Question:
I am the owner of a small general practice firm in Novato, California. I have three associates working in the firm, three legal assistants, and one office manager/bookkeeper. I started my practice thirty-five years ago right out of law school. I am sixty years old and wanting to retire within the next five years. None of my associates have the ability or the desire to take over the firm. I believe that my best option is to sell my practice to another practitioner or join another firm through merger or other arrangement. I would appreciate your ideas regarding merging with another firm and how I would be compensated and receive payment for the goodwill value of my firm.
Response:
Merger or an of counsel arrangement are approaches that many sole owner firms are taking when there is no one on board that is capable or willing to buyout your interest. Often merger or of counsel arrangements look very similar in how they are structured. Typically, the owner joining another firm:
Employees that the new firm has accepted would join the new firm and receive compensation and benefits spelled out in the merger or Of Counsel agreement.
How the arrangement will be structured and how compensation/buy-out will be structured will depend upon the size of the other firm. I assume that you will be looking at a firm similar to your size or a little larger (1-20 attorneys). If this is the case and if the arrangement is structured as a merger you would more than likely be classified as a non-equity partner and not an equity partner. While the other firm could pay you in the same manner that other non-equity partners are paid, often a special compensation arrangement is developed where you are paid a percentage of your collections and if you are lucky a referral fee arrangement for your client origination’s for two or three years after your retirement – typically twenty percent. In many cases if will be difficult to get a goodwill value payment and impossible in mergers or Of Counsel arrangements with large firms.
Another option would be an outright sale to another sole owner or small firm for a fixed price for the goodwill value of your firm and any assets the firm desires to acquire. More than likely this would be with an initial down payment and payments over a three to five-year period. Typically, practice sale agreements have provisions whereby the purchase price can be reduced if revenues fall below a certain level.
Click here for our blog on succession/exit strategies
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 the owner of an estate planning firm in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. I have five associates and four paralegals working in the firm. More of my time is spent on managing the practice and marketing than on servicing clients. I am trying to develop financial goals for the firm but I am clueless as to what financial indicators or ratios I should be looking at and what constitutes good or bad performance. Anything that you are willing to share would be appreciated.
Response:
Here are what I believe to be key financial indicators/ratios and performance for a firm of your size and type:
I like to see profit margin – owner compensation – salary if paid as w-2 wages plus profit in the range of 35% – 45%.
Performance can vary by type of practice.
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:
Our firm is a small firm of two shareholders and two associates based in Bakersfield, California. The firm was formed fifteen years ago by the two existing shareholders. We have never made any additional shareholders but we believe that we owe it to our associates to have some guidelines as to what we are looking for in future shareholders. A partner track program/document if you will. Do you have any suggestions?
Response:
I believe you should have at least a general set of guidelines laid out in writing. For example:
Associates that have been seven years in practice and two years or longer employment with the firm as an attorney and consistently performing as outlined below are eligible for Equity Shareholder level review based upon equity shareholder level openings, competencies attained, performance, and behavior.
Associates selected for admission should be notified by the Executive Committee/Managing Shareholder and a meeting will be scheduled to discuss whether the Associate has a tentative interest in taking this step. If the Associate is interested in taking this step and after executing a non-disclosure agreement, the Executive Committee/managing shareholder should then prepare a detailed proposal outlining the mechanics and details required for admission. The proposal will include firm financial information, the buy-in or capital contribution requirement, and a copy of the firm’s shareholder agreement and equity shareholder compensation plan.
Click here for our blog on partnership
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am the owner of a small estate planning firm in Kansas City, Missouri. I have two associates and four staff members. I am considering acquiring a small (solo) practice in a nearby community. I have read some of your articles as well as your book on succession planning and valuation, and the multiple of gross revenue used to establish a goodwill value for a law firm. What are some of the factors that can impact whether the multiple is higher or lower – a firm’s potential value?
Response:
While multiples of gross revenue is a common approach, a key ingredient should be the profitability picture before distribution to owners. In other words, what is the quality of earnings? A firm that nets fifty percent of gross revenue would generally command a higher price that a firm that nets twenty-five percent. Factors that should be considered in determining a firm’s potential value are:
The average partner or owner earnings figure is the critical component. If the average partner/owner’s income is low, normally the practice is not worth much. A good business person will not pay for a business and pay a premium when it cannot be justified.
Click here for our blog on practice sale
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 partner with a sixteen-attorney firm in downstate Illinois and a member on our three person management committee. My responsibility on the committee in overseeing the firm’s finances and supervision of the firm administrator pertaining to accounting and finance. In reviewing our financial reports I have noted that our effective billing rates (realization rates) are not what they should be. We are reluctant to raise rates to our clients. What other steps can we take to improve our effective rates?
Response:
The most direct way to improve rate performance is to simply increase rates at an amount at least equal to inflation and to do so often (at least once a year). Without regard to whether this can be done, there are several other important techniques such as:
Managing the client intake processes is probably the most important technique for improving rate performance. Intake management means:
Here are some ways to accomplish this:
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 eighteen attorney firm in Milwaukee. Over the years our firm has held firm retreats, but the results have been disappointing – a lot of talk and little action. We have the same problem in our monthly partner meetings. We spend a lot of time in meetings – discussions and decisions made but little implementation. This week we are having a partner vote to decide on whether to have a retreat this year. Frankly, I will vote against it and I think it will be a waste of time. What are your thoughts concerning law firm retreats?
Response:
I understand your frustration and concern. Many law firms have had similar experiences with retreats. Good ideas and decisions but no follow-up or implementation once the retreat is over. Often retreats are too loose with no structure or leadership.
Insure that the firm appoints a qualified retreat leader either from within the firm or someone outside the firm that has experience leading or facilitating retreats. Identify specific objectives and desired outcomes during the retreat planning phase and design in how follow-up and accountability for implementation will be achieved. Be sure you come away from the retreat with a specific plan for follow-up action on every problem discussed. For example, if you decide to start a talent search to fill specific position, or if you have assigned several partners members to work further on specific problems and report the results, it is important that individual assignments and target dates for reporting and completion be made explicit. Determinations of this kind should be recorded and made part of the minutes of the retreat. Further, a system of follow through meetings to assess progress is advised, in order to maintain the momentum achieved at the retreat.
Many law firms benefit considerably by incorporating specific retreat decisions into a twelve month plan and schedule of activities to meet firm objectives. Planning of this kind typically results in significant firm progress, even though there may be initial resistance to these efforts by some firm members.
Click here for our blog on strategy
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a new managing partner in a thirty-five attorney firm in Tucson, Arizona. I replaced the previous managing partner who retired. He was the firm founder and had been in the position since the firm’s inception. I have had this position for six months and I am finding the job overwhelming – trying to serve my clients and managing the firm at the same time is very difficult. What are the major challenges that managing partners are having.
Response:
I understand and appreciate your situation. Managing partners advise me that the following challenges are what keeps them awake at night:
Click here for our blog on governance and leadership
Click here for our blog on financial management
Click here for our law firm management articles
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
Our firm is a fourteen-attorney firm in South Florida. I am the senior member of a three member executive committee. Our firm is in the second generation of partners. The founders retired five years ago. Upon their retirements we changed our governance from a managing partner to an executive committee model supplemented with a office administrator – some refer to the position as the office manager. Our executive committee model has worked relatively well. The administrator that we hired five years ago is still in place but we are not satisfied with his performance. We believe that this is in part due to the fact that our expectations have changed. When we hired him we thought that we needed an office administrator primarily to manage the office staff and the billing and bookkeeping function. So we hired an administrator that had worked, as his first job out of junior college, as an office manager in an eight-attorney firm for two years and had an associates degree in accounting. He has does a good job with managing the staff and the billing and bookkeeping. However, we have now discovered that we want more – we want executive level leadership. We want someone that is respected by all the attorneys and can:
I welcome your thoughts and opinions.
Response:
Yes your expectations have indeed changed. Your administrator has not been able to grow in the role expectations that you now have for the position and does not have the education or experience to meet your new demands.
My observations are as follows:
I believe that you would like an administrator to serve more in the role as a Director of Administrator or Chief Operating Officer and your present administrator simply does not have the education, experience, and maturity to function in this capacity. If you want someone to serve in this capacity you will have to hire someone with degree credentials – such as a MBA or CPA, that will facilitate the candidate’s acceptance by other attorneys in the firm as a peer professional as well as provide the candidate with the academic tools needed to carry out the expectations of the position. In addition, you need to hire someone that has ten years plus as a director of administration or chief operating officer position in a similar size firm or company – preferably a firm that provides professional services such as a law firm, accounting firm, engineering firm, etc. You will have to look beyond the titles that candidates have had and inquire into the specific duties and roles performed. You will need to back up this inquiry with solid reference inquiries.
A director of administrator or chief operating officer position is rare in a fourteen-attorney firm. Many firms your size have administrators or office managers similar to the office administrator that you currently have. The downside to establishing such a position in your firm will be the salary that you will have to pay – more than many of your attorneys and even some partners are being paid – and turnover in the position when an opportunity from a much larger firm comes along.
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 solo practitioner in upstate New York and I hope to retire three years from now and move to Florida and spend my retirement years there with my family. I have been talking with a larger firm, twenty-attorneys, in Albany that has an interest in me either merger my practice with their firm or joining as Of Counsel. My plan would be to work three more years, gradually phase back, and transition clients and referral sources.
I have had several meetings with the partners in the firm and they are now asking me for detailed due diligence information – tax returns, financial statements, etc. I have no problem providing these documents however I was wondering if I should be asking them for information. What do you think?
Response:
I believe that you are entitled to similar due diligence information from the other firm. You need to see what you are getting into.
Usually the smaller firm gets less – but they should share some information with you as you have with them.
I would ask for the following from them (or discuss with them):
I presume that you all have discussed any potential client conflicts of interest, etc.
You need to zero in whether the arrangement is going to be a merger or Of Counsel arrangement. If the arrangement is to be an Of Counsel arrangement the firm will be less likely to be willing to share all the information on the list and you will have less need as well. However, I believe you should at least have the basic financial and compensation information.
Click here for our blog on mergers
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am the firm administrator for a twenty-five attorney firm in Baltimore, Maryland. We have fourteen partners and nine are in their sixties. We have no succession or transition plans in place for senior partners. Every time I bring up the topic there is a resistance to even discuss the topic. I would appreciate any help that you can provide.
Response:
A decade ago, only the more proactive, well-managed law firms had in place programs and provisions for senior partner succession and transition. A majority of firms simply had not addressed or even given serious thought to the eventual retirement and exit of their senior partners. However, in the last five years, I have seen a lot of interest in succession, transition, and exit planning. The avalanche of baby boomers reaching retirement age has fueled this interest. Firms from the largest to the smallest are getting proactive and actively addressing succession and transition of senior partners. Some are putting in place formal programs, while others are at least addressing succession and transition informally using ad hoc approaches.
A recent Altman Weil Transition Survey gives us a glimpse of what other law firms are doing. Here are a few highlights from their survey concerning responding law firms.
Many other law firms are finding it a major challenge to get senior attorneys to talk and share their plans concerning retirement. In many cases the families of senior attorneys are having the same challenges. Coming to terms with aging is a difficult topic. In the case of law firms, often senior attorneys simply don’t know their future plans themselves, need the income, fear that others shareholders/partners will steal their clients, or the firm simply does not have a mechanism in place that mandates transition planning. Some firms are implementing mandatory retirement and others are putting in place financial incentives to motivate early transition of clients. Client loss is the most significant concern.
Keep at it and don’t give up but it may take a series of baby steps. Educate your partners on the risks of “doing nothing”. Provide them with articles and other resources and keep the topic on the agenda.
Click here for our blog on succession
Click here for out articles on various management topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC