Law Practice Management Asked and Answered Blog

Category: and

« Earlier | Later »

Oct 13, 2015

Law Firm People Management and Accountability

Question:

I am the managing partner of a newly formed 8 attorney firm in Austin, Texas that was formed last year when several of us left another firm and started this firm. The most frustrating part of the managing partner job is managing the people – this includes other partners, associates, and staff. How do I deal with people that are not following firm policy or doing things they should not be doing?

Response:

Managing people is one of the toughest challenges that law firms face. Challenges often involve  people not following firm policy and doing what they should not be doing. It drives owners, managing partners, and administrators crazy.

My advice to frustrated owners, managing partners, and administrators – tell them to stop. Seriously. As the managing partner of your firm you can't beat around the bush and be sheepish concerning your expectations concerning desired performance and behavior in the office. Confront the performance or behavioral problem immediately. Manage such problems in real time. Don't wait for the annual performance review and don't treat serious problem as a "self-improvement" effort. Tell them how you feel about the performance or behavioral issue, the consequences for failure to resolve the issue, your timeline for resolving the issue, and the follow-up schedule that you will be using to follow-up and monitor the issue. If they must resolve the performance or behavioral issue in order to keep their job tell them so. They may need this level of confrontation in order to give them the strength to be able to deal with their issues.

Being a wimp does not help you or them. Tell them like it is and conduct a heart-to-heart discussion. You will be glad you did.

Click here for our blog on career management

Click here for articles on other topics

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

Oct 06, 2015

Law Firm Growth – Associate Hiring and Retention

Question: 

Our firm is a two partner firm located in Rochester, MN. We have been approached by a solo practitioner that wants to sell us his practice. The price and terms seem fair but we are concerned about staffing and managing the other office. His practice consists of himself and two staff members. We would have to maintain a second office, hire an associate or two for the office, and then manage both operations. We have recently tried to hire an associate without success by reaching out to targeted lawyers that we knew in our local area. Frankly, acquiring this practice is a little daunting. We would appreciate your thoughts.

Response: 

I believe the first issue is whether you are looking to grow the firm and are willing to undertake the additional management responsibilities that comes with growth. Some firms are ready for growth and others are not. Larger is not necessarily better. 

I would not let your unsuccessful associate hiring attempts discourage you from acquiring the practice if you desire to grow and the price and terms are acceptable. You may need to cast a wider net and be more focused in your efforts. Recently a two attorney firm in Mid-Missouri hired an associate from St. Louis. A two attorney firm in Central Kentucky hired an associate from Lexington, Kentucky. It may take some time but a concentrated recruiting effort usually pays off regardless where you are located – even in small communities. 

Click here for our blog on career management

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

 

Aug 11, 2015

Law Firm Administrator – Performance and Expectations

Question:

I am the managing partner in an 8 attorney general practice firm in Tulsa, Oklahoma. A year and a half ago we hired our first legal administrator to run all business aspects of our practice. We decided that we wanted more than an office manager – we wanted an administrator to serve in the capacity of a COO. We hired an experienced administrator at a good salary, developed a well-conceived job description, and the work began. My partners and I are frustrated. We have to follow-up on projects and task assignments, do not see the leadership that we had hoped for, and have concerns that our administrator may not be up to the tasks. We just realized that we have not have a performance review since he started. I would appreciate your suggestions.

Response:

Sounds like you did a good job clarifying the role and initially laying out your expectations. However, you cannot stop there. You have not conducted a performance review and I suspect that he has received little feedback regarding his performance. During the first year feedback needs to be ongoing with a mini review every ninety days and ongoing coaching and follow-up. You need to conduct a review with him ASAP, layout expectations and compare to actual performance, discuss gaps, and reach an agreement as to a plan with milestones and dates to resolve performance gaps. They you will have a better picture as to whether your administrator was the right hire or not.

