April 22, 2008

The Science Behind Pricing

12:00 am

The April 2008 Scientific American contains an article titled Why Things Cost $19.95:  What Are The Psychological "Rules" Of Bartering? (hat tip: Matthew Homann, in his the [non]billable hour).  The article explains the effects that initial pricing has on a potential buyer based on a series of tests.  The results found:

people appear to create mental measuring sticks that run in increments away from any opening bid, and the size of the increments depends on the opening bid. That is, if we see a $20 toaster, we might wonder whether it is worth $19 or $18 or $21; we are thinking in round numbers. But if the starting point is $19.95, the mental measuring stick would look different. We might still think it is wrongly priced, but in our minds we are thinking about nickels and dimes instead of dollars, so a fair comeback might be $19.75 or $19.50.

 The authors of the tests then looked at five years of real estate sales in Florida to see the difference between the list price of real estate and the actual sales price.

They found that sellers who listed their homes more precisely—say $494,500 as opposed to $500,000—consistently got closer to their asking price. Put another way, buyers were less likely to negotiate the price down as far when they encountered a precise asking price. Furthermore, houses listed in round numbers lost more value if they sat on the market for a couple of months. So, : one way to deal with a buyer’s market may be to pick an exact list price to begin with.

Homann, in his post on the subject, took it a step further:  Why not charge $297 per hour rather than $300 per hour?  Then if a client wanted to negotiate, ostensibly the negotiations would be in single dollars rather than tens of dollars.

In the case of firms who are competing with other firms for business, this tactic may work well to secure a deal. 

It may not work as well when clients are asking for a discount.  Many times when it comes to discounting rates, clients look at percentage discounts of the whole bill rather than dollar discounts.   Therefore taking a few dollars off the charge per hour may end up costing you a lot more than anticipated.  Where it may work better is in flat fee or value-bill situations, where you are adjusting only the final price of the service.

So, if you have priced a certain task at $1,500, try advertising a price of $1,497.96.  On top of making the client look at penny increments, it also makes it look like you have calculated the exact value of the service.  Before making wholesale changes to your pricing, try on a specific area that may have a higher average of discounts (or lost potential clients due to pricing) than other areas.  Track whether the change in pricing has an effect.  If so, please feel free to post your results here.

Related posts

Permalink Print 1 Comment

Filed under Pricing, Rate by Brian J. Ritchey

Comments on The Science Behind Pricing »

April 22, 2008
(Trackback)

Stark County Law Library Blog @ 9:06 am

"The Science Behind Pricing"…

Posted by Brian J. Ritchey: “The April 2008 Scientific American contains an article titled Why Things Cost $19.95: What Are…

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting

February 25, 2008

How Law Firms Can Increase Income By $100k Per Partner In 1 Year

12:00 am

Measurement improves performance.  If you measure the following 5 key performance indicators, your per equity partner will increase.  These drivers are:

in the above model is based on head count .  Head count is the ratio of equity partners to non-equity fee earners. 

Rate in the above model is based on the effective billable rate for all fee earners.  You get this by adding all fee earner rates and dividing the sum by the number of fee earners.

in the above model is based on the amount of fees billed against what was worked.  You get this from dividing the sum of all fee earner hours billed by the sum of all fee earner hours worked.

in the above model is the sum of all fee earner billable hours divided by the total number of fee earners.

Margin is net income divided by total fee revenue.

Here is the scenario.  Your firm has 29 fee earners.  Eleven equity partners, eleven associates/non-equity partners/of counsel, and seven paralegals.  You have a total of 50 employees including equity partners.  Your effective billing rate is $275, your average fee earner is 1,690 per year, your firm writes down or discounts an average of 10% of work performed (90% ) and your cost per head is $140,903.   

Based on the above,  per equity partner would be $462,255.  

Base Scenario 

 Now, let's play with the numbers.  First, we'll look at rate.  If we increase rate by 6.5% (which was the average rate increase predicted by respondents of the 2007 Law Firm Economic Survey by LexisNexis), factor in cost inflation (currently around 4.25%), total PEPP increases to $486,314, an change of $24,059.

Increase Rate

Factoring inflation, the increase in income is not substantial.  However, it underlies the importance of increasing rates annually to avoid devaluing your rate due to inflation.  The secret to beating inflation, though, isn't rate;  It is .  High creates the gap (margin) between cost (which includes inflation) and revenue.  The higher your margin, the less inflation hurts you.  The lower your margin, the more inflation works against you.

So let's consider .  If you increase billable production by 100 hours per fee earner per year (a meager 24 minutes per day based on a 50 week year), PEPP increases to $527,505, a change of $65,250 per partner!

 Increase Productivity

This is one way to make a substantial increase in income with very little change in your workload.  In fact, you can likely make up the 24 minutes per day by just entering your time as you are doing the work.  Tools such as MyJuris Mobility take advantage of mobile devices such as Blackberry devices to recover nearly an hour per day of productive time

Finally, we'll consider .  If you add two non-equity fee earners (assuming you have the business to necessitate such growth), PEPP increases to $512,686; a change of $50,431 per partner. 

Increase Leverage

Best performing firms, however, do well in several indicators.  If you were to combine the above, the results would be striking.  If you increased rate 6.5%, added 24 minutes a day to each fee earner's billable goal, and added two associates, you would increase income from $462,255 to $609,677, a change of $147,422 per partner.  The effect of compounding factors works to increase the effect of each indicator on income more than you would by increasing any of the indicators alone.

Increase Rate, Productivity and Leverage

Even if you only increased rate and , you would increase PEPP by $90,733.  Click here to download a sample spreadsheet (you must be registered to this site to access the downloads page) and work the numbers yourself.  Use it to forecast your increases and measure your performance to reach your financial goals.  

