Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
How a Firm Can Be Killed By Its Culture
When firms first recognize they need to change in order to be more competitive, it appears that they have a seemingly infinite array of options. Cost-cutting, increasing billable hours, starting a marketing program and hiring a rainmaker are usually at the top of the list, but it often seems as though everyone in the firm has their own solution to the problem. In reality, there are only a few key steps that are appropriate and necessary for most firms. The real problem is that execution of these tactics is a long-term effort, not a 1-year program. Mounting a sustained effort requires a change in the behavior of the members of the firm and therefore a change in the culture of the entire firm. However, there are forces at play in every firm that act to prevent these changes. This article discusses how the culture of a firm locks it into place and prevents it from changing. Solutions for moving past these issues are also identified.
Preserving a firm's culture is an overriding consideration of most law firms. This seems to be true no matter what the particular culture is: work hard vs. hardly work, quiet respect vs. public tantrums, egalitarian vs. hierarchical, easy-going Californians vs. hard-driving New Yorkers. This is true not only of law firms, but of all organizations. We tend to believe that our personal behavior and group culture are what have brought us whatever success we have had.
There are several actions that can trigger the need for a culture change in a law firm. Almost all begin with the realization that the firm is not making enough money to pay its lawyers what they think they deserve. This can happen for several reasons:
- The firm is not getting as much work from clients as it has in the past;
- Its lawyers are not working as hard as they used to;
- Its lawyers are working hard but they have not raised their rates
sufficiently to keep up with cost increases; and - Key lawyers have left the firm and taken good client work with them.
Identification of this problem can occur slowly, as the firm's position gradually deteriorates, or it can occur precipitously, for example when ambitious laterals issue an ultimatum that they will not tolerate the current situation any longer. Typically, such lawyers see an opportunity to expand their practice, attract larger clients and thus gain increased compensation and power as well as the ability to perform more complex work.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?