January 19, 2007
Corporate World Still Hesitant About Law Firm Billing Alternatives
The January California Lawyer (page 8) reports that lacking comfortable alternatives, lawyers and clients are staying hitched to the billable hour.
The article, Driven by the Clock, notes that C-level executives on the corporate side seem more reluctant than law firms to abandon the status quo—the traditional hourly bill. Offered an alternative arrangement, one corporate executive rejected it, explaining, “I need someone watching my back. I already have an investment banker whose only interest is this deal is collecting his commission.”
The client did not want legal advice biased toward a certain outcome. One of the complaints against the “billable hour” by the business world is the perceived conflict-of-interest that may result in the lawyer finding things to do just to increase the bill. The article illustrates that alternatives to the billable hour can interject their own versions of perceived and real conflicts-of-interest into the lawyer/client relationship.
As observed by Brad Brian, past chair of the ABA’s litigation section, “There is an interesting dance going on. A lot of clients want attorneys to think about billing alternatives, but they’re nervous about them too because there are risks on both sides.”
There is no single pricing solution that will make everyone happy all of the time. It follows that a law firm should not have a single pricing model. Where alternative pricing fits, alternative pricing is a road toward more partner income and happier clients.
Morepartnerincome.com is sponsored by Juris, Inc. For information about Juris® products and services for increasing law firm performance and partner income, go to www.Juris.com.
Related posts
Filed under Alternative Billing by Tom Collins
Leave a Comment