“Effective Solutions From Creative
Lawyers.” That’s the motto of our law
firm, Press, Potter & Dozier, LLC, and we really try to live up to that
message. But do our clients and
potential clients view us that way?
Earlier
this week, the “LinkedIn Today” section of linkedin.com excerpted an article
from legalweek.com, which is a British website geared to English solicitors (i.e., the non-litigating part of
the British bar). The full article, “Law
firms missing out on SME work over cost concerns, LSB study finds” (http://www.legalweek.com/legal-week/news/2269640/law-firms-missing-out-on-sme-work-over-cost-concerns-lsb-study-finds), states
that,
“More than half of small businesses are handling
their own legal matters amid widespread
concerns about the value for money
offered by law firms…Only 13% of respondents to the
survey believed that
lawyers offer a cost-effective method of resolving legal issues, despite
more
than one third (38%) acknowledging that they had faced a significant legal
problem over
the last 12 months, of which almost half (45%) resulted in a
negative financial impact.”
Although the article addresses the problems
faced by British law firms, it is equally applicable to American firms. The study referenced in the article found
that clients perceive that fees based on hourly rates didn’t reflect the commercial value of the attorney’s work
product and that each new assignment involved continuously re-inventing the
same wheel.
Perhaps worse for lawyers, small and
medium-sized business clients “lack a relationship of trust with a commercially
minded solicitor who they can turn to at short notice to receive succinct
advice on an ad hoc basis.”
So, there are, apparently, two distinct problems,
fees and lack of trust.
As for addressing fees, lawyers need to rethink
their billing structure. Fixed and
not-to-exceed fee structures are two ways to do this. The risk, of course, is that the attorney
under-estimates the time it will take to perform a given assignment and comes
out on the short end of the stick. Presumably,
with experience, most lawyers learn how long it takes to perform a specific
task. The experienced lawyer knows that
it generally takes X hours to review a lease or draft a non-disturbance
agreement. And it is not unfair for the
lawyer offering a fixed or not-to-exceed fee to carve out exceptions. For example, it will take me X hours to draft
a lease, review the opposing lawyer’s comments and revise the lease; however,
if the other side wants to engage in lease negotiations, then the lawyer should
be able to increase the fixed or not-to-exceed fee accordingly – perhaps on a
sliding discounted scale.
The second problem is, in a way, easier to
address. Many lawyers, when speaking to
or on behalf of the client, use terms such as “we” and “us,” not “you” and “the
client.” That suggests to the client
that the client’s problems are the lawyer’s problems and that the two have an
identity of interest in coming up with a satisfactory solution.
Another way to establish trust is for the lawyer
to initiate “just checking in” contact with his clients. All too often, the lawyer only speaks with
the client when the latter initiates the contact – which is generally
associated with a problem or new task. A
quarterly visit or phone call – at no charge to the client – that has as its
agenda nothing other than to find out how things are going, reminds the client
that you are there for them when they need you – and is interested in the
client and the client’s success.
It’s like checking in with your friends. If nothing else, it keeps the relationship
strong. Keeping good relationships with
our clients enables us to better understand their issues without the pressure
of a "legal problem.”
No comments:
Post a Comment