking a phased approach allows you learn more about the other firm which will increase your odds of a successful transition and buys you time before actually selling your practice if that is the direction you should go.

Click here for our blog on succession/exit strategies

Click here for our blog on mergers

Click here for articles on other topics

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Apr 10, 2012

Using Competitive Intelligence to Support Law Firm Strategy

Apr 03, 2012

Using A Law Firm Key Account Survey to Access Client Satisfaction and Your Competitive Profile

Question:

I am the managing partner of a 16 attorney firm in Santa Monica, California. We represent large energy companies located on the west coast. We are contemplating developing our first strategic plan. We would like to obtain insight from our clients, receive their feedback, and use this information to access our level of client satisfaction and our competitive profile. However, we are not sure whether we should conduct a random survey involving selecting a percentage of our clients or a census involving surveying all clients rather than taking a sample. Please advise as to your thoughts.

Response:

Rather than doing a random survey of your client base, you may want a more targeted and focused survey of a particular client group. For example, if 80 to 90 percent of your business comes from ten clients, you may want to create a survey that is specifically targeted to them. The advantage of a targeted key client survey is that it is limited in scope and precisely focused. Before you commit time and resources to a client survey identify your purpose and establish specific goals and objectives.

Develop a survey plan. Insure that a follow-up strategy is incorporated into the plan.

Click here for our blog on client service

Click here for our article on the topic

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Mar 27, 2012

Capital Accounts For New Law Firm Partners

Question:

Our firm was started 20 years ago by four partners. We how have the original four partners as well as six associate attorneys. Originally each of the four partners contributed $25,000 each to their capital accounts. We are considering extending partnership to a couple of the associates. We have talked with other law firms and some require buy-ins (capital contributions) and others do not. What are your thoughts?

Response:

My first question is whether you are planning on creating a non-equity partnership tier. If so, then the associates would initially be brought into that tier first.

Typically a buy-in or capital contribution is not required for non-equity partners nor do I recommend such. Typically non-equity partners are salaried and may participate in some form of an incentive bonus system tied to individual, team, or firm financial performance. They are also not required to assume any responsibility for any of the firm's financial liabilities or debts.

If you intend on bringing in the associates as equity partners that is another matter. I believe that all new partners should be expected to contribute capital and have some "skin in the game." Whenever a firm admits a new partner, the firm should require the new partner to contribute capital. Increasingly, a partner's capital requirement should bear a relationship to the partner's share of profits. You may want to allow new partners a reasonable period of time to fund their capital accounts – say five years or help them arrange favorable terms at your bank to finance their capital accounts.

Some firms have a buy-in tied to either the cash-based book value of the firm or the accrual-based book value (includes accounts receivable and work in process). This is not the typical practice although I do run into it. Usually capital accounts are tied to working capital needed to operate the firm and the percentage of ownership/income that each partner will have.

There are only three ways to increase a firm's working capital to cover cash flow requirements and fund growth:

1. Have partners put more money in
2. Have partners take less money out
3. Borrow

Many firms use bank credit lines instead of capital contributions to pay routine firm expenses and partner draws during periods when cash flow is tight. It has been my experience that firms that follow this practice have ongoing financial challenges and problems.

The reality is that many firms are under-capitalized – don't become one of them!

Click here for our blog on financial management

Click here for our law firm management articles

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Mar 20, 2012

Law Firm Staff Investment – A Sound Marketing Strategy

Question:

Our Chicago firm of 14 attorneys has been discussing various marketing investments that we should be considering. We have a very proactive marketing program but want to insure that we are exploring all avenues. What are your thoughts?

Response:

Invest in your people – your staff – your intellectual capital.

I am amazed at the minimal investment that law firms make in their staff. Law firms are in the knowledge business and their product is their intellectual knowledge. While law firms do invest in their attorneys, such is not the case with the staff. Although staff members are often on the front lines in dealing with clients, very few law firms are providing them with skill training in areas such as communication, marketing, client service, conflict management, effective writing and speaking, time management, computer applications, client complaint management, etc. By the way, attorneys need training in these areas as well. Why do law firms hire the cheapest talent they can find to fill the receptionist position when it is the receptionist who often has the initial contact with a new client. I find it amazing that firms spend huge amounts of money on advertising and marketing and they fail to invest in the other tools needed for effective new client intake. Small firms should consider assigning their receptionist the role of marketing coordinator with responsibility for assisting in the management of client relationships and the firm’s marketing program.

Click here for our blog on marketing

Click here for our published articles

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Mar 15, 2012

Improving Relationship With Insurance Company Clients

Question:

Our firm, a 17 attorney firm in St. Louis, Missouri, is have a major problem with client defections. We practice in the area of insurance defense exclusively. We have lost several insurance company clients and for those that we are working with – our case assignments are dwindling. Any thoughts or suggestions?

