A possible increase in the recent economic downturn is that many business models as an important need to re-invent, or even total elimination of previously incurred adopted. The number of billable hours / Leverage Model of Corporate Law Legal Services is one of the business models are increasingly vilified by example, and now seems in danger, and finally to the dustbin of history. Especially those who greatly benefit from billable hours, as many firms Cravath $ 800 per hourLawyers are now the fundamental irrationality of charging a client for time spent, rather than the expected value. This should be sufficient to show that change is in the air.
Despite growing rumors about the need for alternative models of customer service, I am afraid that most intellectual property lawyers, or try to change the request or to respond, with only gradual changes to their current methods ignore the supply of legal services to their customers. As someone whowith experience in dealing with intellectual property attorneys, I think, unfortunately, say the conservative nature of most IP lawyers that the company IP was probably behind the innovations in customer service. I believe that many prominent law firms and historically very profitable in the near future, IP will cease to exist.
I came to this conclusion after a series of valuable experience. In one of these a few years ago, I went to an associate manager of aKnown IP companies, with ideas on how to reduce the number of hours spent on the client lawyer. At that time the company began a significant push customers about the cost of routine legal services experience. I noticed, the managing partner, reducing the cost could be negligible as the client IP address administrative issues, the transfer of responsibilities to paralegals billing less. His response to this idea: "When has the paralegal's work, what would be the 1st and 2ndYears doing Associates? "
Of course, the central premise of the response, the managing partner at a rate of billable hours to the organization's partners can use model properly maintain required to occupy the youth membership of the settlement period. The current paradigm for his law firm asked to use to increase recruitment of staff to ensure that customers and partners effectively charged per hour, although a substantial part of the rotation time to keep every member directlygo into the pockets of the partners. This business model has been left out in the interests of customers "have been used sufficiently as a model that best serves the partnership business.
Of course, this study is not well managed, could become an excuse for self-service, managing partner of the customer's perspective on legal services for intellectual property. But my experience as a buyer of corporate law departments IP also showed that the billable hours / partner business model, a LeverageAgreement ut often the customer - me - to protect the interests of the company.
As in any other jurisdiction of U.S. $ 100K per year for legal services for a number of companies on IP, I always felt if I invoke external consultants, the first thought that comes the help of the Spirit of counsel "glad that he called is - I wonder how much work will lead to this call? " Most of the time I felt that my IP address outside lawyers my legal viewConcerns that solve their problems in an hour, not as a problem that could affect the profits of the company where I worked. The difference is subtle, but important: in the first a lawyer, as a service provider is, the second is the lawyer as a business partner.
Given these experiences, I was not what I recently heard, if it is surprising to my feelings about billable hours / Model lever with a friend, a partner in a firm "IP Lawyers Top SpecialUnited States. The echo of my partner feelings about the need for innovation in customer intellectual property. But he also pointed out that most of its non-venture partners to recognize that there is a problem with how they currently provide legal services of IP to their customers. As you said, many have their partners use live for a good billable hours / model, so that presently has little reason to change their behavior. My friend, partner, however, knows that his law firmseriously ill and may soon become something of a sudden cardiac arrest experience. Unfortunately, this is not a member of the management of his office, and there is no recognition of the higher level, that change is necessary, not much, so that its concerns to those partners who can deliver change (and probably not politically expedient for them ,) to do so.
The failure of this time are very much on the partner company of intellectual property in order to detect the passage of the windAcceptance of their customers about the billing practices - the foundation of their business related commercial law - reflects the reaction of the obvious interest in the history of innovations that are related paradigm, its current business model. In addition, the inability of many law firms in intellectual property to detect climate change leads me to believe that many of these venerable law firms soon the fate of the buggy whip maker can meet producers if s' not innovative, as theyProvision of legal services to their customers.
Playing in this analogy, killed the whip manufacturers manufacturers, because they thought of the whip manufacturers are in business, when in reality the transport sector. If obsolete buggy whips when the manufacturers are already wealthy. In particular, had the whip manufacturers manufacturers the ability to change and thrive in the new world of automobiles. Ever a strong relationship with the concertProducers, which was the company's first car. In addition, employs skilled craftsmen, who would turn their efforts to seat covers in leather or other aspects of the automobile. The whip manufacturers manufacturers accept that they need to experience the wave of innovation that is driving this time re-inventing itself as a supplier of automotive manufacturers, instead of the buggy makers.
As a manufacturer of buggy whip maker, I believe that many lawyers have become soare rooted in the firm who actually forget that they are the primary providers of legal services. As people with ensuring the continued vitality of the company, law firm lawyers often generators of payment in the first place that charges are derived from billable hours for legal services be paid. The care and feeding of the Company and its partners to ensure the continual creation of billable hours so often take precedence over the needs of the customer to the right. Alsolike the buggy whip maker factory, have lawyers that change in intellectual property law firms the ability to avoid obsolescence to. In fact, the lawyers have the necessary skills to continue their art outside the current paradigm of business practice. More like the buggy whip maker manufacturers, lawyers also have existing relationships with customers, ie customers, giving them a significant head start for newcomers to enter the world of innovative IP services for legal aidbut do not know the model of customer service.
With the usual picture of the aging of the buggy whip maker producer of more than 100 years ago, I think that intellectual property to realize the lawyers that they must adopt innovation, are ready for the IP legal advice to customers to be successful if their Customers decide that the time has come for change. On the other hand, lawyers who believe in the IP law firm is always ignored in innovationCustomer service enters the market that make the business model of commercial obsolete.
Advocates of IP should not expect to be able to predict the change will require a customer. As a customer of whip manufacturers manufacturers, clients, law firm, will not serve to protect its intellectual property advice with a warning period before their cases to lawyers, the models of innovative design services and offer more customer-focused. Conversely, if the customers are finally presented with acceptableAlternatives that moves naturally in the innovation, the best to their business needs. The result is that one day these lawyers are now intellectual property that are likely to wake up and realize that they are losing customers by the mass of lawyers who successfully developed and implemented an innovative model of customer service in the world. And say, like most lawyers, if a customer leaves, are probably gone forever.
Customers not only not their intention toleave their first law firm to do it, not even told their lawyers, as we have it better you can serve. Why should they not - in the business of providing legal services. Therefore, the innovations of the service must be of mutual benefit and produced the action. But fail because of their conservative nature, I think many IP lawyers of May, to understand that innovation is crucial if it is too late to protect their customers.
One couldargue that complaints will be running on the billable hours model for many years, but major changes have occurred so far is indicating that the majority of customers May all bluster and does nothing. While it is certainly true that people change a real pressure for lawyers to engage the past, are the circumstances quite different than before. Breakthrough innovation exploded in the society, and many business models are already strong, such as newspapers and music recordings are nowBalancing on the brink of extinction as a result.
The signs are there that the IP companies to leave on billable hours / model seems to be ready, the serious tensions that use by customers and critics in the very near future. Those that this model would be dependent for their survival will be well served to look for innovative ways to address this changing environment. In short, those who believe that the billable hours / business model will build on the innovations of the Law Business Transformation FlightThere are currently, that "whistling in the graveyard." Intellectual property law firms and other types of law firms, now has to innovate and innovation, big or fear that they do the same fate as the buggy whip maker manufacturers are suffering.
No comments:
Post a Comment