Morepartnerincome.com is sponsored by Juris®.  For information about Juris products and services for increasing law firm performance and partner income contact Juris National Sales Center:

 877/377-3740, e-mail info@juris.com or go to www.Juris.com.

Related posts

Permalink Print 1 Comment

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model, Leverage, Margin, Rate, productivity, realization by Brian J. Ritchey

January 21, 2008

Law Firm Business Model - Measuring Rate

12:00 am

The 5 all should measure are:

This week each day I will focus on one of the above. Today the focus is on rate.

For a primer, look at some prior posts related to rate here, here, here, here, and here. The importance of tracking rate shouldn't surprise anyone. However, I run into firm after firm who either don't increase rates annually or don't track . How can you improve performance if you don't measure it?

Annual_Inflation_chart.jpg

Source: Timothy McMahon (http://www.inflationdata.com)

The above chart shows the trend in inflation since 1990. Failure to increase rates annually at the rate of inflation during the 1990's wouldn't have as much of an effect on considering the economic boom the US experienced along with low inflation. That changed in 2002 and there has been a steady increase in inflation for the past 6 years. In fact, as of December, 2007, the consumer price index (which includes the price for food and oil) was at 4%. If you are not increasing your rate at least by the percentage of inflation, you are working for less every year. It isn't known where inflation will be at the end of this year, and some are forecasting that this year will see some lower inflation, but the point isn't to predict lower when inflation is higher or higher when inflation is lower - it is to keep up with the rate of inflation and be certain your rate increases take it into consideration so that you are immune to the index altogether.

 

Inflation is a starting point - other factors such as relative expertise in a given area of law can also factor into rate. In your retention agreements, you can provide cost predictability to your clients by treating it like one would a long-term lease. You factor price increases into the agreement so that they know the percentage increase each year. In volatile times (such as the last few years), it may be better to treat it more like a mortage, setting a range of increase that won't go beyond a certain ceiling. Then annual increases can meet margin goals as well as inflation.

 

Measure the effective blended rate consistently so that you know if the rate is going up and down throughout the year. Why is this important? Assuming that your firm has established rate goals for the year, the blended rate (the combined average of all fee earners' rates) should be known. If the rate is decreasing, then something is wrong. The most likely culprit is pre-bill or post-bill adjustments. If your attorneys are devaluing their work, there needs to be a reason - otherwise, you will be sending a signal to the client that you are over charging them and adjusting to make it more fair. This is not the way to make it easier to raise rates in the future. Further, if you are trying to meet a financial objective, write downs and mark offs go directly to the and put you behind in reaching your financial goals.

 

The is calculated after the invoice is paid. It gives you the actual value of your services. In the report below, , , and rate are tracked. The image below it is a blow up of the rate section of the report. In it you can see the value of the hours worked at your standard rate, your actual or negotiated rate, the billed rate after mark down but before invoice discounts, the billed rate after discounts, and the collected rate after post-bill adjustments. It is broken down both by both worked hours and billed hours.

 

collectiontkprsmallrate.JPGrate.JPG

In the above, you can instantly see that the time keeper is writing up his negotiated rate at pre-bill edit to conform with his desired standard rate. One way you achieve this (ethically) is by the use of firm-wide standards for the cost of a task. You must determine the time it takes generally to do the task and then price it accordingly. If you have efficient attorneys that can do the task in less time than the standard, he/she may write up the bill to conform (likewise, if it takes longer, you must write it down). This way an efficient attorney may mark up his time and thus increase his . For those who advocate value billing, here it is at work. The better value goes to either the efficient attorney or the client of the inefficient attorney. Tracking effective blended rate regularly will allow you to determine whether your attorneys are being efficient in their processes and if they are on track to reach the financial goals or not. If they are not, you can act on it well before it becomes an uncorrectable problem.

At the same time, the above time keeper may be increasing his rate unethically, which may lead to undesirable consequences (firm reputation as well as ethical violations may be the result). Without regular reporting on the above, you won't have the information to know which is occurring.

Price increase is one factor to consider in increasing effective blended rate. It isn't the only factor. Many firms, especially those who work in corporate defense litigation, have traded high rates for volume. In practice areas where there is not a lot of price flexibility and the rate is usually heavily discounted to get the business, the key is to have an efficient workflow process and be very wary of mark downs. In some firms, the rate can absorb an inefficient operation. In corporate defense, you may not have that luxury. On top of that, more and more corporate clients are levying restrictive billing guidelines that can seriously affect . Not only can non-compliance with client billing guidelines delay payment, it can lead to nonpayment of certain tasks altogether.

Improving workflow efficiency is the easiest way to increase . However, expectation of reciprocity from a client who expects you to provide quality service at a reduced rate wouldn't hurt. Why is it that a client can expect you to lower rate for their volume when you are not guaranteed any volume from them? In my opinion, not only would I work to increase rate, I would tie the frequency and level of the increase on the volume the client provides. If the client is willing to guarantee a certain percentage of their work for a given year, I would be more willing to hold rates steady or only increase them by the annual rate of inflation. Don't be afraid to treat your corporate clients like a corporation. They are treating you like a business. Although restrictive, billing guidelines provide a measure of cost certainty by the tracking of costs associated with a task. They know what it costs for you to do your work. You better know it too - and make sure you are making a profit from the work you do.

Morepartnerincome.com is sponsored by Juris®. For information about Juris products and services for increasing law firm performance and partner income contact Juris National Sales Center:

877/377-3740, e-mail info@juris.com or go to www.Juris.com.

Related posts

Permalink Print Add Comment

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model, Rate by Brian J. Ritchey

Page 1 of 11