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 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 (the combined average of all ' 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 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 bottom line 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 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 regularly will allow you to determine whether your 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 . It isn't the only factor. Many firms, especially those who work in corporate defense litigation, have traded high rates for volume. In 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 ®. For information about products and services for increasing law and partner income contact 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

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting

January 11, 2008

Reflections on the 2007 ALM Billing Rates & Practices Survey

12:00 am

"Is the dead, as many like to proclaim (whether wistfully or presciently?)" So starts the Executive Summary for the 2007 ALM Billing Rates & Practices Survey. The relentless assault against the hapless continues. Here is yet another blog post arguing against hourly billing. Yet if you look at billing rates, they continue to increase. The 2007 ALM Billing Rates & Practices confirms this, but also drills down into respondent's use of alternative fee arrangements.

According to the ALM survey, the average billing rate nationally is $240. This is in line with the 2007 Law Firm Economic Survey from LexisNexis, where nationally, attorney rates were at $249 (broken down: equity partner rates were at $263 and non- billed at $235 on average). In the ALM survey, "[a]ll but a small percentage were the leader, managing partner, shareholder or owner of their firm", so I didn't include the firm that includes associate and paralegal rates in calculating the $249 (for those of you thumbing through the survey). Only 8% of the ALM were associates, so it may very well be that average rates were lowered to $240 in the ALM survey by the associates (who in the survey billed at $175 per hour).

The survey is heavily weighted to small firms, with about a third of being solo practitioners and 58% from "small firms" defined as between 2 and 39 . Why ALM decided to include mid-sized firms ( defines mid-size to include firms with with over 10 ) in the small firm category, I don't know, but it might be due to a small amount of in that 11-39 range.

As further comparison, the average national billing rate for equity and non- in the 2007 survey was $315. The National Law Journal Billing Survey partner average was $427. Both the and NLJ surveys target larger firms.

One of the observations of the survey was that size of the law firm matters and the above figures certainly indicate this. However, in the survey, the observation was different: it isn't the size that matters, but "that that outperform with regard to per-partner income do so because they excel in performance on the key law firm profit drivers." The ALM Billing survey doesn't profile the firms for per-partner income and thus only looks at part of the picture.

kpippp.JPG

In the chart above, each quartile was ranked for the following key profit drivers: (billable hours), , billing , , and operating margin. The highest performing firms ranked the lowest in all of the indicators.

Size, on the other hand, didn't make as much of a difference. For example, the per partner income of the top performing firms with 25 or more in the survey was $609,548. Income per partner for firms with 11 to 24 in the top quartile was $548,557 and with 10 or fewer , $512,896. However, the difference between quartile 1 and 2 across all sizes is substantial: $325,986, $322,876, and $294,871 respectively. While there is less than $100,000 that separates the smallest surveyed firms from the largest ones, there is nearly $300,000 difference between quartile 1 and 2 across firms of all sizes.

Which brings us back to the ALM Billing & Practices Survey. 88% of to the 2007 ALM Billing Rates & Practices Survey reported that they offer "alternatives" to the and it made up an average of 37% of their revenues. That is a pretty substantial number. Given that the survey is made up of smaller firms, you may be tempted to conclude that smaller firms are moving away from the in order to compete better with larger firms.

That may well be the case, but it is just as likely that some small firms that continue to not operate like a business could be getting caught up in a trend that in the long run will drop their even lower while the solo practitioners next door is making half a million. If you don't measure performance, you won't know.

Morepartnerincome.com is sponsored by ®. For information about products and services for increasing law and partner income contact 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 Alternative Billing, Law Firm Bus Model by Brian J. Ritchey

August 30, 2007

Role of Realization in the Law Practice Business Model

10:47 am
This post contains content viewable to subscribers only. Registration is free and gives you access to exclusive articles not found anywhere else, including interviews with managing partners and practice-specific articles written by attorneys specializing in the industry. Subscribe now to gain access to this content.

Related posts

Permalink Print Add Comment

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model, Subscriber Content by Tom Collins

April 11, 2007

What Margin Should Your Law Firm Generate?

10:33 am
This post contains content viewable to subscribers only. Registration is free and gives you access to exclusive articles not found anywhere else, including interviews with managing partners and practice-specific articles written by attorneys specializing in the industry. Subscribe now to gain access to this content.

Related posts

Permalink Print Add Comment

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model, Subscriber Content by Tom Collins

April 9, 2007

Blended Rate and Utilization Model for Law Firms

10:21 am
This post contains content viewable to subscribers only. Registration is free and gives you access to exclusive articles not found anywhere else, including interviews with managing partners and practice-specific articles written by attorneys specializing in the industry. Subscribe now to gain access to this content.

Related posts

Permalink Print Add Comment

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model, Subscriber Content by Tom Collins

January 2, 2007

Increasing a Law Firm's Effective Rate

11:25 am

When it comes to pricing, the firm’s focus should be on more than its published rate list. Look for measures to increase the being realized by the firm.

do not do business with every client on a single hourly rate schedule. Those exceptions are often the key to a low . On the other hand, firms with a standard rate schedule may be overlooking the opportunity to price higher value services at a higher rate. In addition to periodic review of the firm’s standard hourly rate schedule, the firm should be engaged in the following steps to increase effective billing rates and improve partner income.

