« Dance, robots, dance. | Main | Broc Romanek: Congress, HR 2759 and Disclosures of "Social Issues" to the SEC. »
August 21, 2011
Sensitive Litigation Moment No. 33: Do Big Clients need Big Law More than 10% of the Time?
Managing Partner, Astana branch, Big, Clumsy & Talent-Diluted.
It's here, from back in 2006 (modified 2007), and a favorite post of ours. Even uber-feisty international trade lawyer and fellow transplanted Midwesterner Dan Harris at China Law Blog liked it. The piece is actually pro-Big Law (over 1,000 lawyers), but lawyers and their marketing people connected with all sorts of firms--mega-big, large, medium and tiny--can find something they don't like about it. You'll all live.
The point is this: 90% of the important corporate legal work being done right now by firms between 500 and 3000 lawyers can be done by boutiques and smaller firms. If it has the right people, your firm can land Fortune 500 companies and keep them.
And remember to get off your knees. Don't forget to maintain or raise your rates. Competing on price for higher-end work is for chumps and will only hurt you in both marketing and client retention. Remember, in this "model", your lawyers and services/products are first-rate, and your client service is superior. Plus: (a) your firm is more efficient, (b) your overhead is likely lower, and (c) your work in any event is better. And there is no "piling on".
Find out what the "Big Law" rate or price is--and match or exceed it.
Posted by JD Hull at August 21, 2011 12:59 AM