Click here for our blog on career management

Click here for articles on other topics

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

 

Jun 02, 2015

Law Firm Partner Compensation and Client Origination Credit

Question:

Our firm is an 8 attorney general practice law firm located in Kansas City, Missouri. Five of the attorneys are equity partners and the other three are associates. The two founding partners are the only ones in the firm that bring in clients – the other partners are just workers. Currently the partners are paid based upon their collections for cases/matters to which they are assigned. They are also credited for work that others do on their assigned matters as well. We are concerned that in a general practice firm such as ours, everyone must be bringing in clients and we are considering changing our compensation system to factor in credit for client origination – bringing in clients. I would appreciate your thoughts.

Response:

All law firms need a mix of finders, minders, and grinders. Finders (client originators) are needed to provide sufficient work to keep the workers busy. Minders (responsible matter attorneys) are needed to manage the portfolio of client work. Grinders (working attorneys) are needed to service and produce client services.  While there are exceptions, in most firms partners must hit on all three of these cylinders. In other words, most of the partners must do well at finding, minding, and grinding. Partners may perform some of these roles better than others, however overall they should be competently performing each of the roles. Very few firms can afford the luxury of having several senior partners only bringing in business without being required to maintain personal production levels as well. Partner compensation research concludes that the most a law firm can afford to pay a rainmaker – over and above his or her own billable hours (fee collections) is the marginal profit derived from the associates the rainmaker can keep busy, regardless of how many partners he or she occupies. The most valuable partners are those who offer a balance of skills: worker, delegator, supervisor, and rainmaker.

Since origination of new clients is the lifeblood of any firm it is a key factor that should be recognized in any compensation system. The exact weight that it is given will depend upon the firm and how dependent it is upon constant client replacement, only a few institutional clients, turnover of clients, leverage ratio, etc. A firm that has a well diversified base of institutional long time clients will typically weigh client origination much lower than a firm that has to constantly replace individual clients.

Click here for our blog on compensation

Click here for our published articles

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

 

May 12, 2015

Law Firm Marketing and Advertising – How Much Should a Bankruptcy Firm Spend on Marketing

Question:

I am the sole owner of a debtor bankruptcy practice. I have one other attorney and three staff members. Last year we spent $50,000 of advertising. Our fees collected were $550,000 and Net Income was around $160,000. Are we spending too much?

Response:

You are spending 9% of fee revenue. I believe that in a consumer practice such as personal injury and debtor bankruptcy you have to spend around 10% of fee revenue to get the business you need to sustain the practice. I have some practices spending 19% of revenue.

So, I don't think you are necessarily spending too much if the advertising is working for you. You have to constantly measure the ROI on your advertising and fine tune it when needed.

Also, insure that the business is actually coming from the advertising – in other words don't advertise to get business you would have had anyway or in a market that you have saturated and more advertising will not yield any additional business.

Click here for our blog on marketing 

Click here for articles on other topics

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

Mar 03, 2015

Sale of Law Practice and Alternative Approaches

Question:

I am the owner of a solo practice located in the western Boston suburbs. I have been considering selling my practice. Do you see many practitioners selling their practices?

Response:

Yes, I am seeing many solo practitioners selling their practices. However, I also see many lawyers looking to exit their practice start by thinking that they will sell their practice. However, when all is said and done the arrangements often take one of the following arrangements:

  1. Admitting an existing associate to partnership and then having the associate buy out the owners partnership interest in a retirement payout.
  2. Bringing in an associate and mentoring and grooming them, admitting the associate to partnership when he or she is ready, and then having the associate buy out your partnership interest in a retirement payout. Sometimes partnership interests are sold gradually over time.
  3. Merger with another law firm.
  4. A wind-down of the practice and then Of Counsel relationship with another firm with a client transition/payout arrangement.

Many solo practitioners are often taken back by the inflexibility of some of the various state rules of professional conduct concerning sale of law practices and find the above approaches more flexible.

Click here for our blog on succession

Click here for out articles on various management topics

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

Feb 04, 2015

Law Firm Financial Performance – Billable TIme and Fees

Question:

I am the managing partner of a four attorney (all partners) estate planning firm in Tulsa, Oklahoma. We are all working hard but I do not believe that we are making the money that we should be. Last year our fee collections were $600,000 and our net income $250,000 which was the total amount that was available for partner compensation. Thus, we each made $62,500.00. Each of us have been practicing for over 20 years and I believe this is totally unacceptable. We appear to be busy and have plenty of work. I would appreciate your thoughts.

Response:

I agree that the firm should be doing much better. Regardless of practice area (unless you are an insurance defense firm) and where you are located I believe you should be averaging $300,000+ fee collections per lawyer. You are averaging $150,000 per lawyer. You expenses of $350,000 ($67,500 per lawyer) is actually low and not the problem. You need to dig into the numbers and look into why the revenue numbers are not higher. Usually the culprits are lack of business, inadequate billing rate (or effective rate for flat fee matters), not putting in the hours, or poor time management and time keeping habits. Each attorney should strive for 70% of worked time to be billable (client production) time. Lexis has published a couple of studies on billable hours that you might find useful - Billable Hours Survey Report, Non-Billable Hours Survey Report and Where Do all the Hours Go

I find that many estate planning firms that do much of their work on a flat fee basis often are not realizing effective rates anywhere near their target time billing rates.

Look into the numbers and determine the culprit or culprits and then develop a strategy for dealing with each one – marketing to improving work ethic and time management and time keeping habits.

Click here for our blog on financial management

Click here for articles on other topics

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

Jan 20, 2015

Law Firm Hiring Practices – Pros and Cons of Hiring Lawyers that are Children of Firm Partners

Question:

I am a partner in a four partner firm located in Houston. We have three associates in the firm. One of our partners has a son just finishing law school and he would like him to join the firm. We have never had children of partners work in the firm before and I am concerned about setting a precedent. We have a good relationship among all of the attorneys and I do not want to see our relationship tarnished. I would appreciate your thoughts.

Response:

I have seen it go both ways. Many firms have brought children and other family members into the firm and have had excellent results. Others have not. In general I believe that law firms do a better job at this than do other business firms. Your situation is more complicated since you have associates in place that may feel threatened and uncertain as to their futures when you bring in family members. I believe that if you lay the proper foundation and go about it correctly you can successfully bring your children into the firm. Here are a few ideas:

  1. Recognize that for the family members there will be a family system, the family law firm, and an overlapping of these systems. This can be fertile ground for conflict if clear boundaries between the family role and the firm (business) role are not clear. Establish clear boundaries. Family dynamics and business dynamics seldom mix. Your objective should be to draw the clearest possible distinction between the two and make sure that everyone understands that the firm (business) is the firm and the family is the family.
  2. Children should not be brought into the firm unless they want to be involved and satisfy your standard hiring criteria for lawyers. I believe that before your children join the family law firm it is a good idea for them to work for another firm or organization. When they do join the family firm they can bring with them that experience, a supply of new ideas, a network of contacts, and a number of other benefits acquired.
  3. Make it clear to your children that they must "earn their stripes" and come up through the ranks in the same fashion as other associates in the firm. No special privileges. Make it clear that they must earn the respect of other attorneys and staff in the firm.
  4. Put your associates and staff at ease. Make it clear that your children are expected to "earn their stripes" and they will not be promoted to partner over other associates on family status alone. (Unless this is your intent)
  5. Clearly define the role of all parties.
  6. Monitor your own behavior. Don't take sides – either between your children if both join the firm or between your children and other employees in the firm.
  7. Be careful with compensation and other rewards. Compensation should be based up performance and results and consistent and competitive with other law firms of similar size and type.
  8. Communicate, communicate, communicate – your intentions, roles, etc. before and after your children join the firm.

Click here for other articles

Click here for my blog on HR Matters

Good luck! 

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

Sep 09, 2014

Law Firm Staffing and Growth Models – Lateral Partners & Of Counsel

Two weeks ago I was asked by the managing partner of a 16 attorney insurance defense firm about staffing and growth models for an insurance defense firm and I listed the following models and discussed the first model – grow your own associate staffing.

Attorney staffing/growth models include:

  1. Grow Your Own Associate Staffing
  2. Lateral Associate Staffing
  3. Contract – Staff Associate Staffing
  4. Lateral Partners (Equity or Non-Equity)
  5. Of Counsel (Various Approaches and Purposes)
  6. Mergers (Or Small Firm Acquisitions)
  7. Branching

This week I will outline the pros and cons for number 4 and 5 – Lateral Partners (Equity or Non-Equity) and Of Counsel.

Lateral Partners (Equity or Non-Equity

PROS

  1. Maybe a quicker way to increase profitability and cash flow.
  2. Allows the firm to acquire talent that it may not have time to grow or develop.
  3. Allows the firm to expand into new areas if the candidate has said experience and brings a book of business with him or her.

CONS

  1. Desired compensation may not fit within the firm's existing compensation structure.
  2. Clients may not come or materialize.
  3. May be issues with cultural fit.
  4. Costs may not be justified.

Of Counsel – Various Approaches and Purposes

  1. Allows the firm to acquire partner level talent, business, etc. without offering partnership.
  2. Provides the firm with a way to acquire a practice of someone wanting to retire.
  3. Provides the firm with a way to pilot test new lateral partner candidates and evaluate in a first-phase approach.
  4. Provides the firm with a way to partner with other firms.
  5. Provides a way for the firm to enter more new market areas.

Other models to be discussed in upcoming posts.

Click here for our article on hiring associate attorneys

Click here for our law firm management articles

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

 

    

Sep 02, 2014

Law Firm Staffing and Growth Models – Lateral Associate Staffing & Contract Associate Staffing

Last week I was asked by the managing partner of a 16 attorney insurance defense firm about staffing and growth models for an insurance defense firm and I listed the following models and discussed the first model – grow your own associate staffing.

Attorney staffing/growth models include:

  1. Grow Your Own Associate Staffing
  2. Lateral Associate Staffing
  3. Contract – Staff Associate Staffing
  4. Lateral Partners (Equity or Non-Equity)
  5. Of Counsel (Various Approaches and Purposes)
  6. Mergers (Or Small Firm Acquisitions)
  7. Branching

This week I will outline the pros and cons for number 2 and 3 – Lateral Associate Staffing and Contract – Staff Associate Staffing

Lateral Associate Staffing

PROS

  1. Less training and mentoring time
  2. Will become profitable more quickly – maybe a year sooner
  3. They will be more acceptable to clients than new untrained associates
  4. May be able to charge higher billing rates
  5. Tradeoff of higher salary vs. quicker profitability and cash flow – sooner profitability may pay for itself in the short term depending upon the salary differential.
  6. May generate new ideas and skill sets/approaches/insights that can benefit the firm.

CONS

  1. May have to de-train them. They may bring practices and approaches that are undesirable to the firm
  2. Higher salary initially and expectations for more
  3. Sooner expectations for non-equity and or equity partnership
  4. Clients may not allow you to charge any more for these associates than new young associates
  5. May not result in higher profitability and cash flow any sooner than new associates (probably will – but if not costs will be higher)

Contract – Staff Associate Staffing

PROS

  1.  Allows the firm to staff up when needed using a project/matter staffing approach
  2. Allows the firm to better manage fixed costs and manage contract staffing as a variable cost and match costs to staffing needs
  3. Allows the firm to evaluate candidates before committing to full-time positions
  4. Can be experienced and seasoned or not

CONS

  1. Cost per hour will probably be higher
  2. Turnover due to uncertainty as to their future

Other models to be discussed in upcoming posts.

Click here for our article on hiring associate attorneys

Click here for our law firm management articles

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

 

    

Archives

Categories

    Subscribe to our Blog