sj practice m june 10 ofc v2 25/05/2010 16:43 page 1 ...€¦ · a fellow partner act as my...

Revisiting oldmodels to findnew ways todeliver legalaid services

Practice Management SupplementSOLICITORS JOURNAL

Follow the leader

June 2010

Reducingworking hoursto achieve ahealthy work-life balance

Discover themarketingopportunitiesin the LegalServices Act

Could staff ever be as loyal as football fans?

SJ_Practice M_June 10_OFC_V2 25/05/2010 16:43

contents

www.solicitorsjournal.com June 2010 Practice Management Supplement SJ 1

FeaturesFollow the leader 4

How can you ensure your staff stay motivated and

content? Dominic Beeton reveals how to create

a loyal following across your firm

Special delivery 7

Small legal aid firms must embrace new ways to deliver

their services if they are to avoid closure. William Flack

considers two models and how these might evolve in

the future

Making a mark 10

Revisiting the lessons learned over the last 20 years

of legal marketing can help lawyers make the most

of the opportunities of the Legal Services Act,

says Clare Rodway

Keeping house 14

The recession has prompted firms to review their

approach to in-house training – but what are the

emerging trends and how could they work for you?

Helen Langton reports

Happy hours 18

Working reduced hours can help you achieve a healthy

work-life balance, but there are several factors to consider

to ensure you succeed in this role. Rebecca McNeill shares

her experience as an American lawyer

Become one 23

Harnessing the benefits of technology will enable firms

to unify their business practices and take full advantage

of the changing legal market, says Tim Cheadle

23

14

10

4

� EditorJean-Yves Gilg

[email protected]

020 7566 8253

� Design and layout editorAndrew Wood

[email protected]

020 7549 2526

� Editorial assistantJoanna Kelly

[email protected]

020 7566 8267

� Design and layout assistant William Paul

[email protected]

020 7549 2526

� Production co-ordinatorJack Berry

[email protected]

020 7324 2356

� Group sales managerChris Handley

[email protected]

020 7549 8674

� Product manager Bryn Piper

[email protected]

020 7549 2588

� Publisher Lucy Brazier

[email protected]

020 7549 2564

� Subscriptions and customer servicesRobert Shearwood

020 7549 2597

Solicitors Journal and supplements

UK: £239 + VAT and £8.99 p&p

per year for 48 issues

Students: £114.50 + VAT and

£8.99 p&p

� Offices6-14 Underwood Street

London N1 7JQ

Phone020 7490 0049

Fax020 7566 8238

[email protected]

� Citation (2010) 154 SJ ISSN 0038 1152

All rights reserved; no part of this

publication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system, or

transmitted in any form or by any

means, electronic, mechanical,

photocopying, recording, or

otherwise, without the prior written

permission of the publishers.

SOLICITORS JOURNAL

is published by

Waterlow Legal & Regulatory Ltd,

a Wilmington Group company.

SJ_Practice M_June 10_pg1 25/05/2010 16:22 Page 1

human resources

4 SJ Practice Management Supplement June 2010 www.solicitorsjournal.com

LOYALTY IS A curious concept. Think of afootball fan who loyally supports his footballteam week in and week out: even thoughthey may go through years of never winningmany matches, the fans stay loyal. They maydrop from the Premiership down to theChampionship into League 1 and still thefans turn up in the freezing cold to supportthe team. What an extraordinary thing it is.

Without doubt, staff loyalty is a valuablequality – especially holding on to your tal-ented staff as the market recovers and thesalary levels start to rise and the head-hunters start making overtures again after a very long, barren period.

Loyal staff are sometimes loyal to certainindividuals, sometimes to the firm itself.Loyalty means that you will stand up foryour firm if an outsider starts slating it. Itmeans that even when the going gets tough,you will stay at the firm even if you have hadto endure pay cuts or pay freezes. But what is it that makes staff loyal to a particular law firm?

Looking at Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,once physiological (food, breathing, sex) andsafety (financial welfare, health, wellbeingand freedom from accidents) needs aresorted, the next level of Maslow’s pyramid ofneeds relates to love and belongness, andthen the next level relates to esteem. Thislevel of the pyramid consists of such qualitiesas achievement, status, responsibility andreputation. So, let’s look at some of the keytools at the disposal of law firm managers inkeeping their staff loyal.

Money and statusMoney is the obvious one to look at first.Obviously, if you are poorly paid or worsefinancially exploited and are struggling topay your bills and there are other jobsavailable, then you are likely to look aroundand move jobs. But, assuming that your lawfirm is paying you a reasonable salary for thework and responsibilities you undertake,money is unlikely to be the factor whichcauses you to think about jumping ship.

Of course, if you are being paid a fortunewith large bonuses on top, then that is goingto mean money does not come into theequation but money alone is unlikely to produce loyalty.

The next question is status. Job titles aresurprisingly effective at keeping staff loyal.

Promoting a solicitor to associate or seniorsolicitor is a great strategy for the valuedsolicitor, especially if you tell them that this isseen as a stepping stone into salaried partnership. However, it is important to communicate clearly about the criteria forbecoming an associate and for this to beapplied consistently across all departmentsof the firm to avoid the post being devalued.It is very important not to be seen to be constantly moving the goalposts on those criteria. It should carry some tangible bene-fits: for example, extra holiday, car parkingspace, pay rise, attendance on non-confiden-tial partners’ meetings, invitation to partners’dinners, etc).

The route to partnership should be equallyclear and should have a timescale attached toit to ensure that your rising stars can see theircareer path. The head-hunters have abated intheir activity at the moment but work levelsare rising throughout the profession and itwill not be long before you best staff arebeing approached again.

Appreciation and praiseDale Carnegie said in his seminal work Howto Win Friends and Influence People: “Be lavishin your praise and hearty in your approba-tion.” Yet this is the one thing that most supe-riors find difficult to do. Praise fills a person’sheart with pride and spurs them on to greaterachievements. A good leader should bebringing out the very best in his team withpraise and encouragement.

Carnegie says you should never criticise

because this leads to defensiveness and a lustfor revenge. Any constructive suggestions onimprovement should be phrased in a waythat is self deprecating and supportive; forexample: “I am terrible at delegation but Ihave forced myself to improve by havinga fellow partner act as my conscience. Canyou think of anyone who might act as yourconscience to ensure you are delegating toyour junior team members?”

Praise needs to be sincere and must neverbe over the top. Just a short note or a quietword; perhaps feeding back a comment from

Maslow's hierarchy of needs

How can you ensure your staff stay motivated and content? Dominic Beeton reveals how to create a loyal following across your firm

Follow tthhee lleeaaddeerr

SJ_Practice M_June 10_pg4_pg5 25/05/2010 16:23 Page 4

human resources


a grateful client. Honest praise speaks foritself. Without this oxygen, staff quickly lose heart and are very vulnerable tooutside offers.

