Law Practice Management Asked and Answered Blog

« Earlier | Later »

Apr 01, 2014

Law Firm Governance – Firm Administrator With Managing Partner or Management Committee

Question:

I am a partner in a 9 attorney firm in Topeka, Kansas. There are three active partners in the firm. For years day to day management has been the responsibility of a managing partner that we appoint from time to time. We have just hired our first firm administrator - starts in two weeks – who is experienced and has worked in other law firms. Should we continue to have a managing partner or consider a different structure?

Response:

Typically firms your size that have professional firm administrators empower the firm administrator to manage the business side of the law firm and have either a managing partner, management/executive committee, or all partners manage the client service side of the practice. The firm administrator typically reports to the managing partner, management/executive committee, or all partners. In essence there are three levels of management – the partnership which services like a board of directors, the managing partner or management/executive committee that oversees the professional side of the practice, and the firm administrator that manages the business side of the firm.

I find that in firms your size with firm administrators a three member management/executive committee is more common. Since your firm only has three partners – initially your management/executive committee would be all three partners. As you add more partners you would move toward electing your management/executive committee.

While either form would work in your situation – I suggest you consider eliminating the managing partner position and having the three partners serve as the management committee and have the firm administrator report to that group.

Click here for our blog on governance

Click here for my article on leadership

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

Mar 25, 2014

Law Firm Associate and Non-Equity Partner Compensation: Is There a Cap or Ceiling?

Question:

I am the managing partner of a 16 attorney insurance defense law firm in Kansas City. We have two equity partners, four non-equity partners, and ten associates. Only the two equity partners bring in client business. Since our clients are insurance companies most of our work is new business from existing clients. Unlike other firms doing insurance defense work our billing rates are low and we have to put in a lot of billable hours and maintain a high ratio of associates and non-equity partners to equity partners.

In the past our associates stayed for a while and left after several years. As a result about the time they reached the higher compensation levels they left and we replaced them with lower cost associates. In the last few years – with the economy and the oversupply of lawyers – they are staying much longer. While we – the equity partners – want to be fair and are willing to share – we are concerned about our reducing profit margins and at what point an associate or non-equity partner's compensation is "maxed out." We would appreciate your thoughts.

Response:

Law firms of all types of practice are experiencing this dilemma. The problem is even more evident in insurance defense firms where much of the work is routine discovery work that can be handled as well by an attorney with two years' experience as by an attorney with ten years' experience at lower cost. Here are a few thoughts:

  1. Use the formula – 3 times salary as a general guide to determine where you are regarding working attorney fee production from each of your attorneys. If you are paying an associate or non-equity partner $100,000 a year salary you should be collecting $300,000. The goal is that 1/3 of each fee dollar goes to association of the attorney, 1/3 to overhead, and 1/3 to profit – this a 30% profit margin.
  2. Dig into your financials and determine your contribution to profit from each of your attorneys. Allocate all direct expenses and indirect overhead and calculate profit margin. Click here for an illustration on how to allocate overhead
  3. Profit margin should be between 25%-30%.
  4. Use the margin to establish a theoretical salary limit in absence of other contributions such as management, client origination, additional business from existing clients, etc.
  5. Cap salaries with the exception of periodic cost of living adjustments.
  6. Use a client or referral commission bonus, production/hours bonus, and bonus pools to reward exceptional performance.

 Click here for our blog on compensation

Click here for articles on other topics

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

Mar 18, 2014

Law Firm Websites – Videos on Site

Question:

I am the partner in charge of marketing for our 12 attorney firm located in the Dallas suburbs. We are an estate planning/estate administration firm exclusively. We have a pretty good website with attorney bios and photos, articles, practice area descriptions, client testimonials and a blog that is updated weekly. We have been discussing the pros and cons of adding videos to the site. I would appreciate your thoughts.

Response:

I believe that videos can add to the quality of the site if done properly. A quality video can help you showcase your personality and bedside manner and help a potential client "get to know you." What you say may not be as important as how you say it. However, unless the video is a quality video and well done – it can do more harm than good. Here are a few thoughts:

  1. Consider a video introduction by the managing partner introducing the firm linked off the home page.
  2. Consider a video by each attorney linked off their bio pages.
  3. Consider your audience – mom and pop individual clients as well as potential referral sources. Since your clients are individuals – dress and set your tone accordingly. Be a little less formal – speak to your client concerns. Think about their concerns.
  4. Smile and be friendly.
  5. Hire professionals to help you script and film professional quality videos. (Quality lighting and sound separates professional looking quality from homemade looking videos.)
  6. Provide on-camera training and have your attorneys – Practice – Practice – Practice before live filming.
  7. If you don't have anyone that looks good on camera – don't do it.
  8. Use your own attorneys – don't hire outsiders to be presenters in the videos.
  9. Don't let the videos sound like ads or commercials.
  10. Presentations should be educational in nature and goal should be to enable viewers to get to know you. Presentation style is critical.

Done well – quality videos can improve the performance of your website – done poorly videos can reduce the performance of your website.

