"The objective is to have only the most valuable people in London or New York, and the others in India, China or Columbus, Ohio,” said Robert Profusek, co-head of the mergers and acquisitions practice at Jones Day in New York, who sends low-end work to the cheapest locations and plans to open a document center in India. “Lawyers are service providers. We are not gods.”

This comes from a gem-packed Bloomberg article today titled: “Jones Day, Kirkland Send Work to India to Reduce Client Bills” co-authored by Cynthia Cotts and Liane Kufchock

Here are some additional outsourcing factoids from the article:

  • “Outsourcing will move about 50,000 U.S. legal jobs overseas by 2015”
  • “Companies like Dupont, Cisco and Morgan Stanley have legal departments in India”
  • “General Electric Co. sends about $3 million a year in routine legal work to its Indian affiliate”
  • “Kirkland & Ellis, the seventh-largest U.S. law firm, works with offshore attorneys at the client’s request”
  • “Law firms can earn more by using labor they can mark up without disclosure,” said Stephen Gillers, professor of legal ethics at New York University School of Law (referring to offshoring)
  • “Law firms contribute 45 percent to offshore revenue, while corporate law departments contribute 36 percent”, ValueNotes said.

PUNCHLINE:  If you are gathering intelligence on outsourcing, this article is a “must read”

If you want existing clients to like you as much as possible and even more so prospective clients then use proper names in conversation.  Now there’s PROOF if you need it.  

Most probable reasons you may not be using proper names in conversations:

  • You are not completely certain you remember (or pronounce) the name right so why risk it
  • There is a group and you can’t remember all their names so feel you shouldn’t use any
  • You are afraid of sounding patronizing
  • It’s a discipline you simply have not mastered.

PROOF:  A new study by Dr. Amit Almor of the University of South Carolina used MRI brain scans to show the different responses when a subject hears a proper name or a pronoun referring to a previously named person. 

“The brain lit up with activity when proper names were used, including areas that are not associated with language,” Almor said. “We saw considerable activity in areas of the parietal lobe that involve spatial processing that was absent when pronouns were used.”

Read the full story “Names Disrupt The Brain”.

Winners:

  • touch parts of their clients brains that others ignore
  • are liked and remembered much much better than their competitors

How:

  • Write the names down (if a group – make a seating chart – at least first names)
  • If hard to pronounce, ask and practice (they will love you for it)
  • Practice using the names (starting right now)

PUNCHLINE:  Perhaps in a perfect world you would simply be appreciated for the skilled genius you are.  I don’t disagree.  However, if competitive advantage is important to you in this imperfect world, put this post into action.  (Thinking about it, alone, will yield nothing.)

WARNING:  My post above may lack veracity according to Stephanie Allen West’s post "Anatomy of a telephone game applied to a neuroscience study" in her "Brains on Purpose" blog – I respect her enough to reference her post here – Stephanie’s admonition is deserving of consideration and reflection.  Thank you, Stephanie.


It is with personal sadness that I post this news. In September, one of Canada’s most respected law firms will close its doors forever according to a story by lawyer/journalist Jim Middlemiss in today’s Financial Post: “Lawyer exodus shutters Desjardins”.

Jim starts his story:

An era will end for the 100-lawyer law firm Desjardins Ducharme LLP in September. The once-esteemed law firm will close after more than 50 years in business.

For those unfamiliar with Desjardins Ducharme, Kip Cobbett’s comment in the story sums it up:

Kip Cobbett, [Managing Partner and COO of] Stikeman Elliott LLP in Montreal, said it is "very sad" to see Desjardins’ demise. "It was a wonderful firm. It will certainly change the landscape."

The inevitable autopsy will point to a plethora of possible causes.  In my view the imperative for firm leaders who read this is not an analysis of Desjardins Ducharme in particular but rather the realization that complacency, even in the blue chip firms, can be lethal.

Punchline:  The relentless tsunami of change in the legal market place will not spare a firm unable to maneuver out of its path – no matter that firm’s historic financial success, no matter that firm’s pedigree, no matter that firm’s history, no matter that firm’s exemplary reputation.  In my view the harsh lesson here is simple: manage or prepare to perish!

“Ford & Harrison, a 190-attorney labor and employment firm, has tossed out billable-hour requirements for first-year associates. The program aims to close the practical-skills gap of law school education and increase value to clients. The firm also hopes it will enable associates to handle meatier matters more quickly.“ according to Leigh Jones of The National Law Journal.

I have the privilege of knowing C. Lash Harrison (pictured) and his remarkable stature within his firm.  When I read about this bold initiative I was in no way surprised that it was Lash who had the gravitas to pull this off.  It may be prophetic that the tag line on the Ford & Harrison firm’s website reads:  “THE RIGHT RESPONSE AT THE RIGHT TIME”

"Everyone sits around and complains about the problems," said C. Lash Harrison, managing partner of the law firm. "I figured, what the heck, maybe we can try something."

