Law Practice Management Asked and Answered Blog

Category: Associates

Sep 04, 2019

Merger vs Transitioning Our Firm to Our Associates

Question:

I am one of three founding partners in a twelve attorney insurance defense firm in New Orleans. The three of us are in our early sixties and contemplating retirement in the next several years. The three of us have been discussing our succession plans and are wondering whether we would be better off merging with another firm or transitioning the firm to our associates. What are your thoughts on this matter?

Response: 

A majority of firms prefer transitioning to the next generation of attorneys within the firm whenever possible. Many founding partners at this stage of their career are often not ready to move to another firm unless they have to.

Advantages of transitioning to associates in the firm include:

Disadvantages of transitioning to associates in the firm include:

I believe that you should start by taking a critical look at the demographics of your associates and raise the following questions:

  1. What are the retirement timelines for each of you? Will you be retiring close to the same time?
  2. Do you have the bench strength – your present associates – to serve your existing clients if the three of you are no longer with the firm?
  3. If the three of you were no longer with the firm could your present associates retain your existing clients?
  4. Do any of your associates have the leadership and management skills to lead and manage the firm?
  5. Do any of your associates have the will to take over the firm and buy-out your interests?

Your answers to the above five questions will determine whether you should consider a merger strategy. It is often difficult to get a “founders benefit” (goodwill value) in mergers with other firms.

Click here for our blog on mergers

Click here for our blog on succession strategies

Click here for articles on other topics

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

Jul 19, 2018

Law Firm Structure and Elevating Associates to Partnership

Question: 

I started my firm as a solo nine years ago in New Orleans. My practice focuses on maritime defense litigation. Over the years I have added associates and currently I have six associates working for me. I am overwhelmed with work – from the legal work that I am doing in addition to the business development and firm administration. My thought is that I should consider restructuring the firm by making some of my associates partners so I can offload and share some of the administrative responsibilities. I would like your thoughts. What are other firms in my situation doing.

Response: 

Years ago when I started in this business there were solo practitioners and there were multi-attorney firms that were partnerships. There were not many multi-attorney firms that were what I call sole owner firms – firms will many attorneys and just one owner. This has changed. More and more attorneys don’t want to be in partnerships with other attorneys. Sometimes this is a result of bad experiences in other partnerships. In other cases they simply want to go it alone. Also, more and more associates don’t want to take on the stress and financial obligations of partnership – they simply want a job that provides them with a decent income with work life balance. I have law firm clients with sole owners, fifteen to twenty attorneys, and fifty to seventy staff employees. These firm owners have hired firm administrators, marketing managers, and other such talent to offload the administration. While these firm owners have been enjoying the fruits of sole ownership eventually they will have to reevaluate their situation when they begin planning their succession and exit strategies.

I think you have to ask yourself the following questions:

  1. Is adding partners the best way to offload your administrative responsibilities? Should you hire a firm administrator?
  2. Are  you ready for partners?
  3. Do you have associates that meet your requirements for partner admission? Have you thought about these requirements?
  4. Do the associates that you would consider for partnership have an interest in being partners?

Give this some more thought – don’t just make partners to have partners or to have someone to handle administration.

Click here for our blog on partnership

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

Dec 20, 2016

Law Firm Succession Planning – Selling My Stock to Several Associates

Question:

I am the sole owner of a five attorney personal injury plaintiff firm in the Dallas suburbs. Over the years I have built a sustainable brand through advertising. I have helped my associates develop their reputations, handle substantial cases, and be involved in various areas of firm management. I am planning on retiring in five years and I would like to begin the transition early next year by selling some stock (minority interests) to deserving associates with the remainder of my shares to be purchased upon my retirement. Originally, I had through about selling shares to two associates that have been with the firm for over fifteen years – now I am thinking about selling shares to all four associates. I think it would be easier for the four to come up with the required money. I welcome your thoughts.

Response:

If you are asking for a goodwill value plus cash-based book value as well as a percentage of completion estimated value of your contingency fee cases in process, the amount you are asking for your stock could be considerable. This would indeed be difficult for one or two people to raise and on its face it would make sense to sell your shares to all the associates. If this is not the case if may be possible to the two senior associates to raise the required funds.

Here are my thoughts:

  1. You know your people best but give consideration to the future partner dynamics. You are going from a sole owner structure to a five attorney ownership structure if you bring them in all at the same time. This will require some major adjustments in governance, compensation, etc.
  2. Are the two newer associates deserving of ownership? Have they developed their skills and earned the respect of the other associates in the firm and others outside of the firm?
  3. What do the two senior associates think? Do they want to be future partners with each other? Are they able to come up with the money? Do they initially, after your retirement, want other partners? Do they want the other associates to be their partners – initially or down the road?
  4. Interview your two senior associates and get their thoughts on the above questions. They may want to enjoy the benefits of leverage from having less partners as you have over the years. 
  5. My guess is that your senior associates would prefer to go it alone if they can swing it.

Don't try to force future partners on your two senior associates. I will rather see you initially admit the two senior associates as partners and let them admit other partners after your retirement when they are ready.

Click here for our blog on succession

Click here for out articles on various management topics

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

 

Dec 06, 2016

Law Firm Client Development – Getting and Keeping Clients – Roles for Associates

Question:

Our firm is a twenty two lawyer insurance defense firm in Seattle. Over the years we have told our associates that they were hired to work on firm business and there was no requirement for them to develop or bring in client business. In fact we specifically asked them not to bring in business. Now we are rethinking that policy. Many of our equity partners are retiring and we are finding we have a group of grinders – with very few minders or finders capable of either retaining existing clients or bringing in new clients. What are your thoughts?

Response:

Over the years, I have seen many law firms hire associates and tell them that there is plenty of work and they are hired to service the firm’s work and there is no need, or even desire, for them to develop and bring client business into the firm. For years, these associates meet their billable hour expectations, work their files, and get good results on their cases.  Twenty years later they are still associates – what went wrong? What are they not equity partners? Often it is because they have not developed client business.

Successful lawyers in private practice must not only do excellent legal work for their clients they must also develop client business. I believe that each attorney must invest money and time in building and promoting their expertise, professional reputation, and their personal brand. Law firms should not only encourage but should require, support, and fund (money and non-billable time) marketing/business development at the individual attorney level. Client development skills have to be developed and practiced early on.

Due to your client base (insurance companies) it may not be that easy for associates to actually bring in new clients unless the firm is diversifying into other practice areas (unless that is your goal). However, they can start by being good minders – client relationship managers – and work on getting more business from existing clients and maintaining client relationships that the firm has.

Client Development is externally focused – relationship management is more internally focused.

Skills for developing new clients and those needed for maintaining good relations are not the same.

While you associates will each have different abilities they should be honing their skills in one of the following areas:

Rainmakers – win new business from new clients and their strength is networking.They serve on boards, attend events, play golf, and entertain clients; prospective clients.

Hired Guns – win new business from new clients – emphasis on expertise.(They speak, write, give seminars, and become experts in a specific field)

Brain Surgeons – win new business from existing clients – internal focus; emphasis is on expertise – they solve problems that others cannot.

The Point Person – wins new business from existing clients and have an internal focus.

Click here for our blog on marketing 

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

Nov 01, 2016

Law Firm Associate Compensation – How to Deal With Overpaid Associates

Question:

I am the managing partner of a twelve attorney defense litigation firm in Santa Monica, California. We have four partners and eight associates. Associates are paid a salary. We have several associates that are being overpaid – they are being paid $150,000 – $180,000 and just barely generating $300,000 in working attorney fee receipts. I would appreciate your thoughts.

Response:

Do they have enough work? Do they put in enough hours? Are they good time managers and good timekeepers? If they have enough work – then meet with each of them – lay out the expectation of 1800 hours and consequences for non-achievement. If they have issues with time management or time keeping impress upon them the importance of improving these skills – in the meantime they may have to simply put in the extra time to get in the hours.

Suggested consequences:

  1. For those not meeting expectations. Manage and coach them in real time- but be firm about your expectations. You are paying them a salary for a certain level of expectations and performance. If there is not enough work reduce their working hours and compensation. Consider production in future salary reviews and bonuses. Don't pay them an incentive bonus to perform the work you are already paying them to do. In worse case situation you may have to reduce salaries.
  2. For those exceeding expectations. Reward them with a performance-based discretionary bonus. But when advising them of the bonus advise them specifically what it is for and that is it a variable bonus and award for specific performance exceeding expectation. 

Click here for our blog on compensation

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

 

 

Jan 06, 2016

Law Firm Managment – Do Your Non-Equity Partners and Associates Really Want to be Equity Partners?

Question:

I am a member of our firm's executive committee. We are an 18 attorney firm in Baltimore with four equity partners, five non equity partners, and nine associates. Recently we asked one of our non-equity partners to join the equity ranks and he said no. We were shocked and taken by surprise. Is this a common occurrence? We would like to hear your thoughts.

Response:

This is becoming a more common occurrence and this is causing havoc with growth, succession and transition plans. Many law firms are seeing a growing sense of disillusionment from young lawyers that may not want to be an equity partner. While they want to be lawyers they do not want to take the financial and other business risks nor make the other work commitments such as working nights, weekends, and the 24-hour commitment that has historically been the requirements for equity partners in law firms. Work-life balance has become a priority for more younger lawyers.

I believe that you should through performance reviews, survey questionnaires, and other tools gather information sooner than later to get a feel for where your non-equity partners and associates stand as far as attitudes toward business and financial risk, desirability of being an equity owner, and willingness to invest capital and time in the firm. This will give you a feel for your mix. If it looks like you have too many worker bees – revamp your recruiting strategy – new attorneys or laterals – accordingly and look for attorneys that have an interest and the mindset that it takes to be an equity owner.

Click here for our blog on partnership

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

 

 

Aug 30, 2015

Law Firm Associates – Evaluation of Performance

Question:

We are a six partner litigation firm in Des Moines, Iowa. This year we hired two associates and they are our first. We have not provided them with the best mentoring or guidance – it has sort of baptism by fire. I would appreciate your thoughts on what we should be doing concerning performance management.

Response:

Baptism by fire is not the best approach for managing associate performance. It may work in the long term but in the short term it will result in excessive "spin time" and lost revenue and profits for the firm. Here are a few thoughts:

  1. To be effective, evaluation of associates must be meaningful. 
  2. Evaluation for associates right out of school should be done every six months for two years and annually thereafter.
  3. Written criteria must be developed and communicated to everyone as the basis for evaluation.
  4. The associate should be evaluated by every lawyer with whom the associate works.
  5. The evaluation process should be developmental. Weaknesses must be openly discussed, with a plan devised to eliminate the weaknesses. Professional goals should be set each year.
  6. Personal plans should be completed each year and be part of the evaluation process.
  7. The evaluations must be done timely.

Good luck with your program.

Click here for our blog on career management

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

 

Archives

Categories

    Subscribe to our Blog