Law Practice Management Asked and Answered Blog

« Earlier | Later »

Sep 14, 2010

Characteristics of Successful Law Firms – Basic Building Blocks – Block 4 – Partner Compensation

For the past three weeks I have been discussing the characteristics of successful law firms and introduced the following basic building blocks that successful firms typically have in place:

Partner relations, leadership building, and management blocks have been discussed. 

The fourth basic building block is partner compensation. Successful firms have a good partner compensation in place. Partners frequently advise us in confidential interviews that they are more dissatisfied with the method used to determine compensation than with the amount of compensation itself.

How much and how partners are paid are probably the two most challenging management issues that law firms face. Many law firms are struggling with compensation systems that no longer meet the needs of the firm and the individual partners. Failure to explore alternatives to failing systems often result in partner dissatisfaction leading to partner defections and disintegration of the firm.

In many law firms compensation systems have been counter-cultural and failed to align compensation systems with business strategies. As more law firms move toward teams many are incorporating new ways to compensate partners in order to develop a more motivated and productive workforce. Team goals are being linked to business plans and compensation is linked to achieving team goals. Such systems reinforce a culture that significantly advances the firm’s strategic goals.

People tend to behave the way they're measured and paid.

What gets measured and rewarded – is what gets done.

However, be advised that compensation does not drive behavior – it maintains status quo. Motivation requires leadership which can have a greater impact upon a firm than anything else.

Compensation systems should do more than simply allocate the pie – they should reinforce the behaviors and efforts that the firm seeks from its attorneys. Many firms are discovering that desired behaviors and results must go beyond short term fee production and must include contributions in areas such as marketing, mentoring, firm management, etc. to ensure the long term viability of the firm.

Click here to read my article on the topic

I will address each of the other building blocks in upcoming postings.

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
www.olmsteadassoc.com

 

Sep 08, 2010

Characteristics of Successful Law Firms – Basic Building Blocks – Block 3 – Management

For the past two weeks I have been discussing the characteristics of successful law firms and introduced the following basic building blocks that successful firms typically have in place:

Partner relations and the leadership building blocks have been discussed. 

The third basic building block is management. Successful firms have a good governance and management structure in place and effectively manage the firm. A major problem facing many law firms is the lack of long range focus and the amount of partner time that is being spent on administrivia issues as opposed to higher level management issues. Time spent in firm governance and management, if properly controlled, is as valuable as, if not more valuable, than the same time recorded as a billable hour. (client production time)

There is a difference between management (governance) and administration.

Partners and law firm owners should be focusing their time on the management issues rather than administration.

Management includes:

  – Productive activities, including those of individual lawyers and the firm as a whole.
  – Quantity, quality, and economic soundness of the work.
  – Development of lawyers and future leaders of the firm.
  – Formulation of policies that will determine the firm’s character
  – Financial planning, both short-term and long-range.
  – Marketing and business development.
  – Partner compensation and profit distribution systems

  – Other decisions requiring partner approval

Almost everything else is administration.

Hire an office administrator, manager or assistant for the administrivia matters so the partners can focus on the management concerns of the firm.

I will address each of the other building blocks in upcoming postings.

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
www.olmsteadassoc.com

 

 

 

 

 

Almost everything else is administration.

Hire an office administrator,office manager or assistant for the administrivia matters so the partners can focus on the management concerns of the firm

I will address each of the other building blocks in upcoming postings.

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
www.olmsteadassoc.com

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

Aug 31, 2010

Characteristics of Successful Law Firms: Basic Building Blocks – Block Two – Leadership

Last week I discussed the characteristics of successful law firms and introduced the basic building blocks that successful firms typically have in place. These are:

Last week we focused on partner relations as a core foundational building block.

The second basic building block is leadership. Successful firms have good leadership in place. This may be a single individual or a core group of individuals. Leadership does not always come from the formalized management structure of the firm.

Leadership is one of the major problems facing law firms. Leaders are needed for managing partner posts, executive committee chairs, and practice group heads.  

Leadership behaviors include:

Leadership skills will need to be included in compensation systems.

Seven traits of effective leaders include:

  1. Make others feel important
  2. Promote a vision
  3. Follow the golden rule and establish trust
  4. Admit mistakes
  5. Criticize others only in private
  6. Stay close to the action
  7. Walk the talk.

Leadership is what makes things happen and propels the firm forward, facilitates new directions and attainment of strategic goals, and provides the firms the resiliency needed in today's challenging competitive climate.

Law firms without leadership are easy to spot. They are the firms that are "stuck-in-a-rut", unable to reach agreement or concensus on new ideas, stagnating profitability, partner defections.

Firm must pay attention to this key area and develop leaders for all roles mentioned above.

Click here to read my article on leadership

I will address each of the other building blocks in upcoming postings.

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
www.olmsteadassoc.com

 


 

 

Aug 23, 2010

Characteristics of Successful Law Firms: Basic Building Blocks – Block One

Question:

My partner and I just started our firm two years ago. We have one associate attorney and one staff member. As we grow our firm what should we keep in mind so we don't repeat some of the mistakes that I have seen in other firms that have not been successful?

Response:

I often refer to what I call the Basic Building Blocks of Successful Law Firms which are:

Lets take the first one – Partner Relations. This is the foundation (bedrock) of a successful firm. A successful firm has a healthy partner culture – a good marriage. In such a culture partners share common vision and purpose, respect one another, shoot straight with each other, and have difficult conversations and discussions when needed and deal with issues and problems. In many firms this is not the case and these firms often are characterized by the following:

Such firms are often doomed from the start. Firms that don't get this foundational building block right will build a firm on a shaky foundation. Before forming a partnership – go slow and get to know the other lawyer or lawyers and insure that the marriage makes sense, that you share similar goals and values, that you will be compatible, and you will be good partners. Once you have made the commitment – communicate, communicate, communicate and deal with issues in real time.

I will address each of the other building blocks in upcoming postings.

John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
www.olmsteadassoc.com

 

Aug 17, 2010

Law Firm Partner Compensation – Should We Change Our System

  • Question: 

    • We are a three attorney law partnership that does primarily business transactional work. My partner and I have been in practice together for four years. We are equal partners (50% each) as far as our partnership interests and we use these same interests for determining partner compensation. In other words we receive the same compensation. We recently have been discussing whether we should look into a different method for determining partner compensation. Currently we produce about the same level of fee revenue. What are your thoughts?

    Response:

    I could write a whole book on compensation systems – but here are a few thoughts:

    1. Over the past 30+ years I have seen just about every form of compensation system that there is – from "even steven" systems such as yours to "eat-what-you-kill", other formula systems, profit center systems, objective systems, etc. No particular system is better than another system. It depends upon the firm – the culture – strategic goals – and the environment.
    2. If the system is working – sometimes it is better to leave it alone. There is nothing wrong with an "even steven" system as long as the contributions (fee generation, fee origination, firm management, and otherwise) made by both of you to the firm are perceived as equal. Frequently, partners start out making even contributions and down the road contributions change (often due to life or family changes) and are no longer in alignment.
    3. When perceived contributions get out of alignment partners are reluctant to have the candid discussions that need to occur as well as changes in the arrangement or compensation system. It could be the system – percentage interest is fine – but as contributions have changed the percentages need to change.
    4. Resist the temptation to look at financial contributions in a single year. Look longer term – say the past three years.
    5. Consider not just the compensation as to whether people are happy with what they are getting – but consider whether the system in encouraging the behaviors that you need to achieve firm goals? For example – management of the firm, marketing activities, mentoring and training associates and others in the firm, etc. Often we discover that firms that are not realizing their strategic goals (those firms that have such goals) – for example growth – are victims of their compensation systems. The systems are motivating "lone range behaviors" rather than firm strategic goals. Often this is the primary reason that firms decide to change their system – to transition from "long ranger" to "firm-first" team-based firms.
    6. Consider bonus pools and other methods of supplementing the base system.
    7. Start slow.

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

    Aug 10, 2010

    Personal Injury Law Firm Profitability

    Question:

    We are a 5 attorney (all partners) personal injury plaintiff law firm in Central Illinois. We are all working hard, are extremely busy, but we don't seem to be seeing the results of our hard work in our earnings and compensation. We are making hefty marketing investments – in fact we are spending around 6% of revenue on marketing. What are your recommendations on how we can improve our profitability?

    Response:

    It is hard for me to comment specifically with the limited information that you have provided. There are numerous variables that need to be examined. However, in general terms:

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

    Jul 16, 2010

    Law Firm Eat What You Kill Partner Compensation Systems

    Question:

    We are current using an “eat what you kill” compensation system in our firm. Is this appropriate method for our firm to use?

    Response:

     It depends. You must ask yourself what kind of firm you want to be – team-based firm or group of space sharers or partnership of individual firms. Such systems are not appropriate for law firms that want to build a firm and create a team-based practice since such compensation systems typically reinforce “lone ranger” behavior resulting in a “me first vs firm first” orientation. It is hard to build a team-based firm with such an orientation. However, some firms do not want to practice as team-based firms – they want to practice as groups of individuals. For these firms such a system may be appropriate. The challenge will be to nail down a method of allocation revenue and overhead that is fair and equitable to all members concerned. Compensation systems should do more than simply allocate the pie – they should reinforce the behaviors and efforts that the firm seeks from its attorneys. Many firms are discovering that desired behaviors and results must go beyond short term fee production and must include contributions in areas such as marketing, mentoring, firm management, etc. to ensure the long term viability of the firm. Eat-what-you-kill systems discourage these behaviors.

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

    Jul 15, 2010

    Getting Control of the Financial Side of Your Law Practice

    Question:

    I am a partner in a 14 attorney firm. Our bookkeeper has been with us for 20 years. We have a time and billing system, a separate bookkeeping system, and a separate database for clients, and something else for trust accounting. The other partners and myself do not know the name of the software that we are using, don't know how to access the software, and we have to ask the bookkeeper for any financial information that we require. We feel like "hostages". She gets offended when we ask questions. When we do receive information we don't know how to read or interpret much of the information. How can we get control of our firm back?

    Response:

    It is imperative that owners and partners in a law firm have access to financial information on a timely basis, understand the information, and use the information in a proactive way to manage the practice. We suggest:

    The owner (or an appointed partner(s) in larger firms) obtain detailed training on the accounting software system(s) along side the bookkeeper when the system is implemented. In addition to general operation of the software, special training should also be obtained on intepretation and use of the management reports.

    In your current situation – this may be a good time to consider upgrading your system and at that time obtain training on the new system, review the roles of all parties, and current procedures.

    Insure that you have accounting controls in place and appropriate segregation of accounting duties.

    Outline your expectations and requirements of the bookkeeper, meet with her/him, and communicate appropriately.

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


     

    • Jul 15, 2010

    Valuation of My Law Practice For Merger or Acquisition

    Question:

    I have been thinking merging or selling my practice. How do I determine what my practice is worth?

    Response:

    You might want to consider retaining the services of outside advisors to help you with this process. There are a variety of methods used to value law practices including:

    1. Fair Market Value Methods
    2. Rule of Thumb Methods
    3. Price Earnings Ratio
    4. Discounted Cash Flow Models, etc.

    CPA practices are often valued using a rule of thumb method employing a multiplier of 1.0 to 1.5 times average gross revenues for the past five years. Thus, a practice with average billings of $400,000.00 per year might sell for $600,000 with 50% of the purchase price paid upon closing and the balance (50%) paid over a five year period based upon subsequent collections.

    Law practices are more difficult to value. CPA firms often have more repetitive work from ongoing clients and less risk in the practice – say compared to a personal injury law practice. CPA firms often have enforceable non-compete agreements which are non enforceable and therefore non existent in law firms. Law firms have much more fluctuation in practice valuation and no valuation model dominates. The rule of thumb model – when used – ranges from .5 to 3.0% – and will dependent upon the amount of repeat business, extent of institutional vs indivdiual clients, and the ability to sucessfully transfer clients to the acquiring practice.

    Look for ways to institutionalize your practice in a way that your practice is not "uniquely you."

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

    Jul 14, 2010

    Succession/Exit Planning Questions

    Question:

    I am sole owner of a 8 attorney firm in the Northwest. Two other attorneys are income partners – no equity – and the other five attorneys are associates. I am just turning 50 and am beginning to think about future retirement. What questions/issues should I be thinking about?

    Response:

    Fifty seems to be the point at which attorneys being thinking about their retirement and their future. Some even consider and in fact make complete career changes at this point in their lives. Here are a few questions to begin thinking about:

    1. Have you decided when you want to retire and leave your firm? Or do you want to work forever?
    2. What amount of cash or annual cash flow do you need when you exit?
    3. Do you presently have a retirement plan and how much income to you project that it will provide at different exit times?
    4. To whom do you want to transfer your interest? Family members in law school, other attorneys in the firm, another firm, etc?
    5. Based on future cash flow, do you know how much the firm is worth today?
    6. Do you know how to best maximize the income stream generated by the firm – in the years ahead while you are still with the firm and after you leave the firm?
    7. Have you been able to institutionalize the firm – or is it uniquely you?
    8. Is the firm even marketable?
    9. Do you have a succession/exit plan?
    10. Do you have a plan for your business if the unexpected happens to you?
    11. Have you taken steps to protect your family's wealth?

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

    Archives

    Categories

      Subscribe to our Blog