Observation:  The issue of newer lawyers recording time on files is a bit of a hornet’s nest in most firms.  If the time is billable, it detracts from the billing partner’s realization rate and perhaps even hours billed.   Carefully measured associates steer away from files where they can’t record billable time.  This creates a tension that is based on economic reality but serves neither the associate’s training objectives nor the client’s desire to optimize value.  Thank goodness for fresh thinking and bold initiatives.  That makes C. Lash Harrison a hero to me.

Thank you to LAW.COM for its post Firm Kills Billable Hour for First-Year Associates

“Women at modern-day law firms are so petrified of appearing unproductive that they sometimes conceal cancer or heart attacks to avoid being marginalized” according to Linda Robertson, a veteran Vancouver lawyer as reported in one of Canada’s top National Newspapers, The Globe and Mail, describing a session at The Canadian Bar Association annual meeting held recently in Calgary

The presenters included The Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C.?Chief Justice of Canada who is quoted, among other things, as saying:

““The reality is that women entering the profession in droves have suddenly found themselves confronted with a very difficult, inflexible model of practice.”

“This is the question, I believe, for the future. How do we structure the way lawyers — women and men – work; the way they live, the way they serve the public?”

My View:  As a Canadian Lawyer (now residing in Anguilla), I am proud of the remarks of the Canadian Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada and hope that all Managing Partners, regardless of where their firms practice, will commit to making the practice of law attractive to all lawyers, regardless of gender (or ethnicity for that matter).

Read the whole article.

Added Note:  At least some firms seem to have made progress on this front – you may want to glance at the 50 Best Law Firms for women.


Many of my friends and clients know me as a very optimistic person so this post may surprise them.  I feel like I am about to watch the next dot com crash only I am not talking about the internet or high tech.

I have held this belief for many months and I believe that the economic indicators that can hurt the legal profession are gaining momentum.  How much longer can the legal profession remain insulated from the market realities?  I say not long at all.

Our legal profession is in for very rough times. My message to Managing Partners is not to become pessimistic but simply to have a contingency plan in place.

Most firms will:

a) continue to be hourly billers (for the most part)
b) plan for extensions of the historic linear revenue and profit per partner growth
c) perhaps fine tune by de-equitizing or closing an unprofitable office or two

but few will create a contingency plan for:

a) dramatic drops in demand for many traditionally hot practice areas
b) over-staffing (at all levels and in most practice areas)
c) the cancer of internally competitive behavior as the pie shrinks

Those inclined to tell me I am crazy I ask to wait six months following the next US election – then I will eat this post if I was wrong.

I love our profession and want only the best for it so I hope the smart Managing Partners out there will prove that great firms can thrive through adversity – especially when your competitors are not capable of doing so.

My heart hopes I am wrong – but my mind tells me otherwise.  I decided that down the road it would be no good to say “I knew it” if I lacked the courage to post it now.

Your comments are most welcome, as always.

Addendum:

Patrick Lamb posted the following comment both here and on his own popular blog: In Search of Perfect Client Service in his post: Gerry Riskin’s Forecast: Stormy Times Ahead.

I think he deserves a response:

Patrick’s comment/question:    Gerry–very powerful post.  Not one that I disagree with at all, but can you share with us the signs you see that lead you to this conclusion?  And are the elections tied to result or simply a benchmark for the time by which you think the changes will be apparent?  Ciao.

My response:  The US election is a process that sees powerful interest groups exercising their discretion in a manner which will increase the probability of their preferred candidate(s) being elected.  As a result, a temporary and indeed unsustainable economic climate may be manifested.   I think things get very real about six months after US presidential elections.  With outcomes certain, interest groups lose their motivation in a hurry – at least for a while.   As for the indicators themselves, I am afraid to start because where do I finish?  However, here are some things to examine:

    Currency fluctuations
    Price of oil
    Price of precious metals
    Increase and decrease in “real” jobs
    Geographic location of those jobs
    Political stability of job locations
    Foreign relations as they affect business
    Balance of Trade between countries and regions
    Housing markets (not just prices – but demand)
    Auto market (demand)
    Credit levels (or should I say “debt levels”)
    Interest rates (they are not falling, in fact, get ready…)
    The advent of the largely unregulated Hedge Fund industry
    The establishment pensions that invest in Hedge Funds
    The Domino effect – how one indicator impacts many others

And specific to the legal profession:
   
    The disparity between views of General Counsel and Outside Law Firms
    Associate starting salaries (and consequential impact on all salaries)
    “De-equitization of partners” trend
    “Law firms going public” (anticipated) trend
    The obsession by partners on remuneration
    The expectation of continued increasing revenues, PPP and PPL
    The surrealism of the financial expectations of new lawyers
    Comments from Citigroup’s law firm market specialists

Disclaimer:  Yes, I obtained a business degree before law and yes I studied economics and yes I subscribe to reliable publications like The Economist but I do not profess to be able to predict the stock market or future currency fluctuations.  In fact, I will admit that my post is based to a large extent on a hunch – intuition (I read Blink by Malcolm Gladwell so maybe this is OK).

