Sam Glover

Continuing with our discussion on lawyers embracing an entrepreneurial approach to their work, Legal Rebels recently featured attorney Sam Glover.

Mr. Glover, a Minnesota-based legal entrepreneur who manages a consumer rights practice, is also the author of the always useful lawyerist.com, which manages to weave together insightful commentary on legal practice, technology, productivity, and marketing.

Some of the highlights from Mr. Glover's profile regarding the state of the industry:

• Today, the internet-informed public needs lawyers less, but there are more lawyers than ever.

• There is little imagination in the practice of law.

• There are many smart but unemployed lawyers with little to lose by trying some new things.

• Lawyers must think more like entrepreneurs. Clients' changing needs will demand it. The economy demands it.

• To distinguish your practice from the next, look for an opportunity to serve new clients, or a new way to serve existing clients.

• Never be afraid to experiment. All you stand to lose is money. But if your experiments work, you could make even more money and gain happier, more-loyal clients and employees.

Taking Issue

Misleading. At best.

Law.com reported today on Kroll Inc.'s annual survey on corporate fraud. And for some reason law.com used the following headline:

"Legal Pitfalls of Outsourcing May Outweigh Benefits, Says New Survey"

Except, that's not at all what Kroll's report says.

The first sentence of law.com's post reads:

Companies that choose to outsource work to save money may be buying themselves more legal trouble than it's worth. That's one conclusion from Kroll Inc.'s annual global corporate fraud survey released Monday.

Except, um, that's not even close to any conclusion reached by the survey.

Based on that headline (at a legal-based web site) and that opening sentence, you might think the survey discussed Legal Outsourcing. It doesn't.

Based on the headline and that opening sentence, you might think the survey discussed the legal ramifications of other types of outsourcing. It doesn't.

The second paragraph of law.com's post opens with:

Asking if outsourcing is really worth the risk, the survey says companies often make the decision "without a thorough assessment of the risks involved in determining what is to be outsourced, and to whom."

The quote from the Kroll's report is pulled from a section solely dedicated to the discussion of IT Outsourcing. The title of that section is IT Outsourcing: Is it Worth the Risk?

But not even in this section are legal ramifications discussed. The intent of this section of the report -- in the report's own words -- is to present "a strong reminder that technology companies, including IT outsourcing ones, are vulnerable to the same common frauds - such as internal financial fraud, vendor or procurement fraud, and the theft of physical assets - that can occur in any other business."

The survey never intimates that the risks outweigh rewards. The survey simply says do your due diligence. Just like you would do in any other business capacity.

What does the report actually have to say?

It says that the financial services industry has been hit the hardest by fraud.

It also says that the professional services sector (which includes legal services and legal outsourcing) reported the lowest level exposure to fraud.

So, at the end of the day, the report says that while the internet has expanded business services, it has also created additional sources of potential fraud. Nothing earth shattering there. The report says to make sure that any vendor or business partner has proper data security safeguards in place.

Again, business as usual.

But nowhere in the survey does it conclude that legal pitfalls may outweigh the benefits of outsourcing.

Unbound

Unbound: How Entrepreneurship is Dramatically Transforming Legal Services Today is a timely and relevant new book for anyone tracking emerging trends in the legal profession.

Wasting no time, the opening paragraph dives right in with observations we've been discussing for the better part of this year:

"The financial and economic crisis of 2008 delivered the final blow to any skeptics still resisting change in the legal industry. The legal industry is now rushing toward dramatic transformation. Change is long overdue... Over the next three to five years, the legal landscape will be dramatically reshaped. Law will continue on its global march. Even small firms are outsourcing legal support work overseas."

Author David Galbenski founded Lumen Legal, a legal staffing and consulting company, in 1993. His fifteen years as a legal consultant has informed his identification of a number of major trends that he believes will affect the legal industry in the coming few years. Some of those trends are:

• New ways to buy legal services. Consumer demands will force the legal industry to behave less like a profession and more like a business.

• New ways to provide legal services. Globalization is a force that will expand the ways in which legal services are provided to the end consumer.

• New ways to organize legal services. Tasks will become unbundled, as a result of both business pressures and globalization.

• New categories and types of people will be called upon to perform legal services.

Unbound underscores many of the opinions in Richard Susskind's The End of Lawyers? Rethinking the Nature of Legal Services.

Additional quotes from the Financial Times' review of Unbound:

"The highlight of the book is a series of interviews with leading general counsel, who explain the changing global landscape their companies operate in and the pressures in-house lawyers face to rein in costs since the economic collapse. Their observations are stark and should raise the hairs on the arm of every managing partner, group practice leader and legal marketing expert in the business."

"The legal industry is facing unprecedented change, and law firms that don't modify the way they run their businesses face extinction."

"Law firms may be coping with a downturn in business by trimming their costs, but the recession is moving the entire industry toward a range of new, entrepreneurial models that will eventually put the legal industry more in line with other types of businesses."

Real Overhaul in Associate Hiring?

Two weeks ago we discussed how some major firms were rethinking their summer apprenticeship programs.

But last Friday's article in the Boston Business Journal indicates a far more systematic revisiting of the entire recruitment model, and at an even faster pace than previously noted.

The BBJ's title says a lot: Traditional Associate System Collapsing Under Economic Pressure.

According to the article: "Many law firm leaders now are taking the time to rethink the recruitment process soup-to-nuts, from pondering the wisdom of summer programs to slashing first-year salaries."

You know it's significant when the article is peppered with quotes like:

“It is antiquated. It just does not make economic sense. It does not make good business sense,” said John V. Snellings, hiring partner at Nixon Peabody LLP

“The age-old system hit a brick wall with the sharp downturn,” said Brian Bickerton, partner at legal staffing firm Major, Lindsey & Africa. “Never before has there been any kind of real consideration by firms to change the ways they recruit and hire."

“My guts says that there are bigger changes coming,” said Randi Friedman, assistant dean at Northeastern University School of Law. “It’s going to be the beginning of a new era."

“I spend a lot of time out in the world talking to clients. One thing I hear over and over again is that they are not willing to pay the kinds of hourly rates for young associates that they used to,” said Walter G.D. Reed, managing partner of Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge. “Either we’re going to have to come up with a new way of pricing our services or we’re going to have to figure out a different way of bringing young lawyers along.”

It's a refrain that's becoming more and more familiar. 1) The historic summer associate/hiring pattern is based on little other than tradition at this point. 2) Clients are less and less willing to pay large hourly fees for associate-level work.

Now, for the first time, large firms seem to be legitimately open to evaluating new approaches to associate-level work.