Click here for our blog on marketing 

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

Mar 11, 2014

Law Firm Billing Arrangements – Flat Fees

Question:

I am the managing owner of a four attorney estate planning firm in Phoenix. We also have two paralegals, a receptionist, and an office manager. We have always billed our clients by the hour but have been considering switching to a flat rate billing arrangement. I would appreciate your thoughts and suggestions.

Response:

I am currently working with quite a few estate planning/elder law firms. The majority of these firms are still using "time bill" billing arrangements. (8 out of 10 firms) A few firms are using flat fee arrangements for estate planning and asset protection matters and "time bill" arrangements for estate administration and other matters.

Few firms that are using flat fee arrangements are realizing effective billing rates even close to their standard "time bill" rates. In some cases I have found effective rates per hour $100 per hour less than their standard "time bill" rates. In some cases the problem is not working effectively or efficiently. In other cases the flat fee price has not been properly set or limits placed on the work that will be done for the flat fee – for example – number or document rewrites, etc. 

I believe that more than ever clients are wanting the budgetary certainty that flat fees provide.  I think that a flat fee pricing strategy is a good strategy but the scope of work and proper price point must be properly established. A couple of suggestions:

  1. Do some basic market research – secret shopping – and obtain the best information that you can on competitor pricing.
  2. Review time charges on typical estate planning matters and get a handle on the amount of time that it typically takes – by each office professional – for matters of varying levels of complexity.
  3. Based on these time estimates determine flat fees using the desired standard hourly rate and then add a risk premium of 10%. If a matters typically takes 10 hours and your desired rate is $200 per hour – set the flat rate fee at $2200.00.
  4. Incorporate into your engagement letters, fee agreements, etc.
  5. Get at least 1/2 of the fee before commencing work and the other half before deliveringand executing the final documents.
  6. Keep time sheets on the matters for time expended.
  7. Review at least quarterly effective rates realized on completed flat rate matters.
  8. If effective rates are below your target rate review the time detail and determine where the problem lies.
  9. Make changes and adjustments if needed.

I believe that properly implemented and managed flat fees can be a worthwhile strategy.

Click here for our blog on financial management

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

Mar 04, 2014

Lawyer or Businessperson

Question:

I am an attorney in Miami. I have been out of law school for five years. I worked with a small firm for a year and then went solo and have been doing contract work for other law firms for the past four years. For the past year I have been trying to get a position as an associate with a small firm – but have not had any success. Recently, I had an interview with a 2 attorney (2 partners in their early 70s) firm and I thought the interview went well – I believe that I impressed them with my legal knowledge and skills. However, I did not get the position. They advised me that they were looking for less of a lawyer and more of a business person. What am I doing wrong?

Response:

I help many of our law firm clients hire lawyers for associate and lateral positions as well as search for merger candidates. One of my favorite questions is – are you more of a lawyer or a business man or woman. Small firms are more often than not looking for candidates that are both. In a small firm you must be able to bring in clients, manage people (clients, lawyers, and staff), and perform quality legal work. There are a lot of good lawyers available on the market – there are less good lawyers that are also good business persons.

I suspect that the firm you interviewed with is looking at this hire to be part of the firm's succession strategy and the partners are looking for a lawyer/business person that can carry the firm to the next generation of practice.

Next time you interview with a firm in a similar situation – blend in a discussion of business topics as well. Even though you are a solo doing contract work you can still share some business experiences. You have had to bill for your services, manage your receivable and payables, market yourself and your practice, etc. Share your thoughts.

Click here for our blog on career management

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

Feb 25, 2014

Law Firm Partners That Won’t Embrace Technology

Question:

I am the managing partner of an 8 attorney general practice firm located in Charleston, South Carolina. We have done a pretty good job of investing in technology. I am having problems getting our older partners to personally use the technology and this has resulted is our attorney staff ratios and resulting overhead to be higher than it should be. They seem to think that doing their own work is beneath them and want to have their own personal assistants. I would appreciate any thoughts that you have on the matter.


Response:

Few firms can afford the luxury of each attorney having their own secretary/assistant. The economics no longer support such staffing. Many firms today are operating with much leaner attorney/staff ratios – typically two to three attorneys for each secretary/assistant – some firms have four attorneys to each secretary/assistant. I suggest you build the economic case, encourage, train, and motivate these partners to learn how to use and to actually use the technology and if all else fails offset the economic impact as a direct charge against their compensation.

Click here for our blog on financial management

Click here for our blog on profit improvement

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

Feb 18, 2014

Law Firm Merger – Should We Merge

Question:

Our firm is a 16 attorney insurance defense firm in Central Illinois. We have 8 partners and 8 associates. We are in second generation, have inherited our existing clients from the original founders, and currently have no rainmakers. We need to bring some rainmakers into our partner ranks and have been discussing the possibility of merger. I would appreciate your thoughts.

Response:

While mergers can be a valid option making them work is often another matter. Research indicates that one third to one half of all mergers fail to meet expectations due to cultural misalignment and personnel problems. Don't try to use a merger or acquisition as a life raft, for the wrong reasons and as your sole strategy. Successful mergers are based upon a sound integrated business strategy that creates synergy and a combined firm that produces greater client value than either firm can produced alone.

There can be a whole list of reasons for failure including poor financial performance, attorney defections, loss of key clients, and leadership and management issues. However, it has been our experience that most failures have been the result of poor cultural fit. The merging firms – after they have moved past conflict checks and excitement about new client potential – jump immediately to an examination of practice economics and the financials. They fail to perform proper due diligence on the people. It is critical that firms insure that cultural due diligence is a key component of the merger assessment process. Philosophies, personalities, and life styles should be generally compatible. The partners should like each other and the deal should make sense.

The question is not the what (merge) but the who (people).

I would suggest that you consider a lateral strategy as well as a merger strategy and let the WHO and right fit direct your thought process. Also insure that you have fully explored whether you have really developed the business development potential of the partners you have now.

Click here for our blog on mergers

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

Feb 11, 2014

Law Firm Business Models – Alternatives to Consider

Question:

Our firm located in Grand Rapids, Michigan consists of 12 attorneys – 8 partners and four associates. We are a litigation firm and a relatively young firm. We started the firm six years ago as a result of several of us leaving larger law firms and wanting to start something new and different. We have been discussing our current approach to law practice and want to consider alternative business models. We would appreciate your thoughts?

Response:

The current economic climate has caused law firms to question many of the fundamental business models that have served at the core of law firm practice management for many years. Many law firms are exploring revolutionary business models while other firms are actively discussing whether changes to their traditional approaches are needed. 

Suggest that you start by conducting a review of the following areas and develop strategies for each area:

The key is to look for ways that you can differentiate yourself, make your firm distinctive, establish a lasting competitive advantage, and determine your competitive strategy.

Click here for our blog on law firm strategy

Click her for links to our articles on other topics

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

 

Feb 04, 2014

Law Firm Succession – Is There any Real Future Value in My Solo Practice?

Question:

I am a 64 year old solo practitioner in Arlington, Virginia. There are no other attorneys in the firm – I have one legal assistant. My practice is concentrated in estate planning and estate administration. I have just started giving thought to retirement and what to do with my practice. I want to provide continuity for my clients, security for my employee, and salvage any sweat equity from my practice if there is even such a thing? Personally, I question whether there is any potential for receiving any value from the practice – I think when you are done – you are done? What are your thoughts?

Response:

It all depends upon the practice, not waiting too long, and finding the right WHO.  About a year ago I had this discussion with an owner of a practice and he held the position that when you are done – you are done. However, after we assisted him with a year-long hunt – he successfully sold his practice for a multiple of 1.0 times average of the last five years fee revenue with 85% paid at closing and the remainder paid out over three years.

Another sole owner recently sold a practice for $50,000 at closing and 20% of gross practice revenue for five years paid when fees collected.

So I believe if you don't wait too long and take the time to look for the right WHO – value from your sweat equity can be realized.

However, if you don't do your homework and start early – you are right – when you are done – you are done.

Click here for our blog on succession

Click here for out articles on various management topics

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

Jan 28, 2014

Law Firm Partner Compensation – Separate Silos – Profit Sharing

Question:

Our firm is a 9 attorney firm in Orlando, Florida. We have three equity partners and six associates. Currently partners are compensated in accordance with their ownership interest percentages which are 35%, 35%, and 30% respectively for the newest partner. There is growing discontent with this arrangement. We have already evaluated several alternative approaches to compensation and do not believe that they would work for us. Two of the partners share common goals for the firm, have compatible practices and clients, and use almost all of the associate attorney's time and other firm resources. The other partner has a transactional practice (the other two of us are litigators) and operates more as a lone ranger and a separate silo. We are considering creating two profit pies for each of these two silos. I would appreciate your thoughts concerning such an approach.

Response:

I don't run into this approach as much as I did 30+ years ago. In essence this is the profit (or silo) approach to partner compensation. This approach is typically found in firms that believe that the cost of production and consumption of firm resources are disproportionate. Usually there is strong competition in these firms. Small personal injury plaintiff firms are sometimes structured in this fashion.

Using the separate silo (profit center) approach fees and costs (overhead) are allocated to each partner (or partner group or silo) profit center and profit determined for each profit center resulting in separate compensation pies for each profit center. Then each partner draws his or her profit center pie or participates in a sharing arrangement with other partners that are members of the profit center in accordance with an agreement of other partners in the profit center or silo.

The devil lies in the details and the trick is to develop a fair and balanced allocation formula that can be used to allocate fee revenues and costs to the silo or profit center.

Silo, lone ranger, or pure profit center approaches usually results in separate firms operating with a firm (a confederation), each sharing overhead in various proportions. Such firms are usually divisive and the form of organization does not encourage specialization or sharing of work. More often than not there are frequent disagreements over fee and overhead allocations.

Often this approach is the next stop to separate firms – separate books – space sharing arrangement.

Thirty years ago I worked in such a firm – the firm is no longer in business.

So proceed with caution – develop written allocation guidelines and test run the numbers before jumping off the cliff.

 Click here for article on compensation and motivation

Click here for our blog on compensation

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

 

Archives

Categories

    Subscribe to our Blog