Punchline:  If there were a fund that invested in the legal profession worldwide (at least in the western world) I am not a buyer – I might even summon the courage to put some money at risk by “selling short”.

In closing, perhaps not you, Patrick but there are many who will think I am completely wrong – I not only respect their right to hold that view, I hope that their view prevails.  I post this because if there I seven a significant possibility I am right, as stated in my original post:  “My message to Managing Partners is not to become pessimistic but simply to have a contingency plan in place.”

Addendum #2:  In light of the stock market tumble today, I thought I should clarify that this post was not a reaction to it but rather done before today and scheduled to auto post after midnight this AM – here is an image from my aggregator to verify:

-30-


Ahhhh yes… seduction! 

Many great firms that I serve have a common enemy ”complacency” which Is indeed the result of decades of success.  Managing Partners complain that they are unable to get their partners to pay attention to their future.

Read Jim Hassett’s blogpost, Have lawyers been seduced by success? In his fantastic blog: Legal Business Development.

Here’s a teaser quote: 

If you like money, it’s a great time to be a lawyer. In Citigroup’s Law Watch survey of "153 US law firms broadly representative of the industry," law firm revenue has gone up 9.8% per year since 2001. But as Bill Gates put it: "Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can’t lose." We know lawyers are smart people. Do some think they can’t lose?

Read why Jim argues that you ought to read:


This is a San Francisco Chronicle article in which Chronicle Staff Writer Heidi Benson begins:

“Mary Mocine, a 63-year-old Zen priest and former litigator, teaches meditation to burned-out attorneys at weekend retreats at Tassajara in Big Sur and Green Gulch Farm at Muir Beach.”

Litigators may be comforted by this:  "You can still be a warrior…but because you’re at peace with yourself and you’re centered, you’re not coming from rage or fear or anger."

www.law.ufl.edu/faculty/riskin/Apparently, this is not a new idea: "A Zen approach to the law emerged in 1999, when Professor Leonard Riskin of the University of Florida Levin College of Law began discussing mindfulness meditation in his law classes."

Note:  Leonard Riskin and I are not related, to my knowledge, but that does not stop me from admiring his work

If your hectic schedule permits, make a moment to glance at the full article.

Note (added August 1, 2007, 5:45 PM Anguilla, B.W.I.):   I have received an e-mail from an associate director of media relations at Stanford Law School asking me to remove Stanford from the post (which I have done). She says that the information in the San Francisco Chronicle article was inaccurate. The reporter has been contacted and is issuing a correction. The media person says it is misleading to the public to say that Stanford Law has offered such a seminar: "We simply haven’t . . .  ."


Congratulations to Blawgworld 2007 on today’s launch and may I express my deep gratitude for being included in the 77 featured blawgs. 

Congratulations also to the other 76 included blawgers who are inspirations to me every day.

Send the downloadable Blawgworld 2007 eBook to lawyers you know who would benefit from an introduction to the legal blawgosphere.  (Blawgworld 2006 saw 45,000 downloads – 2007 promises to be even bigger and better – 366 pages of indexed information – use the Blawgs, Problems, Products tabs.)

I am asked frequently why some lawyers create such amazing rapport with their clients.  Much of this stems from the art of the first impression .  The first client interaction is more about not making a bad impression than it is making a good one.

Here are 7 first client interaction blunders that virtually guarantee you won’t develop healthy client rapport:

  1. Talking only about yourself
  2. Revealing too much
  3. Not listening
  4. Not looking your best
  5. Trying to be cool or aloof
  6. Not being yourself
  7. Not listening to your gut

CONFESSION:  I stole these! …from genius (he denies it) Brad Isaac who invented Achieve-IT software, known as the Breakthrough Goal Setting Method.

He actually posted 10 First Date Blunders That Blow It Every Time on his Achieve-IT blog and I thought, hmmm, can we learn (transpose from one context to another).

You will note that there were 10 in his post and seven in mine –  as for the three I left out, I thought two were not relevant and thought better of including the third, they were:

  1. Going someplace where you can’t talk
  2. Bringing friends along
  3. Having sex or being too sexual

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:  Why would unappealing behavior in social situations be any more appealing in professional situations.

By the way, Brad’s blog has some very interesting posts – check it out!