Acorns and Oaks: Change Factors for Smaller Firms
We are going to take time out for a little futurism. I was intrigued by a post in ABAJournal.com on “Four Factors that Could Change Law Practice” by Debra Cassens Weiss commenting on an article in American Lawyer.
The ABAJournal.com factors that could change law practice are: less loyalty among associates, investment by nonlawyers, corporate dissatisfaction with high billing rates and technology.
It seemed to me that the four factors selected were from the perspective of “Biglaw.” From the perspective of smaller firms, it seemed to me the principal change factors would be a little different. Along with personal experience, my analysis of small firm experience comes from a number of sources. Two very recent blog posts that provide useful insights are: ABAJournal.com, by Rachel M. Zahorsky, “Boutique Firms Find Recession Resilience in Being a Master of One,” and MyShingle.com, by Carolyn Elefant, entitled “Solo, Leverage Thyself (and Diversify Too): Biglaw, Take Heed!
This may all seem off-topic for this blog but, actually, “changes in law practice” also means changes in business litigation. In fact, one specific change we might predict is that in the future litigation may be a rarity for business disputes, especially for small business clients, while lawyers and their clients deal more broadly with “dispute resolution.” So, with thanks to ABAJournal.com for starting the thought process, I’m going to try to identify change factors from the perspective of smaller firms.
And, although we focus on small firm practice, Myshingle.com may have a point and perhaps Biglaw should take heed: the study of acorns and saplings does yield insights into the lifecycles of the mighty oaks.
I plan to elaborate on each factor in future posts. For now, let’s identify the small firm factors that could change the practice of law:
- Collaboration (both within and among firms): While lawyers do collaborate, currently there is an inherent limitation because many clients can’t afford to pay collaborating lawyers if each is billing strictly on an hourly basis.
- Value Buying: We use this term to address billing issues from the perspective of the buyer. Regardless of the law firm’s billing method, clients are making an implicit comparison of the value of services against the cost.
- Specialization (even more or ever narrower): The value to the smaller firm of specialization and the niche marketing associated with specialization ought to be self-evident.
- Technology: Technology will continue to change the practice of law but not necessarily in esoteric ways. Consider an analogy with the better known example of health care imaging technologies: the benefits come not from the imaging but from the practitioner’s ability to diagnose more accurately and treat more precisely.
We’ll have more to say. Comments will be appreciated at any time.
Thanks for linking to my post. I agree with your identification of collaboration as a way to change the practice of law. I collaborate with other lawyers from time to time but would love to make this a regular part of my practice. Trouble is that bar rules discourage sharing (by imposing imputed malpractice liability if there's a belief that 2 lawyers are part of the same firm) and fee splitting. If the law changes, hope the bar will keep pace.