Response:

Our firm recently completed client satisfaction interviews for several of our insurance defense law firm clients. Here are a few quotes and a summary of what these insurance company law firm clients told us:

1. We want to work with proactive attorneys that aren’t afraid to try cases.
2. Limit the number of people working on a file. I like consistent assignments.
3. I expect attorneys to get back to me by the next business day.
4. I like one partner and one associate per file.
5. Most of our billing issues with law firms is due to excessive use of associates time.
6. I get upset with attorneys that want to settle right before trial.
7. The primary reason that we terminate our relationship with our outside attorneys is not reporting to us in a timely fashion and poor communications.
8. I find that many lawyers are poor at managing their files and have poor basic communication skills. I work with lawyers that can do both of these things well.
9. I think that it is important that law firms provide value added services such as newsletters, legislative updates, e-alerts, seminars, etc on a “no charge” basis. These services are provided by most law firms these days. Such services help us do our jobs better, improves communications and the overall relationship between our organization and the law firm, keeps us up to date on changes in the law, and helps the law firm stay abreast of emerging needs in our business.
10. I will pay higher fees to lawyers that aren’t afraid to try cases.

I suggest that you start by talking to your clients. Much can be learned by talking to your clients. Structured telephone interviews conducted by a neutral third party can provide many surprises as well as answers. Client satisfaction interviews can be the best marketing investment that you can make.

Good Luck!

Click here for our blog on marketing

Click here for our published articles

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Mar 07, 2012

Growing a Law Firm: Issues to Think About

Question:

Our practice is located in Memphis. We have three attorneys, 3 paralegals, and two staff members. We will generate $1,500,000 in legal fees this year. We plan on growing the firm and hope break the $2.5 million barrier in three years. We have a very proactive marketing plan and program. What else do we need to think about?

Response:

Growth will involve more the marketing and getting more clients. Particularly a firm your size. To generate this revenue you will have to add several revenue producers which could almost double your size. Your will become a different firm. Instead of three attorneys – you may have six or seven unless your growth will occur by adding mostly paralegals. Even so, there will be more people. This will impact your physical facilities and physical plant, your systems, your IT infrastructure, approach to talent management, and how the firm is managed. Growth requires investment and puts strain on cash flow. So this needs to be planned for. If you don't have a strategic plan (see our blog under strategy section) I suggest that your consider developing one. A strategic plan will require you to think beyond the marketing plan and getting clients – and address all of the other issues that will impact the firm as you grow.

Click here for our blog on law firm strategy

Click here for articles on other topics

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Feb 28, 2012

Law Firm Marketing: Obtaining More Business From Existing Business Clients

Question:

Our firm is based in Little Rock. We currently have 12 attorneys. We were larger several years ago. We have lost 8 attorneys in the last five years as well as several business clients. Profitability has suffered? What marketing initiatives should we be exploring to improve profitability and increase the size of the pie?

Response:

On average it costs five times as much (dollars/time investment) to get new clients than it does to get more business from existing clients. It just makes good business sense to leverage existing relationships.

I suggest that your first priority is to circle your wagons around your existing clients and insure that the quality of your services and the quality of your relationship with the client is beyond reproach. Then look for unmet needs and additional work from existing clients. Once this has been accomplished begin targeting new business clients and cultivating relationships one by one.

Many of our clients that represent business clients have found the following (listed in order of value to the firm) to be a few of the more successful marketing tools at the firm and individual attorney level:

Firm Level:

Firm website
Solicit and respond to client feedback (Client Surveys)
Newsletters and solid marketing collateral materials
Up to date marketing database of clients, past clients, referral and media sources

Individual Attorney Level

Personal networking and relationship building by individuals
Client site visits
Seminars
Marketing through client trade associations
Speeches and by-lined articles

The national marketing investment average for law firms representing business clients is 2.5% of revenue. While marketing costs money – often the larger investment is lawyer time as much of the effort to maintain relationships with new clients and to create relationships with new potential clients occurs at the individual lawyer level.

Two sets of marketing plans need to be put in place – firm level plans for firm marketing and individual lawyer plans for marketing initiatives by each and every attorney in the firm.

Often partners in law firm that represent business clients think that they can just put in place firm level plans, invest marketing money, put the plan on auto pilot, and sit back and wait for new work to come in. Unfortunately, it is usually not that easy. It also takes client relationship building work at the individual lawyer level as well. When this is not done the results are usually disappointing.

Click here for our blog on marketing

Click here for our published articles

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

• « Later
• 1
• …
• 41
• 42
• 43
• 44
• 45
• …
• 59
• Earlier »

Copyright © 1996 - 2025 Olmstead & Associates, All Rights Reserved

Home – Resource Center – News Releases – About Olmstead – Services Provided – Contacting Olmstead – Sitemap