Law firms fail to modernize because their owners won't invest present earnings to finance future growth. If your law firm can change that, then the sky's the limit.
Very insightful article. One option could be an investment fund model for law firms that guarantee's a higher return on equity based on forward looking earnings potential and investment / business case outcomes. This might incentivize equity partners to pool a % of their profits back into the firms fund as opposed to buying a second home or look for a hedge fund !
Thanks Jordan, your article is very insightful. Many law firms are still focussed on cutting costs, whether they are reviewing annual budgets or investing in something new. I am bemused when law firm partners need several full partnership meetings to decide on whether to approve external consultancy that will lead to improved effectiveness and efficiencies. The irony is that the monetary value of partner hours spent deliberating over a proposal is often not far off the project investment required.
Not everything is as tangible as cost savings. In my law management consultancy, I encourage partners in law firms to look beyond the 'purchase price' and shift their focus from ' what will this cost?' to ' what are the benefits?' - such as 'will this raise my firm`s profitability?' , 'can this replace or improve our current processes?' , ' Does this impact positively on our culture to improve employee engagement?' If so , then partners begin to understand that are not just spending money, they are investing for the future potential of the business and its ability to generate more revenue.
Erin, anecdotally at least, that rings true for me. Having spent some time in both markets, I'd characterize the Canadian legal sector (relative to the US, at any rate) as more cloistered, less competitive, and significantly more risk-averse. The US legal market is so large (~$280B annually, 10x Canada's size) and competitive that firms feel compelled to go harder than in Canada, where (in general) there's still a certain genteel feel to the place. And of course, Canadian productivity across all sectors has lagged the US for decades. I'm not saying one approach is better or worse than the other; but I expect this article, at least, to get a better reception south of the 49th parallel.
Very insightful article. One option could be an investment fund model for law firms that guarantee's a higher return on equity based on forward looking earnings potential and investment / business case outcomes. This might incentivize equity partners to pool a % of their profits back into the firms fund as opposed to buying a second home or look for a hedge fund !
Great idea!
Thanks Jordan, your article is very insightful. Many law firms are still focussed on cutting costs, whether they are reviewing annual budgets or investing in something new. I am bemused when law firm partners need several full partnership meetings to decide on whether to approve external consultancy that will lead to improved effectiveness and efficiencies. The irony is that the monetary value of partner hours spent deliberating over a proposal is often not far off the project investment required.
Not everything is as tangible as cost savings. In my law management consultancy, I encourage partners in law firms to look beyond the 'purchase price' and shift their focus from ' what will this cost?' to ' what are the benefits?' - such as 'will this raise my firm`s profitability?' , 'can this replace or improve our current processes?' , ' Does this impact positively on our culture to improve employee engagement?' If so , then partners begin to understand that are not just spending money, they are investing for the future potential of the business and its ability to generate more revenue.
I just read this article which talks about the lack of investment by Canadian businesses generally and its impact on productivity. I’d be interested to know if US law firms are more innovative and willing to invest than Canadian firms? https://financialpost.com/news/economy/bank-of-canada-says-nation-faces-productivity-emergency
Erin, anecdotally at least, that rings true for me. Having spent some time in both markets, I'd characterize the Canadian legal sector (relative to the US, at any rate) as more cloistered, less competitive, and significantly more risk-averse. The US legal market is so large (~$280B annually, 10x Canada's size) and competitive that firms feel compelled to go harder than in Canada, where (in general) there's still a certain genteel feel to the place. And of course, Canadian productivity across all sectors has lagged the US for decades. I'm not saying one approach is better or worse than the other; but I expect this article, at least, to get a better reception south of the 49th parallel.
A fascinating read with great advice. Thanks Jordan.
Very informative article. Unfortunately, equity partners are the most risk adverse members in a law firm. It's a huge obstacle to overcome.
Very perceptive, as usual, Jordan!