In the same vein, keeping involvement willhelp strengthen loyalty. To create loyal staff,their ideas must be taken on board andimplemented. There must be a sense oflistening to staff and where strong ideas arebrought forward. If staff feel part of the firmand their creativity and innovation arerewarded, there is a strong sense of fulfilment and job satisfaction. You feel partof something worthwhile and are making a difference. It’s back to Maslow’s pyramidof needs. Yet, so many firms have ideas /suggestions boxes and nothing ever getsimplemented. This is the death knell for staffbringing new and exciting ideas forward. All levels and descriptions of jobs must feelthis involvement.

Creating a buzzI have seen first hand how powerful this canbe in ensuring loyalty. If staff think they arepart of a team which is really going placesand picking up accolades and even awards(e.g. ‘best in-house legal team’, ‘best lawfirm’) the buzz that is created is incredible.Everyone likes to think they are part of a suc-cess story. It feels good. It is good for the CV.And it is good for the self-esteem – referringback to Maslow’s pyramid.

How do you create this buzz? By provid-ing the very best in legal advice, by ensuringyou have the finest lawyers in the country, by

having a supportive work environmentwhere praise is readily made, by giving valueto clients before receiving it, by sheer hardwork and persistence, by effective network-ing, by persistence in maintaining superbservice beyond the usual call of duty. All ofthese will create an unstoppable reputationwhich will then become a self-perpetuatingprophesy as high-flying talent is attracted tothis law firm which is creating ripplesthroughout the country or even the world.With all of the social media tools at the dis-posal of law firms, it does not take long forthe word to get out and to spread virallythrough the connected world. Just as a badreputation spreads rapidly.

Acceleration of equity partnershipWe are living in a rapidly changing environ-ment where the concept of a job for life is allbut gone. However, solicitors tend to stay atlaw firms for quite a long time often becausethey have become partners and their capitaland their client following is tied up with aparticular law firm – and so it is not easy tomove firms. So, creating equity partners at anearly stage can produce much-needed work-ing capital and can ensure that talentedlawyers remain loyal to the firm.

On the negative side, this could mean youhave underperforming partners embeddedin a firm and remaining loyal, but who arenot actually embracing the culture or futuredirection of the firm and may even be spread-ing discontent and dissatisfaction amongjunior members of staff. So, making lawyersinto equity partners at an early stage in theircareer may not produce loyalty per se.

The legal press reports high-profile defections of entire teams from one law firmto another on a weekly basis. So it is clearlynot a solution to the loyalty/staff retentionissue where there are underlying problemsor political power struggles.

Loyalty to persons v loyalty to firmsIt is much more likely that staff – both sup-port staff and legal staff – will be loyal to afirm because of a particular individual ratherthan to a firm itself. When a popular memberof management is ousted and leaves the firm,you often have a period of six to 12 monthswhen staff leave because the only reason theyremained at that firm was because of thatindividual.

This is especially true if he or she was amanaging partner and has imbibed a wholeculture and atmosphere throughout the firm.This is the cult of the personality and can be avery powerful factor in both retaining staffand attracting new talent, but, when thingsgo wrong, it can really drag a firm down.

The best leaders bring out the very best intheir team members but are self-effacing,modest and play down their roles. JimCollins in his book Good to Great analysed 11American companies with a 21-strongresearch team, and found that all of the com-panies that became great and stayed greatwere led by what Collins terms ‘Level 5 lead-ers’ – people who are self-effacing, quiet,reserved and even shy. A paradoxical blendof personal humility and intense professionalwill. A burning desire to make the companysucceed and endure.

These are the men and women whodeserve loyalty because they create organisations which outlive their architectsof success. If you can find a Type 5 leader tolead your firm, you can expect fanatical levels of loyalty.

Consideration and kindnessSmall signs that a boss appreciates yourefforts are enormously powerful in engen-dering staff loyalty. My wife worked for awell-respected aviation lawyer. We werespending a weekend in Paris and out of theblue he just gave us £500 spending money. Anextraordinary gesture of kindness. He wouldalso bring small gifts back whenever hereturned from foreign trips.

This was a man at the absolute top of hisgame, respected throughout the world, witha wife and four daughters and yet he was nottoo important to remember his loyal staff. Ican’t think of a better way to create loyalty.

Consistency of management styleThere is nothing worse than a manager whoone minute wants to be your best friend andthe next is openly humiliating you with themost offensive insults and mockery.

Staff can be very loyal to a manager whoconsistently rants and raves, and can alsohandle a boss who wants to be friendly, but toswing from one style to the other so staffnever know where they stand will drive yourstaff out rapidly. Loyalty from staff is a cher-ished goal few law firms achieve, and yet theprocess of finding replacement staff is costlyand time consuming. Firms should devise aplanned strategy and hold their partners andsenior management accountable where theguidelines are broken.

They must embrace change as we moveinto the next phase of development, but theymust carry their valuable staff with thembecause without them there is nothingto celebrate.

Dominic Beeton is a partner in niche property firm

Beeton Edwards LLP. Contact:

[email protected]

the leader


legal aid


Special deliverySmall legal aid firms must embrace new ways to deliver their services if they

are to avoid closure. William Flack considers the main two models and how

these might evolve in the future

THOSE SOLICITORS WHO are still workingin legal aid do not need reminding that it isgoing to continue to get more difficult to do so.

In recent years there has been a sense ofunreality about overall funding for legal aid.The Legal Services Commission has madecuts but denied that they were doing so andmaintained that it was just a restructuringprocess. When fixed fees were introducedand then reduced, solicitors were assuredthat if they worked creatively and imagina-tively with even small fixed fees they couldexpect to be paid more under the new system. This was accompanied by announce-ments from the LSC about the increasingnumber of people who were receiving helpunder the Legal Aid Scheme. The commis-sion indicated that it was hoping to go onproviding more advice and assistance tomore people in the future. This has nowstopped. The Advice Service Alliance pro-duced a report on ‘Updated ProcurementPlans in Social Welfare Law’ in March 2010which has shown cuts in funding levels ofaround 11 per cent.

As a result of these cuts it is inevitable thatmore small legal aid firms and not-for-profitorganisations are going to close. The govern-ment has made it clear that they consider thisto be a good thing as it will enable them to

save money by only having to deal with areduced number of suppliers. Individualsolicitors who wish to go on working in legalaid will have to face working for one of asmall number of large organisations.

Time to adaptEver since fixed fees were introduced, solici-tors have been advised to slim down theiroperations and to cut out any unnecessaryoverheads. Any firm that is still carrying outlegal aid work must by now have slimmeddown as much as they will ever be able to. Wehave now reached a stage where solicitorscannot expect to survive by simply modify-ing their old ways of working. Instead itseems that there is no choice but to changethe whole service delivery model.

According to the traditional service deliv-ery model, a new client is seen by a specialistsolicitor when they first instruct the firm. A face-to-face meeting takes place duringwhich the client is able to tell the solicitorabout their problem in detail. The solicitorthen tells the client about the law relating tothat problem and what steps might be takento resolve it. The solicitor then confirms theinstructions and advice in writing. The casethen progresses through further meetings,telephone conversations, letters and

hearings. The client has a dedicated solicitorwho is not just their advocate but also theirguide and counsellor throughout the life ofthe case. This highly personalised specialistservice cannot be provided for the rates ofpay offered by the LSC. Anyone still tryingto use this model is likely to go out of busi-ness in the near future. The government isnot prepared to provide the funding neces-sary to sustain it.

At present there seem to be two alternativemodels for service delivery: the pyramidmodel and the virtual model.

The pyramid modelThis model relies on unqualified staff run-ning cases supervised by a small number ofsolicitors towards the top of the pyramid. Theother levels consist of paralegals and traineeslower down and managing partners at thevery top. The solicitor can supervise a num-ber of paralegals who are trained to completequestionnaires and run whole cases accord-ing to workflow production line type step.The client is made aware from the start of thecase that the person dealing with their case isnot a solicitor but a ‘case worker’. The clientmay never meet or even speak to a solicitor.

The advantage of this model is that thefirm can claim payment at the same level of


legal aid


fixed fees for cases run by paralegals as werepreviously claimed for the work of muchmore expensive solicitors. If the paralegalsare properly trained and supervised, thenclients should still be assured a reasonablequality of service.

The main problem with this model is thatsupervising low-paid paralegals is not as easyas it seems. It can take a long time to trainparalegals up to the level where they can run acaseload adequately with minimal supervi-sion. Until they have reached that level, thesupervising solicitor will be at risk of spend-ing as much time dealing with the mess madeby new paralegals as they would have spentdealing with the cases themselves.

Because they are only paid low wages, para-legals are not likely to stay with the firm forvery long. They are likely to be constantly onthe look out for better wages and career pro-gression. It may be possible to encourage themto stay by promising them training contracts,but there is still likely to be a high turnover.This means that the training cycle has to startagain and cases have to be reallocated. Clientsare bound to get frustrated by having to dealwith case workers who lack the skills to be ableto provide a clear and confident answer to a question about a complex problem.

The virtual model The second model is based on the firm nolonger employing (as many) in-house solici-tors but instead working with self-employedconsultant solicitors who undertake casework from remote locations (such as theirhomes) by logging into the firm’s computersystems and dealing with clients by tele-phone or video conference. Instead of payingthe solicitor a wage, the firm pays the solicitora percentage of the profit costs which thesolicitor generates. Paralegals might still beused to carry out administrative functions atthe firm’s office but each case would be dealtwith by a solicitor.

The benefits of this system are that the firmdoes not have to pay large wage bills to solici-tors and/or large numbers of paralegals. Thefirm only has to pay out money to a solicitorafter that solicitor has brought the money inwhich is used to pay them. The firm alsomakes savings on office space as the solicitorswork from home or elsewhere. If the consult-ant solicitors wish to use support staff suchas typists then they can make their ownarrangements for this which the firm doesnot have to pay for.

The disadvantages of this model are that itdepends heavily on information technologyand can only work with a paperless officewhich very few legal aid solicitors have

managed to develop. Computer systems arenow powerful and cheap enough for thismodel to be within the grasp of all legal aidsolicitors whether in the private or not-for-profit sector. The paralegal-based model isalso heavily dependent on information tech-nology. Managing teams of paralegals wouldalmost certainly be much more difficult if notimpossible without a computerised casemanagement system which supervisingsolicitors use to monitor their work.

Which one is best for your firm?For most firms the consultant model is goingto be preferable to the pyramid model. Theclient receives a better service because theydeal more closely with a specialist solicitoreven though this may not be in person. Thefirm makes substantial savings in terms ofwages and other overheads. The pyramidmodel is based on the expensive foundationsof office space and paid employees which thevirtual model minimises.

For those firms that adopt the pyramidmodel, the key question is just how inexperi-enced/untrained/unsupervised can a ‘caseworker’ be before the quality of service pro-vided falls below an acceptable level? There is no easy answer. Some paralegals can reachhigh standards very quickly, others never will.The pressure of economics and day-to-daywork will always place pressure on the firm to expect more from paralegals than they arecapable of providing or are being paid to pro-vide. Those who adopt the virtual model willhave to decide how much time to spend super-vising the consultants. The same pressuresmean that it will always be tempting to justassume that the consultants are workingsmoothly and do not need to supervised in thesame way as paralegals. Anyone who hasmanaged even highly experienced solicitorswill know that this is a dangerous assumption.

The emergence of a third servicedelivery modelAlthough the two models which I havedescribed may seem very different, I believe that over time they willmerge into a third model thatsolicitors will have to adoptover the coming years ifthey are to survivethe likely competi-tive tenderingthat the succes-sor body tothe nowabolishedLSC will be likely to

adopt when awarding the next set of con-tracts in 2013.

The firms using the paralegal-based modelare going to find that they are paying outunacceptable sums for renting office space inthe future. The continued improvements inIT will mean that it simply will not makesense for firms to require staff to assemble inthe traditional office building. They will alsofind that they are paying fixed salaries tosolicitors which could be avoided if theywere only paying the solicitors a percentageof the fees they bring in. These firms willtherefore have to move towards a consultant-based model and expect not just solicitors butalso paralegals to work from home or any-where else that the firm is not paying rent for.Similarly, the consultant solicitors workingunder the second model will find that itmakes economic sense to delegate more andmore of their work to paralegals. Using newsocial networking type IT developments,solicitors will be able to supervise their casesvery closely and maintain a level of contactwith the client.

Out of this merger of the two models, I pre-dict a future in which firms of solicitors andnot-for-profit organisations evolve frombeing office-based factories where staffassemble and process cases to being a centralplatform though which solicitors and sup-port staff will utilise their resources (such ascase management systems, office space andinsurance cover) from bases in remote loca-tions to provide specialist technical services.This could be liberating for all concerned.However, even the most innovative solicitorswill not be able to continue to carry out legalwork without adequate funding. I hope thatthe government will be able to address this inthe future and arrive at a consensus withsolicitors for the future provision of qualitylegal services to persons on low incomes.

William Flack is a solicitor at Flack & Co


marketing


SINCE THE LAW SOCIETYrelaxed restrictions onmarketing and advertising in1987, the legal profession hasbeen on a long and oftentortuous journey. In the late1980s, law firms saw themselvesvery much as ‘professionalpractices’, rather than ‘businesses’of any sort, and most lawyersconsidered ‘selling’ a four-letter word.But as the most forward-thinking firmsstarted to make the transition from old-fashioned legal practices to modern legal businesses, and as clientsresponded saying it was a breath offresh air and a sign of like-mindedcommercial thinking, the rest of the profession gradually startingwaking up to the fact that it wastime to change.