  • Increase existing low negotiated rates to their higher competitive level
  • Set higher rates for selected areas of specialization and expertise
  • Identify new specialty areas and train or acquire expertise, thereby increasing value and the potential for increased billing rates. Market for better clients—those willing and able to pay more
  • Develop and enforce case acceptance standards that emphasize the value of matters undertaken
  • Improve (and market) the quality of service, presentation of work product, technology, efficiency and responsiveness
  • Take advantage of opportunities for alternative billing (value based) pricing
  • Invest in a better for pricing flexibility, easier price changes, improved anniversary date tracking, etc.

Morepartnerincome.com is sponsored by , Inc. For information about ® products and services for increasing law and partner income, go to www.Juris.com.
 

Related posts

Permalink Print Add Comment

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model by Tom Collins

November 16, 2006

Law Firm Standard Rate Realization

11:17 am

Average reported in the Law Firm of midsized , was 91.6 percent.

Invisible expenses, a phrase coined by William F. Breman at , Inc., accounts for the fact that only 95.4 percent of the time value of work performed for billable clients at rates agreed upon is being billed. Billing , on average, write off 4.6% before clients ever see their bill. Then only 96 percent of the remaining billed amount is ever collected. When combined, these two components of overall represent the 91.6 percent picked up in the survey.

The situation is worse. There is another component of overall that, unfortunately, usually goes unmeasured and unreported. It has a name, “Standard Rate ”. It is the lost value because of negotiated rates that are below the firm's standard rates.

As we analyzed the survey information, it became apparent that lower performing firms had a higher discrepancy between their reported standard rates and their realized . Since the average billing showed little reported variance regardless of quartiles of performance measured in terms of per-partner income, the culprit has to be the firm's standard rate . Lower performing firms are billing clients at rates well below their standard rates. They are doing deals. They are increasing standard rates but not adjusting rates of existing clients. Their billing systems and procedures are out of synch with firm intentions.

The message here is do not leave standard rate unmeasured. How do you do that? Most full-featured time and billing systems will measure and track the time value of work performed by both standard rate and negotiated rate values. You need to set goals and measure and hold people accountable at both the origination and billing attorney levels for the difference between negotiated rates and the firm’s standard rates. In addition, for the drill-down information needed to investigate and correct problem areas, you need to have measured the difference at the client, matter, and working attorney levels. Measuring and comparing both values at the practice class level is important for firm planning purposes. If your time and billing system does not track both standard and negotiated time values, replacing it with one that does should pay back the added investment many times over and for years to come.

Morepartnerincome.com is sponsored by , Inc. For information about ® products and services for increasing law and partner income, go to www.Juris.com.
 

Related posts

Permalink Print

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model by Tom Collins

August 4, 2006

High Performing Law Firms Spend More

10:02 am

The most profitable firms don’t have the lowest cost structure. That was one of the findings from a recent , Inc. survey. Top performing firms had higher per-head operating expenses and a higher ratio of non- to . Full survey details will become available later this month.

The findings provide more evidence that it pays to focus on revenue rather than cost reduction. That is not to say that profitable firms spend recklessly. While costs per head are higher, the firm’s total cost as a percentage of revenue was lower due to higher revenue per partner and per head.

Cost cutting campaigns will not move a law firm into the category of a top performer. If you want to increase , you need to concentrate on increasing revenue rather than focusing attention on reducing expenses. You should pursue as well as opportunities to increase , , and . Eliminating amenities, downgrading facilities, reducing personnel, holding back on salary increases, and reducing is likely to cause more harm than gain.

Morepartnerincome.com is sponsored by , Inc. For information about ® products and services for increasing law and partner income, go to www.Juris.com.

Related posts

Permalink Print

Filed under Expense Control by Tom Collins

December 5, 2005

Measuring Law Firm Utilization (Billable Hours) and Blended Rate

11:29 am
This post contains content viewable to subscribers only. Registration is free and gives you access to exclusive articles not found anywhere else, including interviews with managing partners and practice-specific articles written by attorneys specializing in the industry. Subscribe now to gain access to this content.

Related posts

Permalink Print

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model, Subscriber Content by Tom Collins

April 4, 2005

How does your firm's effective rate per hour compare?

1:13 pm

The overall mean for blended or per hour is $200.00.  While effective rates will vary by region and mix of business, my experience is that those firms that are off of the mark are usually those who are not disciplined about renegotiating rates with its continuing clients.  Remember, it is your .  Inadequate pricing comes right out of partner pockets.  Out-of-date fee agreements amount to a discount for which you don’t get credit.

 

Your business and information system should help you keep fee agreements in sync with the current market price.  Find out if and how your existing will track fee agreement anniversary dates, alert you when a review is needed, and even keep management apprised about renegotiations that have not yet resulted in a successful increase in rates.  Rates aren’t the only story.  Your agreement regarding expenses is also important.  Recover direct and indirect costs by providing adequate pricing for soft and hard cost billed to clients.

Related posts

Permalink Print 1 Comment

Filed under Law Firm Bus Model by Tom Collins

Page 1 of 212»