In 2012 the Australian legal profession faces a number of key challenges which, if disregarded, pose a significant risk to the performance and sustainability of the industry. Briana Everett looks at the top 10 risks to the future of Australia’s law firms.
 |
Mental health
It comes as no surprise that mental illness is one of the biggest threats to Australia’s legal profession.
Over the last few years, countless reports in the media have revealed the devastating e ects ofdepression and anxiety and the high incidence of mental illness in the legal profession, compared to any other.
But despite the increasing willingness amongst members of the industry to speak openly about mental illness, as well as the signifi cant efforts made by organisations such as the Tristan Jepson Memorial Foundation (TJMF) to increase education about mental illness, it remains a huge issue and threat to the legal profession in 2011 and beyond.
In September this year, members of the profession gathered in the Federal Court of Australia to hear a seven-member panel address the ongoing issue of mental illness in the profession as part of the TJMF’s annual lecture. Discussing his own battle with depression, panel member and managing partner of HopgoodGanim, Bruce Humphrys, highlighted the need to address ways of preventing the illness, rather than focusing on alleviating the symptoms.
Following on from my October post, as you know I am all for firms being creative and innovative.
After all you market for growth but innovate for profit.
But lets face it many organizations, especially professional firms, struggle with innovation despite just about every firms website mentioning just how innovative they are.
When I ask some firm leaders to give me examples of what their firm does that is truly innovative either the silence is deafening or the examples provided relate to efficiency gains, are pretty underwhelming and moreover are usually things practiced (often better) by their competitors. This is not to say such examples are bad or a firm should not have them- merely that they are not innovative per se.
Most professional firms like to benchmark themselves against their so called competitors to either feel good about themselves or to establish just how far they still have go to copy those they perceive as leaders, but this is hardly being creative or innovative. The real leading firms, those that are truly innovative, do not waste their energies benchmarking themselves against the more average firms. Most firms also tend to benchmark themselves against others in their profession – despite the fact that competition is increasingly coming from outside. Such benchmarking at best creates a race towards mediocrity.
Implementing Value PricingI have read many books on pricing, given my interest in the topic, and this is one of the most comprehensive yet understandable for lawyers.
Ron Baker, founder of The Verasage Institute, a think tank dedicated to teaching value-based pricing to professionals around the world, has written many books on this topic but his latest combines an up-to-date healthy mixture of the theory of value-based pricing and hundreds of practical tips and case studies to enable the theory to be put into practice.
This book is a must read for any lawyer even remotely interested in pricing their services other than by time. Even those who may not see any change happening in the legal profession or are not inclined to move away from time-based billing should read it, if only to be aware of what an increasing number of their competitors are doing.
It is also a book for those who say “value-based pricing is OK in theory but it just won’t/can’t/is too difficult to work in practice”. It is filled with proven, practical examples of how firms can and do price their services other than by time and successfully answer those critics who say it cannot be done.
Lawyers Weekly article by Brianna Everett
Goldilocks Solution key to lateral hiring strategy
Posted Nov 23 2011, 12:46 AM by Lawyers Weekly
Law firms with a conservative lateral hiring strategy tend to be more successful than their more active or minimally-active direct competitors, according to new research from the UK.
As a follow up to research conducted earlier this year into 1,944 partner moves in London across a five-year period, Motive Legal Consulting has conducted new research to determine the extent to which lateral partner hiring delivers value to law firms and the most appropriate strategy to do so.
Recognising that law firm development is affected by a multiplicity of factors, the research report maintains that lateral partner hiring continues to be the “main perceived engine of law firm growth”, with almost every law firm in the UK market having a dedicated strategy to hire partners.
With a serious degree of attrition amongst lateral partner hires in the UK – a rate of 33 per cent after three years and 44 per cent after five years – the research sought to uncover the financial value to firms.
“It stands to reason therefore, that these programmes must be presumed to be having some effect to law firm financials over time. Otherwise, why do it?” said Motive Legal Consulting’s Mark Brandon.