A first step for many firms was to hire an in-house marketingprofessional, to help guide them inthis brave new world. There weresome very painful moments at the startof this journey, with highly experiencedmarketeers coming in to the profession –for example from big-brand marketingbackgrounds – frustrated at the restricted brief they were given,the lack of respect afforded totheir discipline and skill set (“wellanyone can do marketing, can’t they?”) and the fact they had, and could have, no influence in the business whatsoeverbecause of a simple regulatory block thatprecluded them from becoming part of thepartnership. The phrase ‘non-fee earner’sums up everything you need to knowabout lawyers’ attitudes at this time topeople in the business with professionaldisciplines other than law.

Equally, partners had their ownfrustrations with the new fashion formarketing and the advent of the in-houselegal marketer – frustration that these newmarketing people were not able simply towave a magic wand and do their marketingand business development for them; i.e.that they apparently still required thelawyers to engage thoroughly in theprocess – more than this, that it was still the lawyers who were expected to bring in the business, just facilitated by these newmarketing gurus. Where was the value inthat? Given the frustrations on both sides, it

is not surprising that there was a verydefinite ‘bounce’ phenomenon in the late1980s; with the average stay of a newlyappointed in-house marketeer as little as nine months.

Lasting changeToday, the profession is facing anunprecedented level of change once againwith the advent of the Legal Services Act.There may have been a time when lawyersquestioned whether this would have anyreal impact at all, other than in a fewspecialist pockets of the legal marketplace.Now, however, almost all lawyers recognisethat change will be fundamental and lasting– although predicting just what that changewill look like is as difficult as ever. Whatinsight can we glean from the journey ofthe last 20 years that might help us inmoving forward in these uncertain times?

One of the biggest stumbling blocks forthe early legal marketing pioneers was thedifficulty in gaining the trust of partners.

Revisiting the lessons

learned over the last

20 years of legal

marketing can help

lawyers make the most

of the opportunities of

the Legal Services Act,

says Clare Rodway

Making a mark



They were qualified in a discipline thatlawyers did not respect. Further, they couldnever aspire to the status of partnershipand an equal footing with their new bosses.Lawyers were clear that these marketingpeople were here to take orders – the onlyproblem was that the lawyers were notqualified to give the right instructions. But how could a firm progress and adapt tothe new, more commercial environment ifpartners refused to listen to their in-housemarketing advisers? What a waste of anopportunity – not to mention waste of anoften very expensive salary cost!

At the heart of the problem lay a flaw in the management structure of law firms,in particular the lack of separation between‘ownership’ and ‘executive’ roles in thebusiness. Powerful equity partners (thosethat brought in huge levels of business)would interfere with any decisions beingtaken in the business, according to whim –which does not make for consistent, logicalbusiness thinking. One of the most positiveoutcomes of the last 20 years of change inthe profession has been the development of proper management process: truedelegation of authority to function headsand line managers, based on fitness forrole, rather than partners being promotedto management positions as a ‘badge ofseniority’ with no thought as to whether the individual can manage.

Closing the gapSo, the very different worlds of marketingand legal expertise have slowly and painfullybeen bridged and today we see firms withvery sophisticated approaches to marketingand communications – particularly amongthe large firms that have had budgets toinvest in strong marketing teams anddevelop them over successive generations.

With new challenges ahead, the professionis in fact in much better shape to respond thanit was in 1987: we now have business disciplines in place that help firms anticipatechange and plan accordingly, much the waythat corporates do. With the door now opento legal disciplinary partnerships too – theLegal Service Act has enabled a range of non-lawyers to apply for partnership and a number of marketeers, financiers and HRshave taken up the challenge – the non-lawyers in our law firms now have the opportunity to influence the business frominside the partnership. The future is bright for the legal profession – and exciting too.

Clare Rodway is managing director of specialist

professional services consultancy Kysen PR

(www.kysenpr.co.uk)

Arguably the single biggest positive impact that marketers have had on law firms’ approach to, and

experience of, business development and marketing is to show lawyers the power of a planned

approach over the ad hoc, and the effectiveness of integrated campaigns: showing partners how a

properly targeted campaign, that dovetails profile-raising activity with a programme of face-to-face

contact with prospects and referrers, will see business coming in through the door. A classic example

of this might be a well-orchestrated, high-level round-table discussion event where firms can create

excellent promotional and media opportunities leading up to, during and after the event on the back of

the discussion topic and at the same time creating opportunities for face-to-face contact with the

cream of the firm’s business prospects.

Direct mailers on the topic might also be sent to a wider list than the round-table guest list, and

opportunities sought on the agendas of external conference organisers to place lawyers on the

conference circuit talking about the same issue. All this activity would be mirrored in cyberspace, with

articles well-positioned online and in the blogosphere, and discussion topics led or followed on relevant

social networking sites, such as LinkedIn or twitter. This integrated approach enables lawyers to ‘own the

space’ around a particular debate or issue; i.e. be positioned as thought leaders and thus in pole position

to advise anyone with an issue in the area.

Differentiation

Marketeers have also taught lawyers the importance of differentiation. Forget ‘me too’ marketing, the

winners in any marketplace are the firms that can clearly show they are different and better than the

competition. Of course, knowing who the competition is is also key. Lawyers often have a rather skewed

idea of this, assuming that competing firms are those they secretly would have liked to work for, firms they

are generally in awe of or firms that regularly appear on the other side from them on deals or cases.

In reality, it is much more immediate and visceral than this: your competitors are the lawyers or firm you

compete with for specific pieces of business; or with whom you share a panel position, so are fighting with

for share of a client’s business; or who have a direct relationship with your clients and who are constantly

trying to entice them away. And the key to winning the competition is not so much about positioning

yourself as the best lawyer in the world, but better than these specific firms that your client/prospect will

be comparing you against.

Using tools

At times, marketeers may occasionally have misled their lawyers into thinking that bandwagon-jumping is

a good idea. A far better approach, however, is to assess new marketing or communications opportunities

(social networking being a good current example) on the basis of the true business benefit – and it might

take a while to work out exactly what this might be. These new and emerging technologies, and those that

will emerge in the future, are tools not gimmicks – and this is a very important distinction. It is vital to

ensure there is a system in the business for assessing these new opportunities before and as they emerge,

and quickly diagnose how they can be put to best use to serve the objectives of the business.

Outsourcing

Another important lesson is how to decide what of the marketing and PR function to keep in house, what

to outsource (to a consultancy) and to understand how this balance changes over time and in different

markets. For example, in good times there may be more budget for consultancy resource, and there are

significant advantages to buying the certain aspects of the marketing/PR resource in this way because it

enables you to buy little bits of people’s time at different levels of seniority and skill set as you need it.

A consultancy team will typically provide you with strategic advice and direction, and that all-important

‘helicopter view’ that comes from working with many clients at the same time rather than just one. When

outsourcing media relations work, there are also considerable benefits to be gained from the more junior

members of the team who will generally have a much more impressive little black book of journalist

contacts than an in-house PR who is working only for one firm. However, elements of business

development work may be much less amenable to being outsourced; there is a strong argument for

keeping much of that work in house simply because, being so integral to the business, it is important

that the business itself ‘owns’ it as such.

By contrast, when markets harden, other factors creep in to decisions about what to keep in house

and what to outsource: perhaps the marketing team is short-staffed, yet does not have sanction to

replace staff who have gone, or to beef up the team at busy periods. Consultancy support can be

a good interim measure, as it is much more flexible and does not carry the same liabilities and

issues that employment does.

The most important lessons of the last 20 years of legal marketing

marketing


training


ASK ANY LEGAL training provider and theywill tell you that the provision of in-houselegal training has changed dramatically overthe last 18 months. Firms are buying fewerin-house training programmes. This is adirect result of two main factors: one, areduction in the amount a firm may spendon training; and two, the number of individ-uals within a firm to be trained on the samesubject has also reduced as firms have con-tracted in size relative to their business. Theeconomic downturn and its consequenceshave caused firms to rethink how they buytraining, what they buy, from whom, howoften and the price paid. And this is no badthing for firms. A revisiting of the traditionalapproach to meeting the training needs oftheir staff may actually result in greater effi-ciency, effectiveness and savings in cost. So,what trends are emerging and how can firmsbenefit?

Cascade trainingCommercial providers have to be more inno-vative in their response to the needs of firms.They have to charge a lower fee for smallernumbers and often the firm will ask for adegree of customisation in content. A fairlycommon customisation request has been fora programme that includes an element oftuition training so that the firm can under-take cascade training.

Cascade training or train-the-trainer sys-tems involve firms sending a smaller number

of individuals to a training event or under-taking an in-house session, and they pass onwhat they have learnt to their colleagues.This approach is not new. What is new is thenumbers of firms adopting this methodologyand this can be seen as a direct response toconstraints on training budgets.

Cascade training offers a several potentialbenefits for the training buyer. Using an exter-nal training provider to train a firm’s owntrainers minimises the cost as the bulk of thetraining will be done by the firm’s own staff.More importantly, it increases the opportuni-ties for a firm to own the training and is muchmore likely to embed the content into thefirm’s own culture. It provides the means tocommunicate the expertise of a particularindividual or a small group of individuals to alarger group of individuals very efficiently.Theoretically, it can be scaled up infinitely.

However, there are pitfalls. The first andmost important is the dilution of content. Ithas been suggested that training messagesare never communicated 100 per cent effec-tively even when the trainer is excellent. Atbest, attendees at a training event will onlyretain 75 per cent of what they have beentaught. The individual with responsibilityfor cascading this training down throughoutthe firm will probably only pass on around 75per cent of what they learnt – so you can seehow the original training is being dilutedquite dramatically. And, if the purpose oftraining is to increase knowledge and skills

to the betterment of the individual and ultimately the firm, then you can see how theprimary objective is not being met effectively.Depending on what the subject matter is, thiscould be quite critical.

Planning aheadThose tasked with passing on the trainingmay feel quite nervous about taking some-thing that has been created by an externalprovider and then standing up and deliver-ing it to their colleagues. They may alsostruggle to answer questions and challengesthat may arise. This is likely to undermineboth the individual and the training.

The way to mitigate these risks is to planahead. If cascade delivery is the chosenmethod for training staff in house, then theproject will need designing from the start.This means the trainer who has the responsi-bility for delivering the content must puttogether the relevant aids, notes and hand-outs. As with any other type of training, focuson the end before the means, defining knowl-edge requirements, skills and behavioursyou want as a result of the training.

Choosing the right person to deliver thetraining is also important. Enthusiasm isprobably the most important – more thantechnical knowledge. Certainly, the ability toanalyse and assimilate a large amount ofinformation is crucial.

If the initial training is an in-house session,firms should ensure there is also some

Keeping houseThe recession has prompted firms

to review their approach to in-house

training – but what are the emerging

trends and how could they work

for you? Helen Langton reports


training


training skills tuition for those who will actually subsequently deliver the material.Ideally, this should include practising pre-sentations of the content. This way, the train-ing provider can give support and coachingand can also build up the confidence andknowledge of the second-stage trainers.

Be aware though. If you are sourcing in-house training from a provider with theintention of subsequently delivering it to awider audience, the training provider willinevitably charge a higher fee to help com-pensate from lost revenue.

Making use of technologyAdvances in technology have given rise to a proliferation of webinars or online semi-nars. This highly accessible means of trainingenables individuals to watch an hour or so-long training session, delivered live over theinternet direct to their desktop. What we areseeing more of is firms buying access to awebinar broadcast for multiple personswithin the firm and are using this as in-house training.

Undertaking in-house training in this waycan be very effective. It is certainly economic,as the fee for participating in a webinar can be quite low in comparison to other trainingoptions. The subject range is vast andexpanding every day. As more and moreindividuals choose this method of learning,so they become more comfortable with it.Webinars are designed to get knowledge of key issues across to interested parties in a concentrated, effective way. Most webinarproviders allow for some degree of interac-tion with participants. Questions can beposed throughout the broadcast. Surveys can be conducted and such participationstimulates the learning process, reinforcinglearning. By organising an in-house broad-cast of a webinar, this benefit is lost. Thus it is important that whoever is conductingthe training of staff within the firm in thisway has a degree of specialist knowledge to deal with any questions that may arisepost broadcast.

Regional training consortiaRegional training consortia are anotheremerging trend. This is a hybrid of in-housetraining in so far as it adopts the same princi-ples but offers it to a local community offirms rather than just one. The numbers ofstaff with law firms has reduced, making anin-house training option untenable. This isbecause of cost and because of the learningexperience itself. For truly effective in-housetraining, a critical mass of participants isrequired to stimulate debate and interaction.But the learning requirements for the staff

that remain still exist. So, we see the emer-gence of the formation of regional consortia.This is when a number of firms in a localcatchment area send one or two individualsto an external training event run by a trainingprovider. The firms in essence form a consor-tium. Being a member enables them tochoose the topics they are interested in so the training becomes specific to their needs.They also get to network with their peers,they spend less time out of the office travel-ling because it is local, and they are gettingeffective useful training at affordable rates.

In-house training is evolving and

adapting to meet the needs of law firmstoday. But the principles remain unaltered,securing the effective means for the transferof knowledge in order to benefit both indi-vidual and firm. As the UK Commissionfor Employment and Skills recently stated:“Good skills form the bedrock of success…experience shows that firms which continue to invest in their staff do better in recessions and emerge stronger in the long term.”

Helen Langton is director of Central Law Training.

Contact: [email protected]

How can an individual or a firm maximise the

return on their in-house training expenditure?

Understanding precisely what the training needs

are is the first step. You cannot choose the training

provider that is the best fit with your needs unless

you have a clear idea of your training objectives.

So, time consuming though they may be, a ‘train-

ing needs analysis’ will certainly assist you in clari-

fying your training goals and evaluate possible

solutions. Time spent here at the outset will reap

real returns later down the line.

In choosing a training provider, the decision

essentially comes down to assessing the quality

of the training offered and the competence of

the provider. In doing this, you could look at all,

or some, of the following factors:

Look beyond existing suppliers

It is often very difficult to identify a truly good

trainer who can provide innovative and effective

training solutions. This leads many organisations

to stick rigidly with existing suppliers, even when

these are expensive or when other suppliers

could potentially add something new. So, check

with colleagues in other companies – or staff

who might have received training during periods

with past employers – and actively look for rec-

ommendations.

Avoid the generic

Ensure that you find a specialist – avoid the

generics. Most often, they have a general

solution to a broad problem.

Custom fit

The most effective training is often the programme

that is carefully customised. Look for a training

provider that can offer insight and support in

refining your own organisation’s training goals.

With a specialist, the chances are greater that

your training will be relevant and successful.

Ensure that the programme is truly customised

and not just a re-jigged version of a programme

delivered to a previous organisation.

Reputation of provider

Ensure that the reputation of the training

provider is still current. Ask for, and follow up,

references for both the organisation and the

training facilitator who will be looking after

your training project. Look for evaluation of

effectiveness in terms of ‘the four Rs’:

Reaction: what was the reaction of the

participants?

Retention: what learning has taken place?

Relevance: have the participants applied what

they learned?

Rating: has their job performance improved?

Facilitator

Insist on profiles of all training facilitators who

will be delivering the training. Check if the

facilitator has trained with similar groups in

the past and with similar learning objectives

and delivery tools as the programme you are

seeking to have delivered.

Cost

Clearly, you need to know the exact per-person

cost of the training. Don’t accept any open-

ended quotations and look out for extras such

as materials, overnight etc. Often, a carefully

chosen trainer can not only prove more

effective in terms of skills enhancement but

can also be more cost effective. Best is

definitely not the most expensive.

Materials and training style

Make sure that you have an opportunity to

look at all of the materials to be used by

participants during the training programme.

Be clear as to the level of participant

involvement in terms of such things as experi-

mental learning, project work and assessment.

Follow up

The effectiveness of many training programmes

is enhanced by follow-up sessions. Look for these,

and check that they are included in the cost.

Choosing a trainer


employment


Happy hours

DO YOU WORK part time or have youconsidered working on a reduced-hoursschedule? There are several factors toconsider, which can roughly becategorised under eight headings andwill help make your reduced-hourswork as a lawyer successful. Manylawyers work part time or on areduced hours schedule, and, ifyou ask a successful part-timelawyer for their secrets,chances are they will name atleast a few of the items on thislist. If you keep these factorsin mind, you will be morelikely to be able to balancethe challenging demands ofyour career with the rest ofyour life.

Do your homeworkBefore contacting your adviser,practice group leader or firmmanagement to request a reduced-hours schedule, do your homework.Determine if your firm has a reduced-hours policy and, if so, review it. If a policyexists, ask how many people have used itand whether their schedules have beensuccessful. Consider whether recenteconomic challenges have impactedreceptivity to reduced-hours workschedules at your organisation. Thinkabout how reduced hours would affectyour particular legal practice and theclients you service, and how your requestwill be viewed based on the culture of yourfirm, corporation or government office.

If your firm or organisation does nothave a reduced-hours programme, try todetermine receptivity to adopting such a programme.

Gather information on any discussionsregarding prior draft policies so that yourproposal takes those into account.

Next, spend some time understandingthe latest research on part-time schedules,including research regarding the particularimplications for women and minorities inlaw firms. Familiarise yourself with bestpractice recommendations for part-time

policies. Among others, such practicesinclude:� creating a written policy for part-time

lawyers; � supporting flexibility in when and

where lawyers work; � eliminating stigma for reduced-hours

lawyers;� encouraging business development

efforts of part-time lawyers; and � recognising contributions fairly.

Make the business case to yourorganisationAs you approach your adviser, practicegroup leader or other decision makers atyour organisation, make the business case fora quality reduced-hours programme. If theyare unfamiliar with current trends inreduced-hours schedules, help educate

them. But, before you approach firm leader-ship, try to understand the perspective ofyour organisation and any concerns keyplayers may have regarding reduced hoursand be prepared to address them.

Dispel the myth that firms lose money onreduced-hours attorneys. Explain thatreduced-hours programmes allowemployers to attract and retain the bestlawyers, satisfy clients by providingconsistent lawyers on their matters andcontrol the high cost of attrition. Duringchallenging economic times, firmmanagement may be less concerned aboutattrition, but it may help to havequantitative or anecdotal data that showsthat your organisation is losing highperformers because of the lack of, orproblems with, a reduced-hoursprogramme.

Working reduced hours can help you achieve a healthy work-life balance, but there are several factors to consider to ensure you succeed in this role.Rebecca McNeill shares her experience as an American lawyer


employment


Encourage your firm to maintain a longview. In slow years, part-time attorneys willreduce salary expenses to your firm, andcould even save money if the attorneys inquestion did not have a large enough docketto bill a full-time year due to economic challenges.

Furthermore, a visibly flexible approachtoday will pay dividends tomorrow. Juniorlawyers will see more options for themselves,now and also in the future, as they observesenior lawyers able to work reduced-hoursschedules.

Find an advocateAs part of your request for a part-time orreduced-hours schedule, enlist the supportof individuals who will support yourrequest. A senior partner who can attest toyour work quality and commitment to yourorganisation may help convince decisionmakers who do not know you as well toapprove your requested schedule. As yourschedule is approved, you may also wish toenlist the same mentor or develop a relation-ship with additional influential individualswho will go to bat for you during importantdiscussions about your future, such as com-pensation determinations, reviews and partnership consideration. Even if your firmhas a general policy supporting reduced-hour schedules, you should ensure that yourparticipation in that programme has broadleadership support.

Be organisedWhen your request for a part-time orreduced-hours schedule is approved, youstill must advocate for your new schedule,even if only in indirect ways. Because youmay only work in the office three or four daysa week, or because you may work shorterdays, sharpen your organisational skills sothat you will accomplish all of your necessarytasks during your time in the office. Planahead so that you will not be faced with sur-prises when you are out of the office or leaveunresolved issues behind for your co-work-ers. Look ahead on your calendar.

Communicate with your practice group,the partner supervising your work and anystaff reporting to you. Be extremely diligentabout asking for due dates on projects andcommunicate about your progress, so thatthe assigning attorney does not wonderabout the status of your project. Many part-time lawyers find email access on their homecomputer or through their mobile device toallows them to respond to requests fromclients and colleagues.

