Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Joel Rose authored last month's A&FP article on how to balance compensation for law firm partners whose strengths lay in origination, production and management. So A&FP sought his reaction to the following thought-provoking quote from Peter C. Lando and Matthew B. Lowrie.
The quote is from a recent article Lando and Lowrie coauthored for the National Law Journal. Their article addresses the question: Can a firm wanting its attorneys to have a better work-family balance survive and flourish if it requires only 1600 billable hours/yr per lawyer?
The quote (emphasis added): “Maintaining balance and a fair return for the work requires teamwork. This is necessary so that an undue burden is not placed on any one person. If the vision is not shared, then internally competitive behavior can distract from both the personal and financial rewards of practice. It helps toward that end not to track originations or billing credit.”
Rose duly noted the tie-in between the authors' firm-culture objective and their surprising recommendation not to track some types of lawyer contributions.
Rose's reply: I agree with Peter C. Lando and Matthew B. Lowrie's thesis about the importance of teamwork to maintain balance and a fair return for work performed in a law firm. However, I take exception to their comment that “[i]t helps toward that end not to track origination or billing credit.”
A given firm's culture is based on values such as aggressiveness, collegiality, sensitivity to quality of life, competitiveness, democracy, etc., that set a pattern for the firm's activities and the roles and relationships among and between its partners. That cultural pattern is instilled in partners and associates, and thereby perpetuated in the firm, by the examples set by lawyer management and other influential partners.
In 38 years as a management consultant to law firms, it has been my experience that a law firm's culture can be one of its major strengths when it is consistent with its current and long-term objectives. But if a firm's culture prevents it from meeting competitive threats or adapting to changing economic environments, that culture can lead to the firm's stagnation and decline – unless its partners make a conscious effort to change.
The significant majority of law firms that I have worked with over the years do track origination credit, billing credit, productivity, etc. This data can indeed contribute to firm problems if partners use it as “ammunition” to earn points for themselves or to tear down others. But most partners use this information as a basis for making sound business decisions about the allocation of profits.
Like this majority of firms, I conclude that properly keeping track of originations, billings, production and other objective factors ' as well as a multitude of subjective factors that may not be as readily quantified ' is required to compensate attorneys fairly for their total contributions to the firm.
Finally, I recommend that record-keeping practices used in credit tracking be examined periodically. These practices often initially evolve in response to demands by strong and influential partners, so over time they can become increasingly unsatisfactory to other firm members. At the very least, these practices should be clearly articulated and understood ' and open for discussion.
Joel Rose authored last month's A&FP article on how to balance compensation for law firm partners whose strengths lay in origination, production and management. So A&FP sought his reaction to the following thought-provoking quote from Peter C. Lando and Matthew B. Lowrie.
The quote is from a recent article Lando and Lowrie coauthored for the National Law Journal. Their article addresses the question: Can a firm wanting its attorneys to have a better work-family balance survive and flourish if it requires only 1600 billable hours/yr per lawyer?
The quote (emphasis added): “Maintaining balance and a fair return for the work requires teamwork. This is necessary so that an undue burden is not placed on any one person. If the vision is not shared, then internally competitive behavior can distract from both the personal and financial rewards of practice. It helps toward that end not to track originations or billing credit.”
Rose duly noted the tie-in between the authors' firm-culture objective and their surprising recommendation not to track some types of lawyer contributions.
Rose's reply: I agree with Peter C. Lando and Matthew B. Lowrie's thesis about the importance of teamwork to maintain balance and a fair return for work performed in a law firm. However, I take exception to their comment that “[i]t helps toward that end not to track origination or billing credit.”
A given firm's culture is based on values such as aggressiveness, collegiality, sensitivity to quality of life, competitiveness, democracy, etc., that set a pattern for the firm's activities and the roles and relationships among and between its partners. That cultural pattern is instilled in partners and associates, and thereby perpetuated in the firm, by the examples set by lawyer management and other influential partners.
In 38 years as a management consultant to law firms, it has been my experience that a law firm's culture can be one of its major strengths when it is consistent with its current and long-term objectives. But if a firm's culture prevents it from meeting competitive threats or adapting to changing economic environments, that culture can lead to the firm's stagnation and decline – unless its partners make a conscious effort to change.
The significant majority of law firms that I have worked with over the years do track origination credit, billing credit, productivity, etc. This data can indeed contribute to firm problems if partners use it as “ammunition” to earn points for themselves or to tear down others. But most partners use this information as a basis for making sound business decisions about the allocation of profits.
Like this majority of firms, I conclude that properly keeping track of originations, billings, production and other objective factors ' as well as a multitude of subjective factors that may not be as readily quantified ' is required to compensate attorneys fairly for their total contributions to the firm.
Finally, I recommend that record-keeping practices used in credit tracking be examined periodically. These practices often initially evolve in response to demands by strong and influential partners, so over time they can become increasingly unsatisfactory to other firm members. At the very least, these practices should be clearly articulated and understood ' and open for discussion.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Businesses have long embraced the use of computer technology in the workplace as a means of improving efficiency and productivity of their operations. In recent years, businesses have incorporated artificial intelligence and other automated and algorithmic technologies into their computer systems. This article provides an overview of the federal regulatory guidance and the state and local rules in place so far and suggests ways in which employers may wish to address these developments with policies and practices to reduce legal risk.
This two-part article dives into the massive shifts AI is bringing to Google Search and SEO and why traditional searches are no longer part of the solution for marketers. It’s not theoretical, it’s happening, and firms that adapt will come out ahead.
For decades, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has been the only law to expressly address privacy for minors’ information other than student data. In the absence of more robust federal requirements, states are stepping in to regulate not only the processing of all minors’ data, but also online platforms used by teens and children.
In an era where the workplace is constantly evolving, law firms face unique challenges and opportunities in facilities management, real estate, and design. Across the industry, firms are reevaluating their office spaces to adapt to hybrid work models, prioritize collaboration, and enhance employee experience. Trends such as flexible seating, technology-driven planning, and the creation of multifunctional spaces are shaping the future of law firm offices.
Protection against unauthorized model distillation is an emerging issue within the longstanding theme of safeguarding intellectual property. This article examines the legal protections available under the current legal framework and explore why patents may serve as a crucial safeguard against unauthorized distillation.