Avoiding Law Firm Implosions by Mandating Firms to Undergo Annual Stress Tests

Avoiding Law Firm Implosions by Mandating Firms to Undergo Annual Stress Tests.

Avoiding Law Firm Implosions by Mandating Firms to Undergo Annual Stress Tests

Good Lord! Please make it stop.

We can’t take witnessing any more carnage or scandal from the Dewy & LeBoeuf front! The worst part, in some respects, is that clients, laterals and law firm lenders are now looking past the Dewey debacle and looking at other large law firms and wondering which one is next.

The horrific death spiral of Dewey & LeBoeuf, which started within the firm in October of 2911 and debuted its public spectacle in March, 2012, continues to evoke gasps and cries from all observers and participants. The latest horrors, not unexpected, are the loss of hundreds of jobs and the disappearance or dramatic reduction of thousands of pensions. To be sure, more ugliness lies ahead: Draconian financial penalties to partners and prosecutorial inquiries of potential criminal liability for some key Dewey players.

The Dewey debacle isn’t going away any time soon. The slog of judicial proceedings will take years and impose enormous tolls on all concerned.

The added nightmare is that other large law firms will liklely follow suit and similarly implode.

The profession must galvanize and provide assurance to law firm partners and law firm stakeholders – partners, clients, lenders, lateral candidates and law school students that individual firms are strong and viable and are not in danger of implosion. The way to provide assurances is through having law firms undergo stress tests by qualified independent professionals. Given the current state of play, firms will likely only do so if market demands dictate that they do so. Those market mandates will arise when law firms are required to do so by clients, lenders, clients, lateral candidates and to maintain a competitive edge.

The need for these stress tests is urgent and the time to start applying them is now.

Dewey, Sex, Lies and Videotape

We are still sitting and gawking unabashedly at the awful train wreck that is now the fate of Dewey & LeBoeuf. The human carnage is unspeakable, yet we can’t stop staring.

The pundits are rapidly offering their own dissections for the cause of the carnage: Tales of corruption, deceit, dishonesty, mismanagement, sexual improprieties, criminality, dishonesty and such abound.
There is a huge amount of unnecessary pain that many will endure.

One of the odd things is that many at the top of Dewey’s dysfunctional food chain will – extremely bright, accomplished and talented lawyers – could have avoided much of the pain that lies ahead of them by simply characterizing their relationship with the law firm as something other than “partners.” The irony is that many of these folks were not partners. They did not share in profits or losses. They had fixed multi-year contracts under which their income was guaranteed, regardless of the fortunes of the law firm. These agreements were the products of avarice, greed and shortsightedness, which could have and should have been avoided.

Now, the beneficiaries of these contracts are destined to pay handsomely for their previous ego gratification, a result which could have been easily avoided.

Dewey Think We Are Watching the Deconstruction of a Venerable Law Firm?

Dewey Think We Are Watching the Deconstruction of a Venerable Law Firm?. Related articles Lean Times for Dewey & LeBoeuf (lesliebrodie.wordpress.com) More Partners Leave Dewey & LeBoeuf (dealbook.nytimes.com) Defections Continue at Dewey & LeBoeuf (dealbook.nytimes.com)

Dewey Think We Are Watching the Deconstruction of a Venerable Law Firm?

Jerome Kowalski Kowalski & Associates March, 2012   Have you ever witnessed a sudden and unexpected calamitous and life threatening accident unfolding before your eyes?  Your brain is hard wired to provoke one or more of several different reactions:  (1) avert your eyes; (2) take flight for your own safety; (3) stare intently while frozen [...]

How to Succeed in BigLaw While Really Trying: A Four Act Unfinished Play, Now Playing at a Law Firm Near You

How to Succeed in BigLaw While Really Trying: A Four Act Unfinished Play, Now Playing at a Law Firm Near You.

How to Succeed in BigLaw While Really Trying: A Four Act Unfinished Play, Now Playing at a Law Firm Near You

The numbers for 2011 for law firms are dribbling out as they inevitably do at this time of year. The reports are fairly consistent all across the board: Gross revenues up at about 3 or 4%; net profits increased at double that rate. Expenses increased at rates at triple that rate. Law firms seem to be generally recovering relatively well from The Great Recession.

But some real cracks are surfacing. Partner free agency continues to be a boon to some law forms and a bane to others. Even some law firms that have attracted some real big hitters are groaning with the expense of paying for substantial books of business, Those firms that are losing producers are seeing a cash drain and some ominous publicity.

Law firms that saw their gross revenues increase did so by squeezing every possible cent out of their accounts receivable, leaving them with reduced inventories of A/R and weakened cash flow positions. Law firms that saw their net profits increase often did so by deferring accounts payable, leaving them with swollen accounts payable ledgers.

And the bill collector is at the front door for many of the steps taken by law firms in the last few years to escape the clutches of The Great Recession. The due bills are arriving for expansions.

The industry is at a cross roads as we all remain uncertain how this show will conclude. We are about to see the exciting finale – only, there remains great uncertainty as to what that last act will look like.

What are your thoughts as to what the next act will look like?

Leverage is Back: The Return of the Pyramid Business Model for Law Firms, with a Twist

Leverage is Back: The Return of the Pyramid Business Model for Law Firms, with a Twist.

Leverage is Back: The Return of the Pyramid Business Model for Law Firms, with a Twist

In the second half of the last century, BigLaw developed and then fine tuned its pyramided business model. The name of the game was leverage: put an increasingly large cadre of associates at the base of the pyramid, have them bill scads of hours. Bill associates at a rate of three times their compensation; one-third of that amount would cover overhead and the balance would be profits for the partners, Partners sat at the top of the pyramid and waited for the dumbwaiters to send up piles of cash. The notion that large scale profits would be earned by hourly billing of partners was unheard of at BigLaw. The market for legal services was incredibly elastic, as demand for legal services exceeded supply. The fuel of for the pyramided business model was constant growth. BigLaw knew with certainty that it would grow at the rate of 10% per annum, compounded. Hiring and building law firms’ infrastructure was predicated on that growth rate.

The Great Recession put an end to that business model. Suddenly, supply exceeded demand. For the first time since the Cravath model was created, almost all large law firms began to contract. Clients revolted against the Cravath model and, more importantly, began to refuse to feed firms’ profit machines by refusing to pay for time billed by first and second year associates. It began to look like the associate cadre, the base of the pyramid, was in real danger of collapsing.

As law firm managers began to scramble to meet the challenges of The Great Recession, they met their firms’ need for growth and revenues by aggressively recruiting lateral partners with large client followings. These lateral partners were all highly compensated and in order to meet their salary requirements, less productive partners were shoved aside and moved to lower levels of the pyramid structure.

Now, law firm revenues are largely driven by hours billed by service and contract partners. Enormous compensation gaps among ranks of partners began to emerge. Thus emerged the new pyramid, with three tiers of partners, namely, the most highly compensated equity partners, equity partners earning far less and contract partners.

But the real weakness in the New Pyramid is at its summit. Lateral partners with large books of business do not have institutional loyalty, they are proudly free agents offering their portfolios to the highest bidder. And when those at the top of the New Pyramid hop off to a more attractive New Pyramid, the underlying structure can be in real danger of collapse.

It Shouldn’t Suck to be an Associate at a Law Firm, Part II

It Shouldn’t Suck to be an Associate at a Law Firm, Part II.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 721 other followers