Two Cheers for HR
January 2, 2007 | Filed Under Law Firm Trends, Legal Resources
Law firm associates as human resources?
The Chicago Tribune notes that some law firms are giving HR a second look. Kirkland & Ellis has even hired former Andersen partner Gary Beu in this role.
Still, it’s not an easy slot to fill. There’s the ongoing focus on diversity, and the tension involved in balancing the two realities of high starting pay and workload:
— Attrition is on the rise among young lawyers, known as associates, some of whom make as much as $145,000 their first year out of law school. A 2005 survey found that one out of five associates leave U.S. law firms every year, the highest rate ever documented by the Association for Legal Career Professionals.
— Associate dissatisfaction is nothing new. They always have complained about long hours, boring assignments and poor treatment by partners.
Hmm… High pay and long hours. Perhaps a connection?
Still, it’s encouraging to see law firms placing experienced executives in a role targeted at developing the key asset: people.
A Radical Approach to Legal Cost Control
December 21, 2006 | Filed Under Legal Resources, In the News
All GCs are under pressure to control costs. One in Australia is pursuing a novel approach.
Do nothing.
According to press reports, Food service company Coles Group is taking out a meat cleaver:
But charged with cutting legal costs by 45 per cent over the next two years, Coles general counsel Richard Dammery has proposed that lawyers no longer be included in the signing-off process for new contracts unless they are specifically invited to by the business.
He also wants to eliminate all legal checks on contracts of less than $100,000.
Linking legal department approval to contracts based upon dollar amount is not news. Most have forms that can be used within certain guidelines.
What is a bit more unnerving here is some of the potential management latitude involved:
Coles insiders believe Mr Dammery’s push for a dynamic legal structure, which gives managers discretion over whether to engage lawyers on contractual matters, reduces accountability and leaves the retailer exposed to potential litigation for anti-competitive behaviour and breaches of the Trade Practices Act.
Any experienced GC or corporate counsel knows that you can’t always let the client frame the legal issue. Or whether the matter needs legal input in the first place.
Someone once said if you think preventative law is expensive, try litigation.
There are some initiatives under way to take a lower cost approach to contract approval and processing. We’ll cover some of them next year.
But until then, consider something like this for that favorite GC on your Christmas list:
Law Firm Beauty Contest?
December 1, 2006 | Filed Under Law Firm Trends, Legal Resources
The Wired GC had a hidden camera at a recent beauty contest for national litigation counsel run by a Midwest manufacturer.
In a rare twist, the law firms insisted that the client be blindfolded to ensure impartiality (click on arrow and adjust volume):
Apparently, at least one name partner was on vacation.
So they sent the summers.
The GCs Strike Back
November 3, 2006 | Filed Under Law Firm Trends, Legal Resources
Amid the talk of law firm mergers, it’s interesting to see what some clients are thinking.
It’s not about big platforms and ever bigger profits per partner.
An article in The Lawyer from the UK related a survey of in-house counsel by Grant Thornton about their views of law firms, particularly in the area of dispute avoidance. The results would make any managing partner squirm a bit.
The majority of inside counsel respondents wanted to spend more on dispute avoidance, and nearly 90% reported strong board support for doing so.
So this would be a source of new business for alternative dispute resolution practice groups?
Not so fast.
The respondents laid the wood on that idea a bit:
However the survey also found in-house counsel were reluctant to involve private practice firms in dispute avoidance, citing high fees, lack of business understanding, and a “litigious mindset”.
Ouch!
Note what is going on here: firms see things like ADR as a new source of business. But clients don’t just want to resolve disputes better.
They want to avoid disputes in the first place. And they don’t think their outside counsel “get it.”
If that wasn’t enough, Grant Thornton partner Toni Pincott closes the article by returning to a favorite theme haunting law firms:
“They also need to rethink how they charge for these services - this is an area where hourly rates will just not be acceptable.”
The Wired GC — Unscripted
January 30, 2006 | Filed Under Legal Resources, General
Broc Romanek, editor of TheCorporateCounsel.net, has interviewed yours truly on his “Inside Track With Broc” series. I like the concise and straightforward approach Mr. Romanek takes with his “subjects.”
The podcast is here, and Broc also finds time to blog as well.
Search
Powered By
Links
| ||||
 | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
