Reid My Blog!

Zen and the Art of Practice Management

I was pleased and honored to be a featured presenter at the ABA GP Solo Roadshow in Miami this past weekend. It was a pleasure to once again share the playbill with Jim Calloway, Natalie Thornwell, Bruce Dorner and Dan Coolidge.  The size of the crowds surprised all of us, but hey, the weather wasn't the best.

I presented one of my favorite seminars, Zen and the Art of Practice Management.  It is an opportunity for law practice entrepreneurs to get a Big Picture view of the practice of law; to step back, see themselves, then develop new strategies and ideas to improve and/or build their firms.

I have uploaded my slide presentation for those who are interested in the concepts I teach.  Let me know what you think!

Update: Some readers are having problems viewing the slide show.  Email me and I'll send it to you.

What's Wrong with Mandatory Retirement?

This National Law Journal story on law firm mandatory retirement policies demonstrates the high-wire act law firms are walking to transfer responsibility, money and power to the next generation of partners.  These policies, in effect at many larger firms, promote the gradual transfer of client matters to younger lawyers within the firm when a senior partner approaches mandatory retirement--usually 70 years of age.  They seek to gently move partners towards retirement over a period of three to five years.

The problem arises when one or more senior partners do not want to slip quietly into the night.  For many, it is difficult to stop being a lawyer.  After 40 years, one's whole identity can be wrapped up in being a lawyer.  When the lawyer stops being, so does the person.

So while law firm retirement policies help the clients and law firm, they need to be flexible to deal with the wide range of human psyches belonging to retiring partners.  Rather than a one size fits all policy, law firms must address the underlying human needs of partners to achieve a total win-win-win solution.

Retirement options for senior partners should include the opportunity to remain a partner at some level to help the firm achieve its pro bono goals, Of-counsel agreements with tiered financial incentives, and the option to work as a solo practitioner subleasing space and services from the firm.

It just seeems the right thing to do for all involved.

It Had to Happen: The Law Firm Meets Reality TV

NBC is touting a new summer TV series The Law Firm.  According to NBC, Attorney Roy Black will manage 12 real lawyers handling real cases with real clients in front of real judges and juries, resulting in real consequences.

And presumably, real client bills.

One "legal eagle" will be eliminated each week until one attorney is left standing to collect $250,000. Twelve lawyers billing clients for 12 weeks of work?  Gotta be worth more than a quarter mil!

I'm not sure if this series will be The Peoples' Court Goes Primetime or The Apprentice Meets Ally McBeal.  Either way, I can't wait for the scenes of real lawyers filling out their time logs, running conflicts checks, reminding clients of overdue bills, and complaining about the lack of face time with partners and clients. After all, isn't it reality TV?

When Law Firms Become the News

Rarely does a law firm governance issue make the national news, but that's what has happened at Holland & Knight.  And rather than fade away, the stakes just got higher.

According to the St. Petersburg Times and Law.com, the controversy started as an internal sexual harassment matter in the Tampa office of Holland & Knight, but became public when the subject of the investigation was promoted to Chief Operating Office six months after the firm found the harassment complaints against him "credible."

The public stir caused the partner to surrender his position as COO, but not his partnership.  Now Managing Partner, Howell Melton, Jr. is under fire to resign despite the fact he has apologized to the firm for making the promotion.

Now word comes that Chicago-based partner, Charles Wright, has written a confidential memo urging Mr. Melton to resign or face the possibility of a recall vote of the partners.

Enter Martha Barnett, chair of the firm's Directors Committee and a former president of the American Bar Association, to reinterate her support of Mr. Melton and convey overall support from partners.

But the most interesting fact revealed by Ms. Barnett, according to her interview with the Tampa Tribune: it takes 20% of the firm's partners to seek Mr. Melton's recall.

As large law firms merge and expand to create a national presence they have to face several natural truths:

• The firm is no longer a small organization where everyone knows your name and shares your values.  It becomes harder for partners to reach concensus on many issues, including who leads them.
• Law firm internal activities and public actions will increasingly interest more people in and out of the legal profession.  Controversies once ignored are now magnified.  If a management misstep can bring down a Boeing executive, why not the managing partner of a large international law firm?

While Barnett claims partner support for Mr. Melton, it seems that tracking the opinions of 700 partners across 27 offices throughout several continents is no easy task--even with e-mail.  It will take some time for both sides to marshall their votes.

Given the stakes and status of the players involved, and the desire and ability to leak internal memos, it appears that the final chapter of this public drama has yet to be written.

Law Firms: Know Thyself!

My friend and colleague, Suzanne Rose, hits a home run in her latest article in Law Practice Today.  She succinctly identifies certain cultures and behaviors in law firms that can lead to malpractice claims.  She pinpoints cultural factors in firms including:

• Taking the short-term view
• Loosely affiliated office sharers acting as a firm
• Poor fiscal responsibility
• Poor environment of integrity and trust
• Eat-What-You-Kill Philosophy predominates

I think she would also agree that law firms with such cultures are also on the superhighway to disciplinary complaints and, potentially, financial ruin.

Unfortunately, too few lawyers and firms stop to consider the symptoms Suzanne has so clearly describes.  These lawyers focus their efforts on client legal work to the exclusion of effective law firm management.  They are too concerned with their clients’ matters or with their own short-term income needs to focus on the bigger (non-billable) picture.

It often requires a nuclear event to get these firm leaders to wake up, such as the defection of a profitable practice group, loss of one or more key partners, a disciplinary inquiry, or a malpractice complaint. To me, the big question is how to get firm leaders to take notice of their cultures and behaviors before the Big Bang happens. 

Unfortunately, no easy answers come to mind.

Law schools leave many graduates unaware of the need for management skills in the “real” world.  A few leaders in our profession continue to press law firm management as a crucial component of professionalism.  A small number of bar associations have made strides to better prepare their members for the business of practicing law.  And some lawyers self-identify the need for management and solve the matter through continuing legal education and self-study.  As Suzanne noted, these efforts continue to fall short.

It will take a more concerted effort within the organized bar to raise lawyer awareness of the need for greater management skills, planning, and implementation.  This should include CLE credit for law practice management courses; making such courses a requirement for all lawyers; greater emphasis of management concepts within the Rules of Professional Conduct; increased prominence of practice issues in bar communications with members; and greater availability of practice management resources for bar members.

Market forces will still weed out certain firms that fail to meet minimal business standards. I’m all for that. However, lawyers are professionals, not just businesspersons. We owe it to our profession and the communities we serve to take greater steps to improve the professionalism of all our members.