Question:
Our firm is a sixteen attorney firm in Chicago. Our marketing committee has been discussing implementing a client survey program. We are not sure where to start or how best to collect and report the data. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Response:
Surveys can be used for a variety of purposes including the following:
I assume that you are planning on doing a client satisfaction survey in order to solicit feedback on how well the firm is meeting client needs, quality of services being provided, and additional needs that the client may have where the firm can provide services.
The type of survey will depend upon whether your clients are individuals or institutional clients such as corporate or governmental. If your clients are institutional I recommend that you conduct telephone structured telephone interviews with these clients using a interview questionnaire consisting of quantitative and qualitative questions. If you have a large number of institutional clients then you may want to consider conducting these interviews with your top fifty, twenty-five, or ten top clients and use a paper mail survey or online survey for the remainder. For individual clients you may want to use a paper survey or online survey for your entire database of individual clients and thereafter a paper mail survey or online survey at the conclusion of a matter. Another option would be to survey a random sample of your clients.
Once the surveys are completed – whether telephone interviews or paper mail or online surveys the questionnaires/surveys will need to be tabulated and provided in some form of a report. Some firms use two Excel spreadsheets – one for the quantitative responses and one for the qualitative/narrative responses for interview and paper mail questionnaires. Then averages, percentages, and other summary statistics can be calculated for the quantitative responses. If you use an online survey service such as Survey Monkey the tabulation and the statistics will be done already for these surveys. If you have a Survey Monkey account you could also enter your interview questionnaire and paper mail questionnaires responses into Survey Monkey and use it rather than Excel. If you want more sophisticated statistical analysis you might want to look into statistical software such as SPSS which is sold and marketed by IBM.
Once you have summarized analyzed the questionnaires you may want to prepare a summary report document using your word processing software. Include the tabulation, statistical calculations, charts, etc. as attachments to the report.
There are several articles on our website – see links below – that discuss client satisfaction survey programs and how to get started.
Click here for our blog on client service
Click here for our article on client satisfaction
Click here for our article on client surveys
Click here for our article on analyzing survey results
Click here for our article on developing your client service improvement plan
Click here for our article on tips for rewarding and recognizing employees
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am the owner of a solo real estate practice in Merced, California. I have two staff members that work for me. I am the only attorney in the firm. I am sixty years old. While I am concerned about the long term exit from the practice I am also concerned about office coverage in case something would happen to me in the short term. I appreciate any recommendations that you may have.
Response:
Forming an Of Counsel relationship with another firm is an option that many solos are taking. Sometimes it is a final arrangement where a solo winds down his or her practice and then joins another firm as an employee or independent contractor. He or she is paid a percentage of collected revenue under a compensation agreement with different percentages depending upon whether the practitioner brings in the business, services work that he or she brings in, or services work that the firm refers to the practitioner. In other situations, an Of Counsel relationship is used as a practice continuation mechanism that provides the solo with additional resources and support if needed. An Of Counsel relationship can also be used to “pilot test” a relationship prior to merging with another firm. We have had several law firm clients that has taken a phased approach to merger with Phase I being an Of Counsel “pilot test” exploratory arrangement and Phase II being the actual merger.
Click here for our blog on succession
Click here for out articles on various management topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am an attorney in New Orleans that has been a lawyer for ten years. I practiced with a small firm for eight years as an associate and then opened my own firm two years ago. I primarily work from home supplemented with a virtual pay-as-you-go office. I do not have any staff employees. I have been approached by a fourteen-attorney firm that would like me to join their firm as an income partner. Their offer includes a salary which I feel is low and a bonus based upon a percentage after covering my salary, other direct costs, and indirect firm overhead. The overhead allocations seem extremely high to me. In my practice I am bringing in around $100,000 in gross fees and my overhead averages $10,000-$15,000 per year. My profit margin is around 90%. I feel like I am better off building up my practice rather than accepting their offer. What are typical overhead and profit margins for law firms?
Response:
We have to be careful how we define overhead. Overhead is generally to be considered all law firm expenses less attorney salaries and sometimes less paralegal salaries. The overhead ratio would then be the overhead divided by firm revenues. Profit margin is expressed in terms of owner (partner, shareholder, etc.) earnings. In other words what is going into the owner’s pockets in terms of salary, share of profit, etc. Owner earnings is firm revenue less all firm expenses including associate and paralegal salaries but not including owner salary or compensation. The profit margin is total expenses (excluding owner compensation) divided by firm revenues.
A desirable profit margin range for law firms is thirty-five to forty-five percent. Some firms are able to attain fifty percent. Profit margins depend upon the type of law practice, leverage ratios (associates to partners), how well the firm is managed, etc. I have some very successful firms with profit margins as low as twenty percent but the partner earnings are very high.
Your current overhead and profit margin is not sustainable in the long-term. While you have low overhead and a high profit margin you also have low earnings. You are only earning $85,000. You will soon reach a point where in order to increase your revenues you will have to hire people, acquire office space, and buy phone systems and other equipment. When this occurs you will be in a similar situation as to the law firm you are talking with.
Click here for our financial management topic blog
Click here for our law firm profit improvement blog
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a partner in a fourteen attorney firm in San Antonio, Texas. We have eight partners and six associates working in the firm. The firm was founded twenty years ago, so we are a first-generation firm. Two of the partners were the founders of the firm and the other six were made partners in later years. Currently our method of governing the firm is handled by the full partnership. While each partner has one vote, we try to manage by consensus. We do not have a managing partner or any committees. We have an office manager that primarily handles the accounting and the staff oversight. The partners meet weekly to discuss issues and make decisions. We are beginning to have issues with our management structure. Partners are not showing up for the weekly meetings and complaining about the amount of time it is taking away from servicing their clients. Should we consider a different approach? We would appreciate your thoughts.
Response:
You are at a difficult size, still a small partnership but big enough that management by all may no longer be working for you. I believe that you should consider either a managing partner or a management committee of three partners elected by the partnership. For this to work all of the partners must agree to surrender some degree of independence to a managing partner or a management committee. I would start with putting together a list, or job description, for the managing partner or management committee. Partnership agreements often outline management decisions (powers) reserved for the partnership with all decisions handled by the managing partner or management committee. If your partners are unwilling to surrender some degree of independence then changing to a managing partner or management committee may prove to be wasted effort.
Click here for our blog on governance
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a partner in a twelve attorney commercial litigation law firm in Palm Beach, Florida. There are five partners in the firm. We are contemplating merging with another firm in the area of similar size. We have done our due diligence and have come across a possible non-starter – the compensation system. Our compensation system is totally objective – formula-based very close to an eat-what-you-kill system. The other firm has operated under a subjective system and they are pushing for the firm to operate under this type of system. We would appreciate your thoughts and enlightenment concerning subjective-based systems.
Response:
Subjective-based systems are the most commonly used approach to setting partner compensation, especially in larger firms. More and more firms your size and larger are moving to subjective systems as a result of the failure of other systems to account for the full range of contributions that partners make to the law firm. Subjective systems can take on a variety of forms but the central theme of such systems is that they rely on a subjective assessment of partner performance, without reference to specific weighting of factors or a set formula. This is not to say that subjective systems lack structure or predictability, or that they don’t consider objective financial data. Successful subjective compensation systems include these elements and more.
Subjective compensation systems vary widely. Here are some of the most common elements found in subjective systems:
In additional to subjective compensation systems some firms used hybrid systems that employs objective (formula) and subjective components.
Subjective systems are not for all firms. They will fail with out strong, trusted, leadership. In very small firms it is difficult to structure a compensation decision making body.
It sounds like your firm and the firm you are thinking of merging with may come from two very different cultures. Subjective systems work well for firms that are “firm first” firms but not for lone ranger firms that often operate under eat-what-you-kill systems. If you firm is not a long ranger firm and your are in fact a “firm first” firm or aspire to be such you may be able to adapt to a subjective system. However, you may need a post-merger phase-in period. Another comprise approach might be a hybrid system.
Click here for our blog on compensation
Click here for our blog on mergers
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a partner and a member of our three-member executive committee. Our firm is a twenty-five attorney litigation defense firm in Kansas City, Missouri. We handle matters such as personal injury, medical malpractice, professional malpractice, products liability, and health care law. Each attorney handles and manages his or her own cases and operates in isolation of the other partners in the firm. Other than attending a quarterly partnership meeting there is little interaction among the partners. We have been discussing whether we should form practice groups. We would appreciate your thoughts.
Response:
Practice groups can be excellent vehicles for enhancing communications, attorney and staff skill development and training, practice management, and marketing. Practice groups should share the mission and vision of the firm as well as goals of enhancing services to clients by developing the skills of the members of the group in a particular legal specialty or industry niche and developing business for that particular group. Practice groups should not operate as isolated islands but should be structured and integrated with the firm. Specifically, functional practice groups should:
Practice groups can be structured around legal specialties such as personal injury, product liability, and professional malpractice. Other practice groups can be structured around industry niches such as energy, health care, etc. In cases where a firm has a very large client a practice group can established for that specific client.
While practice groups can have their advantages, I have found that in many firms they are dysfunctional. They do not meet on a consistent basis, have no goals, or direction, poor leadership, and seem to accomplish little. To be effective practice groups must:
I believe a practice group would be a logical direction for your firm. You might want to start slow and try a “pilot” test group where there appears to be significant interest and see how it develops.
Click here for our blog on governance
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
Our firm is a fourteen attorney firm in Chicago. There are nine partners and five associate attorneys in the firm. Our practice is limited to insurance defense. I am one of the founders and senior partners in the firm and have been practicing for 35 years. We are having problems getting our associates to produce at the levels that we need for the firm to be profitable. We have a 1800 annual billable hour requirement and several of our associates aren’t even close. We have a bonus system that pays associates a bonus based upon billable hours exceeding 1800 billable hours. What are we doing wrong?
Response:
It often takes more than setting up a bonus system and then leaving it on autopilot. I am finding that the intrinsic reward of doing a good job and meeting the expectations of the firm’s partners are as important as the bonus system. In client law firms that have had similar problems we have found that by supplementing the bonus system with monthly reviews and coaching sessions with associates not meeting their targets has made the difference. Here is an outline of the process:
The bonus rewards those that want to push beyond the 1800 billable hours but does nothing to solve the problem of those not meeting the 1800 billable hour expectation.
Click here for our blog on career management
Click here for our blog on human resources
Click here for our blog on compensation
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a partner in a six lawyer firm in Jackson Mississippi. There are three partners and three associates in the firm. The firm is a insurance defense litigation firm. Our firm has been at its present size for many years, revenues have been flat, and profits have been shrinking. The partners have been discussing the pros and cons of growth and we would like to significantly grow the practice. A couple of our insurance company clients have asked us to open offices in other states and we are giving this consideration. Initially, we would open two other offices and we anticipate that this would require us to hire six additional attorneys. We appreciate any thoughts that you have.
Response:
This is a huge step and I suggest that you give it careful thought. Here are a few of the issues you should consider:
These are just a few of the issues that you will need to consider. Do your homework and due diligence on this before you jump feet first.
Click here for our blog on strategy
Click here for our blog on profit improvement
Click here for our blog on offices and facilities
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a partner in a three partner six attorney in Chicago. We have been having discussions with another law firm in the city regarding us acquiring their practice. The owner is seventy years old and wanting to retire and exit his practice. My partners and I have looked over the numbers and believe this would be an excellent opportunity for us to expand our client base. The practice handles the same type of work that we do. We are unsure what our next step should be? Do you have any suggestions?
Response:
I would start by asking for all the due diligence information that your can get your hands on. For example:
Insure that you have done a thorough conflict of interest check and insure that you review the Illinois rules of professional conduct concerning sale of law practice. Give consideration to the value of the firm and what you are willing to pay for it and how? What assets do want to purchase – just the goodwill or will fixed assets be included? What about work in process and accounts receivable? Is there a building involved and if so do you want to purchase the building and real estate? Do you want to take on any of the employees? Do the numbers work for you? What terms would be acceptable to you?
The next step is to prepare and present a proposal. Some of the following elements would be included in a proposal:
Once you have prepared the proposal present it to the owner of the firm and go from there.
Click here for our blog on succession
Click here for out articles on various management topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a member of a three member executive committee with our twelve-attorney firm in San Antonio, Texas. One of our responsibilities is oversight of our career development program for associates and non-equity partners. We have been discussing our policy of admitting associates to non-equity partner and non-equity partners to equity partner. Presently, we do not have anything in writing regarding timeline for consideration or what qualifies one to move to the next level. Associates and non-equity partners are unhappy with the present process. They want more clarity concerning their career advancement within the firm. You advise would be helpful to us.
Response:
Several of my clients are developing career advancement programs that incorporate a competency-based approach that outlines specifically what is takes to be successful and advance from associate to non-equity partner and from non-equity partner to equity partner. Rather than leaving the formula for success in the minds of the equity partners, a competency model gives each attorney in the firm an understanding of how he or she will need to perform in order to be perceived as progressing, an ultimately, as successful. Competency models offer transparency and clarity. The model outlines specific behavioral observations as the primary source of performance information. Benefits are as follows:
Associates are presented with clear information on expectations for their level of experience and a road map of what is expected as they progress. Specific expectations are laid out for progression to non-equity partner as opposed to a specific timeline.
Non-equity partners are presented with clear information on expectations for their level of experience and a road map of what is expected as they progress. Specific expectations are laid out for progression to equity-partner as opposed to a specific timeline.
Equity partners and senior lawyers benefit from a consistent description of performance standards that allow them to access performance, assign work effectively, and offer more meaningful career guidance.
The firm has a consistent methodology for making and compensation decisions.
In order to work, a competency model should be integrated with attorney recruiting, performance evaluations, training, and compensation systems. Associates and partners must invest time in attorney development.
Click here for our blog on career management
Click here for our blog on human resources
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC