Philanthropy is very personal
In a recent thread on a listserv to which I contribute, there was discussion about the philanthropic proclivities of lawyers - that they aren't charitable enough. I was moved to comment, and thought you might be interested in my comments. They follow. You will note that the discussion hit a nerve for me.
Continue Reading...WI Court expands The Business of Law(tm)
The ABA's electronic Report discusses a new Wisconsin Supreme Court case that discards medical malpractice limitations for non-economic pain and suffering.
The reason, in part, was violation of the equal protection clause: Those with major injuries will benefit proportionately less than those with minor injuries who total compensation might come in below the cap.
This issue is huge and, in today's world of politics, is a stunning blow to the medical community that seems to be able to have its own way in everything.
From the perspective of the legal community, it is good news for some personal injury lawyers. While many lawyers are facing a challenge to their very economic existence --- see asbestos law changes, among others --- Wisconsin (this ruling is State specific) lawyers at least have been given new life for the moment. The medical community will now move to the national/federal level to seek new legislation.
The reasoning of the Wisconsin court was so well crafted, though, that it may be used elsewhere. Let's hope.
This issue is just one more example of what lawyers need to look out for in the development of their business plans: Consider "threats" to your practice from the outside world. In this case, from politicians seeking to make it less attractive for lawyers as a means of reducing litigation against claimed negligence. "Keep your eye on the ball" to make sure your practice area isn't the next target for our erstwhile politicians.
Dragon Naturally Speaking -- Part II
Like others, the earlier versions of Dragon left me complacent. I type very quickly and feel I have greater control using the typing modality.
However, I recently went to version 8 (standard), purchased a much better microphone (AcousticMagic) for about $250 and engaged a consultant to set up the system for me. Voila! Everything works nicely now. The real issue is the training of the system with your voice. And this is an on-going process. The more perfection you want, the more time you must spend in the training process. The more you are willing to accept the result as either a draft or as a version that your secretary can clean up later, the more pleased you will be with less training effort.
The total out-of-pocket cost, including the consultant, approaches $2,000. Well worth the cost. The real cost, however, as always, is your time in the training process. No one can do this but you .... And whether this is a valuable use of your time is dependent on the factors mentioned above as well as your own personality, your need for this modality and your level of patience/perfection.
Should I use Dragon Naturally Speaking?
The question is being asked of me: Should I go back to using digital transcription or should I get the latest version of Dragon Naturally Speaking? (Note: I'm frustrated with Miscrosoft's version and am ready to throw out my computer because of it!)
Continue Reading...The State Bar is clearly NOT a business
Otherwise they would have acted differently!
I find it interesting that people scratch their heads about why lawyers fail to support the Bar. In California, Governor Pete Wilson vetoed a Bar dues bill which would have allowed the State Bar to send out its billings for that year. This is old news.
The new part of it is that the lawyers in the Bar failed to support the Bar en masse; if they had, the Governor would have had to relent. When Governor Wilson, with a very long memory for an old slight, got even with the Bar, there was no one there to defend the Bar.
The Legislature, under a new governor, adopted a bill; the Bar sent out its dues, a couple of years late, but still ... better late than never.
As part of the bill, and the negotiation with the Bar that enable the adoption of the bill, law practice management was deleted as a designated category of education for MCLE.
Last year, a committee of the Board of Governors unanimously supported a resolution to re-designate law practice management as study category. For reasons not pertinent to this comment, the committee delayed sending the resolution to the full Board of Governors. Two weeks ago, that same committee reconsidered the resolution. Now the vote was 3-2 to kill the resolution and not send it to the full Board of Governors.
What's wrong with this picture?
Lawyers in California spend 80% of their dues each year to support the California disciplinary system. More than 50% of all complaints against lawyers involved somre sort of management failure on the part of lawyers.
If studying management could reduce the number of complaints (and all evidence supports this), then the cost savings presumably would also enable a dues reduction.
And you say that that is too logical for a bureaucratic instituion, one that has no profit motive or measurement stick. And they wonder why lawyers fail to support their agenda.
Thanks to Monica Bay
Thanks to Monica Bay and her ALM group, I saw one of the best baseball games ever this evening: California Angels (still can't get used to saying the Los Angeles Angels, or the California Angels of Los Angeles --- but this should make one interesting lawsuit!) VS. the New York Yankees (there is no confusion there).
6-5 in favor of the Angels!
Keeping clients after a lawyer retires
Question: How are clients kept with a firm when a lawyer retires?
This is a classic and difficult problem for many law and professional firms. Typically 10% of the lawyers bring in 80% of the business. When the rainmakers hit 65, they slow down, and their referral sources retire. Meanwhile, the next generation of partners has been accustomed to inheriting business and has no marketing skills.
This is usually when I get a call.
Firms must start with the premise that clients are a firm asset, and not a partner's personal asset. I have advised law firms to:
- Have the rainmakers introduce younger partners to their client contacts
- Build teams around the top 20 clients, and to let the client know they have a team.
- Actively start cross-selling the top 20 clients. For more info see Larry Bodine's webinar: Best Practices Of Cross Marketing and Selling New Services To Clients
- Create a business/strategic plan for the firm
- Compose a strategic marketing plan built around the top industries in which the firm has clients.
- Train the lawyers to go after target businesses and have each lawyer compose a personal marketing plan. Those who don't make the effort have their pay docked at review time. Those who get results get bonuses.
- Don't make associates partners unless they have a book of business; don't hire associates unless they have business development skills.
- Require everyone on the management committee to be rainmakers. If they can't bring in enough business to feed themselves and a platoon of associates, demote them off the committee.
And that's just for starters.
What are you paying for?
Stephen Pratt, CEO and Managing Director of Infosys Consulting, Inc., organizes work around the workers. This approach moves work to workers rather than workers to work. Support and expertise can be piped in by telephone in today's world by way of the the internet as well as by telephone (now over the internet with VOIP). The real collaborative stuff (the real value that professionals offer), he says, is done at the client's site.
Continue Reading...Succession planning - Is it possible?
Most lawyers fail to plan for succession because i) they think they're immortal; ii) they live in a system (most law firms) in which they
Continue Reading...Tort Reform
Steven G. Kraus, a Massachusetts attorney, just told me about a doctrine in New Jersey that should be adopted in every State. It should make litigants act more reasonably.
Steve said: "...an insurance coverage doctrine that we in New Jersey call 'Rova Farms' ... The doctrine provides that if an insurance company can resolve a lawsuit reasonably worth more than its liability policy limits for those policy limits and the plaintiff makes a demand to settle for the policy limits, if the insurance company refuses the offer and the case is later tried and comes in for more than the policy limits, the policy limits are reformed to cover the full amount of the verdict."
Wow! Talk about a way to make litigants, and their counsel, analyze their cases before they reach the Courthouse steps and act more reasonably! This should be adopted in every State, if not by Court doctrine, then by statute. That would be Tort Reform I could live with ....
Lessons from the Tour de France
As an avid cyclist, I've been watching the Tour de France with great enthusiasm and hope for all the Americans in this year's race. Of course, I want Armstrong to win an unprecedented 7th consecutive Tour.
But, Terri Lonier, took her enthusiasm one step further ... to glean certain lessons that can be applied to all businesses as well. These lessons apply equally to lawyers and The Business of Law(tm).
In her current Solo newsletter, Terri Lonier said:
"If it's July, it means that the annual cycling spectacle, the Tour de France, is underway... There are so many things to be gleaned from this competition. I believe three key lessons for soloists are:
