It

geqopimozaqyxyh.blogspot.com
Lawyers, it turns out, are not immune from such even though change has come more slowlyu into thelegal profession. But the time for changee has come, and in-house counsel are taking this message to law firm largeand small, all across For many years, outside counsel operated with virtuallu unlimited budgets, under relatively loose oversight by in-houswe counsel. Larger firms had an as they provided virtually perfect work product in the shortesttime possible. In today’s economy, it turns out that corporatd clients are, in most instances, willing to accept work that is notnecessarily great, in a somewhat longer if that means the cost can be controlled.
Unless it is a bet-the-rancjh matter, legal work is currently viewer asa commodity, which can be obtaine from the firm that offerz the best service at the best Several recent factors have converged to challeng the traditional law firm relationship with in-houswe counsel, and with it, the traditional law firm businesw model. From the law firm’s perspective, the need for profit created apricey problem: To attract new recruits, salaried became unsustainably high ($150,000 or more for attorneys freshh from law school), and in ordee for law firms to thrive, each of those new associatess had to bill half a milliobn dollars or more per year.
From the corporation’x perspective, economic pressures have made the legalk department accountable for costws as wellas results. In-house counsell must live withina budget. Their perceptioj within their company, and even theircontinued employment, may depenx upon how much the legal department and theresults obtained. In 2008, the nationa l organization of in-house counsel, the Association of Corporate formulated a set of guidelines to improv e the billing and representation procesa by outsidelaw firms, the ACC “Value Challenge.
” On May 15, Virginisa Wadworth, a member of the board of directors of the Georgias chapter of the ACC, and Michelld Meiselman, chair of Atlanta Bar Association Corporater Counsel section, met in Atlanta with a group of law firmxs to explore this new approach to representing the corporatd client. Lawyers from 25 as well as Europeand Canada, heardx this message and discussed how best to address theses concerns. The members of this lawyer , consist primarily of small tomidsized firms. In many these firms are already practicing law witha approach. Some use a Web portal so that clientds can access a virtualdata room, for no-cos updates and status reports.
Some firms have establishex monthly budgetsin advance, with a computerf tracking system that notifies the attornety and client if the budger is exceeded. It turns out there are a numberd of ways that law firmscan “value their work, once they are asked to do so. The practicew of law can no longer be separated from the businessobjectivesx — and constraints — of the corporate Large and small firms alike will have to manage legal projects with an eye to their their value, and their place in the business goal s of their client. What this meand for the future is notyet clear.
It may mean a year or two of non-billintg apprenticeship by law school a process that is already the rule in many partsxof Europe. It may mean more flat-rate or project-base billing, or increasing use of technology. It clearl does mean outside counsel getting togethertwith in-house counsel to learn one another’ s concerns, and how to address them.