Additionally, always use your day off toschedule personal appointments so that they

do not infringe on your valuable time inthe office. Make your day off your appoint-ment day.

Be flexibleNo matter how organised you are, things willjust happen on your day off. It may be the onlyday that a deposition witness can be sched-uled, or a date the judge selects for a hearing.Be flexible and recognise that as a professionalyou cannot set your hours like a shift worker.Of course, your employer should recogniseyour extra time in the office, and you shouldtake additional days when things quiet down.The successful part-time lawyer offers flexibil-ity to her employer, just as her employer hasoffered her flexibility. Part-time arrangementsrequire give and take from both parties. Arecent study of part-time partners showedthat these lawyers seldom work a set sched-ule; while the part-time partners might try toplan for a certain day off a week, collectivelythey tend to see the benefit of a part-timeschedule being fewer billable hours on anannualised basis.

Be the bestYou’re only as good as your last brief, filing orletter to the client. And, because you may notbe in the office to answer a question on amemo or letter, you have additional reasonsto prepare the clearest, most comprehensivedocuments so that you can avoid getting callson your mobile phone asking for clarificationor more information.

Working at the highest quality also ensuresthat your firm will value you enough toaccommodate your requests for a part-timeschedule, and will continue to offer you flexi-bility in exchange for your high-quality legalwork. No firm wants lawyers who domediocre work – doing the best work ensuresyour employer will value your skills as

a contract drafter, deposition taker and brief writer.

Be valuableIf you work part-time at a law firm, remem-ber that just like all of the other lawyers in thefirm, you can’t just bill your hours and gohome. Provide extra value to the firm. Decidewhat you enjoy and what you are good at,and help strengthen the firm in those ways.Write articles on substantive legal topics tobring attention to your practice group. Servein a Bar association. Mentor other lawyers atthe firm, or attend conferences to meetprospective new clients. Take on an adminis-trative responsibility at your firm, such asworking with a staff department, organisingthe summer associate programme or provid-ing updates on changes in the law to others inyour practice area. Seek mentors who havetop-notch business development skills andsolicit their advice. Step up to the plate; don’twait for an invitation to participate in business development.

Use your time wiselyUse your time wisely – after all it is a preciouscommodity! If you have kids, plan specialactivities or outings. Visit friends. Volunteer.Plan to eat dinner with your family.

A career practising law is a wonderfulthing, but a fulfilling life requires more thanjust a career. Working a reduced schedulegives you more room to be a happy, relaxedand healthy person, and recharges you to goback to your desk on Monday ready to startanother week as an organised, flexible andvaluable lawyer.

Rebecca M McNeill is of counsel at Finnegan,

Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.

Contact: [email protected]

M any organisations in the US have studied the business case for allowing attorneys to design

part-time arrangements. More information on part-time programs, including research

citations, can be obtained from the Project for Attorney Retention (www.pardc.org).

See also: ‘Catalyst, Women of Color in US Law Firms’ (2009); ‘Creating Pathways to Success:

Advancing and Retaining Women in Today’s Law Firms’ and ‘Initiative on Advancement and Retention

of Women’ (May 2006) (Women’s Bar Association of the District of Columbia); and ‘Reduced Hours,

Full Success: Part-Time Partners in US Law Firms’.

The American way


information technology


WHO’S WATCHING YOU? While there isanxiety among law firms, especially at theprospect of competing with the likes ofsupermarkets driven by the Legal ServicesAct 2007 (LSA), less thought is being givento the ramped-up regulation. The LSA hasextended the powers of the SolicitorsRegulation Authority and established theOffice for Legal Complaints under theLegal Services Board.

On the other hand, the introduction oflegal disciplinary practices and alternativebusiness structures (ABSs) means that lawfirms can receive investment from othersources, giving them the opportunity toexpand their offering across geographiesand grow. Also, despite the hype, there willalways remain a market for high-end workalongside the commoditised lower-endservices such as debt collection,conveyancing and personal injury claims.

As the market opens up, coupled withthe economic and regulatory pressures, lawfirms must operate in a more competitive,enterprise-like manner. The need for thetraditional business values of efficiency,cost reduction and innovation to win andretain customers has never been greater.The increased price competitiveness,reduced budgets and shift towards a fixed-fee business model make operationalefficiency paramount. Firms must free thelatent capacity within their businesses todevelop new services and partake in the

opportunities in improved economicconditions.

Underpinning legal businesses withtechnology to drive efficiency, reducebusiness risk of professional negligence,speed service delivery and ensurecompliance is a foregone conclusion.Contrary to the traditional approach offocusing only on legal process efficiency,firms now need to look for businessprocess efficiency beyond the legalactivities, spanning every aspect of thelegal business – from finance andaccounting to customer relationshipmanagement to business development andhuman resources. This will deliver thetransparency demanded not just by theLSA, but legislations at large.

Already, a number of forward-lookinglegal practices are consolidating theirexisting technology systems and re-engineering their underlying processes tocreate a single, unified, future-proofplatform from which to conduct theirbusiness. Some firms are also looking atdifferent ways to manage their ITinfrastructure for economic andtechnological benefits.

Creating a “joined-up businessenvironment”Recognising the competitive advantage thattechnology can give its business, TWMSolicitors is capitalising on the recession as

Harnessing the

benefits of technology

will enable firms to

unify their business

practices and take

full advantage of

the changing

legal market,

says Tim Cheadle

Become one

SJ_Practice M_June 10_pg23_pg24_pg26 25/05/2010 09:37 Page 23



an opportunity to rationalise its technologydeployments and maximise its investmentin preparation for the LSA and for whenthe economy recovers.

The firm is currently undergoing anambitious IT and telecommunicationsmodernisation programme. It is integratingits voice (both mobile and fixed line),digital dictation and practice managementsolutions across its seven offices in Surreyand southwest London.

This practice modernisation programmeis laying the foundation for the way inwhich business will be conducted in thefirm, now and in the future. The objectiveof this technology consolidation is to bringtogether the various disparate systems sothat they operate in a seamless way. With aworkflow-based practice managementsystem sitting at the heart of theconsolidation, TWM will be able to put inplace standard business and legal processesand procedures; which will reduce costs,increase productivity and aid transparencyin business management and financialreporting – a key requisite of the LSA.

To meet the stringent demands of theLSA, it is imperative that the firm is able toalign the practice of compliance with itsbroader business strategies. The integratedbusiness platform will enable TWM toundertake compliance as a matter of course– not just to adhere to the LSA, but alsowith other legislations such as the MoneyLaundering Regulations 2007, companyreporting directives and the Solicitors’ Codeof Conduct, to name a few.

When complete, the firm will be able toimprove the day-to-day operation of thebusiness across every single function of thepractice making working easier,streamlined and efficient. For instance, a feeearner will be able to make a client callwhen working on a matter within the casemanagement system through integratedtelephony. In addition, it will enable TWMto deliver an improved customer serviceand ensure fail-safe compliance alongsidedeveloping new legal offerings, especiallyin areas such as residential conveyancingand private client which lend themselves toautomated processes.

Patrick Stewart, managing principal ofTWM Solicitors, summarises: “2010 is ayear of stock taking and planning inpreparation for the irreversible changes thatthe LSA will initiate in the legal market.This legislation presents a goodopportunity for us to modernise andmaximise the advantages of best practiceand efficiency, by creating a joined-upbusiness environment, which in turn will

help the practice as a whole to meet theincreasing legislative compliance burden.”

Maximising efficiency Mishcon de Reya, one of the UK’s mostprestigious law firms and a forerunner intechnology adoption, has historicallyinvested in best-of-breed solutions fordocument management, customerrelationship management and practicemanagement as part of its IT strategy.While these systems are good in isolation,in today’s digital business environmenttheir inability to talk to each other is amajor issue for the firm. This, coupled withan ever-evolving regulatory landscape suchas the LSA and the imperative need for bestpractice, has led to the firm revisiting itsapproach to technology deployments.

The firm is undergoing a comprehensivetechnology consolidation and businessprocess re-engineering programme. It iscreating an enterprise-wide workflow-based platform encompassing all legal andbusiness processes to maximise efficiencygains for the firm. Mishcon is developing asingle, unified business environment bylinking together its disparate businesssystems using a sophisticated businessprocess management platform.

Rather than retiring any of its incumbentmission critical solutions such as practicemanagement or document management,Mishcon is overlaying its infrastructurewith middleware that will provideworkflow, single instance data entry andpoint solutions to create an exact fitbetween technology and its re-engineeredprocesses. This will deliver efficiency gainsto the firm, facilitate compliance and enableit to maximise return on the large-scaleinvestments the firm has alreadyundertaken.

Mishcon is taking a phased approach toits business process engineeringprogramme. The firm believes that solid,best practice should start at the door –matter and client inception is therefore thefirst process that is being automated.

To illustrate, when a new client or matterfile is opened, the secretary willautomatically be asked to input responsesto a series of questions depending on thenature of the file pertaining to thecustomer, conflict checking and anti-moneylaundering. The information inputted via asingle computer will automatically alsoappear in all the other technology systems,eliminating the need to re-enter data.

In isolation, the issue of entering datamultiple times into different technologysystems may seem trivial, but, when

“Ultimately, all

this will translate into

unprecedented business

efficiency, firm-wide

best practice, enhanced

client service and vastly

improved knowledge

management – all

contributors to

profitability”



considered firm-wide, it can lead to signifi-cant inefficiencies and data inconsistency.The business process re-engineering projectat Mishcon will leave very little room for inefficiency or administrative errors. It willpreserve the integrity of data – the lifeblood of a law firm.

In addition, Mishcon’s technology strategy includes deployment of rapiddevelopment tools that will enable the firmto quickly develop bespoke point solutionsin house. This means that the firm will beable to develop innovative service offeringsquickly, without needing to undertakeadditional technology investments at a laterdate. Mishcon will be able to evolve its ITstrategy alongside its business strategy tomeet the changing market needs, includingcompliance.

Nick Taylor-Delahoy, director ofinformation technology at Mishcon,concludes: “Ultimately, all this willtranslate into unprecedented businessefficiency, firm-wide best practice,enhanced client service and vastlyimproved knowledge management – allcontributors to profitability.”

Minimising the impact of the recession In view of the LSA, Martin-Kaye Solicitors,an established West Midlands generalpractice, believes that it is in a vulnerableposition – the firm is not a niche legalservices provider and neither is it largeenough to be able to compete withsupermarkets and cooperatives. Theoptions available to the firm are that eitherit becomes larger through mergers andacquisitions or it uses technologystrategically to position itself for growth inthe market as it opens up. The firm islooking at all possibilities.

Martin-Kaye is well ahead of the game.The firm has leveraged technology to cut

costs and fully utilise its inherent capacity,making it a much leaner and more efficientorganisation. For instance, today its 35 feeearners are serviced by just three secretariesacross its core practice areas: corporate,private client and property.

The firm has outsourced its IT to a serviceprovider. All the software and hardwaremaintenance, configurations, back-up, viruschecks, spam filters and support areundertaken by the service provider, whichalso hosts its key applications anddatabases. The case and mattermanagement system used by the fee earnersis hosted too. In addition, and crucially,Martin-Kaye is able to design businessprocesses within its case managementsystem to address changing requirements.Hence, the fee earners are able to benefitfrom the efficiencies delivered by thesystem to provide the required legalservices, safe in the knowledge that thetechnology takes care of compliance,including the LSA and the MoneyLaundering Regulations 2007, and overallrisk management. The firm also expects toeasily be able to comply with the new codeof conduct that is scheduled to come intoeffect towards the end of this year.

This approach has given Martin-Kaye theflexibility to scale its business up and downbased on market performance. In fact,unlike a number of firms that had incurredsubstantial costs in implementing businesssystems and applications prior to theproperty market collapse, Martin-Kaye hasactually benefited from this arrangement.Because the firm has a monthlysubscription based on the number of usersfor its hosted deal, the firm has been able toeasily reduce its IT costs in line with thedemand of its legal services for theproperty practice area.

This ability to scale its technology

requirements has enabled Martin-Kaye toundertake significant amounts of panelwork, which has minimised the impact ofthe recession on the firm. Through its ITservice provider, the firm has seamlesslylinked its case management system withthat of other organisations outsourcinglegal work to Martin-Kaye. For instance,Martin-Kaye is able to allow inception ofnew cases by referrers within its casemanagement system and automaticallyreport to outsourcing organisations’databases and business systems.

Chris Cann, consultant on systems, ITand compliance at Martin-Kaye, says:“When ABSs come into full force, we expectthis trend of outsourcing legal work tosmaller law firms to increase significantly.Supermarkets and cooperatives will nodoubt have access to customers given thenature of their business and their marketingmuscle, but they will not have thecapability to deliver high-quality legalservices. It is not their area of expertise.Our hosted approach to consumingtechnology will greatly benefit us.

“By using reliable technology for all ofour business process management andreporting through this approach, we will beable to supply a cost efficient and fullycompliant service to our clients andintroducers.”

The LSA is designed to modernise thelegal sector and in doing so protect andgive end customers a better deal. In today’scompetitive regulation-driven legalbusiness landscape, firms have no optionbut to devise innovative ways of working.By leveraging technology, firms can poisethemselves to take advantage of thechanging market conditions.

Tim Cheadle is general manager at LexisNexis UK

Enterprise Solutions



sj practice m june 10 ofc v2 25/05/2010 16:43 page 1 ...€¦ · a fellow partner act as my...

Documents