Post by Nuno B.M. Lumbrales, lawyer, partner at Lumbrales & Associados and LawRD user:

One year ago, as a partner of a newborn law office, I was confronted (relunctly and along with scarce financial resources) with the need to invest in the development of a website to the office.

At that time, our only target was to keep up along with our direct competitors, avoiding to “stay behind”, as we were resting assured that the website wasn’t going to provide us with measurable profits.

The first surprise was the budget presented to the website development and maintenance, which was quite reasonable. In fact, the competition between many of the Portuguese PME (Small and Medium Enterprises) in the computer sciences business was robust enough to assure that the prices kept reasonable and negotiable. The secret to get a good deal in computer sciences was to avoid making business with the highly acclaimed “monsters” (it only took the estimate budget of the project to get discouraged).

The second surprise was, once again contradicting our assumptions, that in our first year of existence some clients came to us stating they’d known our office through the website after performing some google searches.

At the end of the day, comparing the costs of the website and the profits coming from this specific clients, showed us that the balance was positive right in the first year, reason that led us to conclude that our investment was, in fact, profitable.

Post by Gustavo Rocha, lawyer and consultant in management, IT and quality for law firms. He’s the author of Gestão.Adv.br (content in Portuguese only):

A lot has been said on managing law firms, on how they need to organize and prepare present today’s market, etc.

Management is a wide, true and assertive word. Not the answer to everything, though.

Law practice management is like an adjective in a sentence, it needs a subject and a verb. How so?

Subject: What is the point on talking about standard procedures and results analysis when those in charge of the firm are not doing their homework? Management ought to be the first ones to be involved in any firm evolving process. They will be the driving force so all staff see changes in a serious, willing and respectful light.

Managing stands for assessing internal procedures, reviewing and change whatever it needs so the business  may thrive. This calls for the presence of all partners in this process. Executive tasks can be delegated, however, strategic ones are to be set by those who take all risks and sort the firm out i.e. the partners. A tree alone does not a forest make, of course. Everyone at the firm must be in tune with the practice and its project. For that purpose, the subject (be it a leader, a partner or a manager) has to be a constant presence so it all comes into being.

Verb: if we have subjects (people willing to face up the challenge of changing) the first step is taken. But with no concrete action (verb) nothing happens. It’s a basic law of physics: for something to leave it’s inertia something must alter that.

So, what actions are taking you presently on your practice? At least, you should invest on:

• Law marketing;
• Social networks;
• Proper software.

One has to be connected to today’s market (law marketing) and present/future market (social networks), as well as, to IT as an edge in your business (more productivity with less people by managing data).  It not enough for you to be the subject, you’ll need to have and to be the verb of change.

Adjective: it is what specifies and distinguishes within a sentence. That is exactly what management does. There is none without subjects nor actions. Even if a firm is formed with driven, self assured and leading people in the legal practice, without management all is doomed in presence of the demands of the present market reality. Management provides firms with quality, efficacy and productivity.

Those are the demands that the market wants to be met. How is your firm doing in this regard? Are the subjects who work with you driven and focused? Have you any planning for strategic results? Is management an edge at your firm? More than qualifying, management differentiates in today’s market.

To conclude, management has to go along with driven subjects and focused actions towards quality, efficiency and productivity in your practice.

Post by Gustavo Rocha, lawyer and consultant in management, IT and quality for law firms. He’s the author of Gestão.Adv.br (content in Portuguese only):

When asking themselves this, everybody has in mind a software solution that does it all: it can manage matters, it organizes the firm, it will sort all that in your practice can be delt with in the cloud and still keep your business from fallling into chaos.

Foolishness!

Prior to solving the management of your office with a software comes the need to manage your practice.

What do I mean?

Any software solution will enable you with data, swift search (assuming it is provided with a comprehensive database), issue reports, etc. However, for a streamlined performance it will need for its data to be logged  within a certain logic and pattern. Reaching this implies that an advanced acquaintance with the app is a given, i.e. understanding its features, possibilities and actual implementation cost, so that an assessment of its cost/benefit ratio can be realized.

Some myths on legal apps are:

The complete solution

All app developers claim that their soltions are the bench mark of the market, they will meet all your practice needs. The reality is that apps will only do what they were programmed to and without an in depth try out,  there’s no way to find how suited for the task they are or not. Apps will enable you with countless resources that won’t do you any good if you don’t know how to make use of them or those resources are not suited for your needs.

Before buying software ask yourself the following:

• What is my area of business?
• What sort of data will be most usefull for my clients?
• Can I access and log data at any time, from any place (from my cell phone for instance)?
• What area the areas of my practice that the app will manage (matters, fiscal, documents, etc)?
• Can I afford to invest in an ideal software solution or do I have other priorities?

The point is, before thinking of apps you should actually be thinking of management.

Managing matters versus managing your office

This could be a blurry issue. Taking matter management for practice management. Dangerous blunder.

Managing matters is a part of the legal practice. But that’s what it is: a part. Lawyers ought to be a part of their clients businesses, part of their decision making by acting preventively. Matters are important but not the sole purpose of your practice.

If they’re not your only goal, why turn them into the core of your office? No way. You got to manage  finances (bills to pay, invoices to receive, cash flow, costs, etc), e-documents (digitize everything, contracts, bills, etc)  clients and prospects management and so on.

If you still think that there is no app for that, you must have been out of the Earth for the last years. The market has to offer solutions that will serve for general office management and not just concerning matters. Don’t be dazzled with matter management, for it needs to be a complete one in order to be effective.

Implementation

This where lots of firms lose money. Believing that an app will solve all their problems, lawyers leave to the people in charge of implementing, fundamental decisions about their practices.

Not to demerit IT consultants and pros, however very few of these take business management really into their interest. The success of their app implementation in your office is their actual concern. How the data is going to be managed and used is not their aim.

This is the real issue here. Management comes before any sort of app implementation. Sort what routines in your firm are the most suited for the present reality and within a year’s time. You’ll have to know what an app can do, to assess it in your firm’s daily practice.

Once you’ve got this down, IT people can come over to train you and your employees, to implement and check on the reports that your management has previously determined and so forth.

To conclude: software will have to work for your firm and not be it to set what can be done or not. You paid for it, it should be working for you and not the other way around.

To be or nor to be web-based

Some by fear, others by prejudice and others by being oblivious of it, do not use wed-based software.

I am totally for it. More good than bad (if any) comes from it. Available from anywhere (even from your cell phone) you have data, documents, court sentences all within the reach of a LAN connection.

Is it safe? Quite safe. A hefty effort is put into web safety. To be true they invest more into safety than any one single law firm would. It is their business to be safe, isn’t it? And yours is to practice law.

So, is there such thing as “the perfect app for the legal practice”? Of course there is, but it is up to you and not to the app to say so.

Post by Nuno B.M. Lumbrales, lawyer, partner at Lumbrales & Associados and LawRD user:

The billing method is an issue that, mishandled, will cause nasty glitches in the relationships between lawyers and clients.

There are several ways of billing lawyer services, just like in any other area of business, bearing in mind the uniqueness and proper rules that apply in each country as to the legal practice.

One of the most common, and losing preference, is the hourly rate method, for billing lawyers fees. Such method has the quality of its flexibility thus enabling a balance between the service rendered by lawyers and its due compensation, overlooking the fluctuation that will occur unavoidably throughout the diligences.
On the downside, in this instance it is troublesome for clients to preview the cost of  the lawyer’s fee when a given period of time is agreed upon.

However, by demanding a specification for each of the billing invoices (as it is supposed) as to the description and time spent in each item clients can have some control. Without being utterly rigorous this will prevent costs from soaring.

A more classic method is a fixed rate that will settled upon for a matter (flat rate) or for a determined cycle of billing (retainer). This, being a quite clear method, has the advantage of eliminating almost any grounds for litigation on fee agreements (service quality and issues alike are not thus prevented, though). Its lack of flexibility regarding fluctuation of the amount of work through the procedures, come as a negative point.

One other billing method consists on agreeing to a percentage of the results that will come from the lawyer’s services on one or more legal matters. Many countries do permit this form of fee agreement in its pure sate, invoking that this will give way for the leayer to being too much as a directly interested part on the matter at appreciation in court for it will depend on the court’s decision, thus compromising the lawyer’s objectivity, impartiality and independence. A mixed form of this agreement with others is allowed, though.

These methods in their pure forms and an arrangement of different ones will give way for more ecletic and balanced billing methods.

The underlying question to choosing a billing method is the fare quantification of lawyers’ services, considering amount, quality and results they bring to clients.

Post by Nuno B.M. Lumbrales, lawyer, partner at Lumbrales & Associados and LawRD user:

The development of non legal skills, i.e. management, strategy and leadership, has been subject of an ever growing interest in law firms, regarding their senior partners.

Such a trend implies investments on professional training in those areas and others alike.

The matter of leadership, particularly, raises important and complex issues, unlike those concerning management, for it has a life of its own, manifesting itself and coming into being, many times in a spontaneous manner, whenever the company structure or some of its elements make way for any voids of power and initiative.

All organizations have some sort of “official structural grid” which defines functions, competences and hierarchy within them.

However, when the officially designated leaders do not act effectively, more often than not, when initiative and procedure leadership are concerned, these are taken by elements less empowered, hierarchy wise, but naturally more keen to take such decisions.

This gap between “official and real” structures striving within companies, in medium or long term,  will  result in counter-productivity.

From all the issues that will breed from that situation, the difficulty in legitimizing merit within the organization, stands out. Adding to it, is the increase awkwardness in coping with the different agendas, objectives and priorities (even preferences) of these two co-existing leaderships.

All the mentioned factors and circumstances are hurdles and setbacks in any company’s performance and productivity.

That is why all companies, namely law firms, ought to ensure that their leaders have all the necessary conditions to in fact exercise their competences, under the penalty of, not doing so, squandering their resources (i.e. time) trying to solve and sort inside conflicts, otherwise avoidable.

Post by Gustavo Rocha, lawyer and consultant in management, IT and quality for law firms. He’s the author of Gestão.Adv.br (content in Portuguese only):

Would you need 25h days to do all that you have to do? Lots of law professionals do. They put in 12, 14 hour days and still they get the feeling it’s not enough. The work keeps piling up. How come?

Just before you answer to that, read this: “Do we need more time? Or do we need to be more disciplined with the time we have?” – Kerry Johnson.

There’s only 24 hours in a day and that’s it. By law, we have 8h work days. We need time to work, time eat, time to sleep, time to be with our families, leisure time … you get the picture, we just need time. How can we juggle the time we have with all the our demands and needs? Three tips:

1. Prioritize
2. Delegate
3. Reserve time for yourself

Prioritize: This probably the hardest one for many of law professionals. Sorting priorities is hell when everything looks like it is due for ten minutes ago. Yet, a calmer look into it will let see that some are more urgent than others. In law practice, deadlines are always a priority for lawyers. Otávio Estaque, a Brazilian lawyer has this saying: “In this country, only lawyers are bound by deadlines”; still deadlines have priorities up until the 11th hour. Otherwise there more urgent priorities.

Try to set tasks into two groups: Strategic and Operative.

Strategic: contacting a client, new project, strategic alliance meeting, staff meeting, etc.

Operative: setting deadlines, calling suppliers and so on.

Strategic tasks always take the lead. But, you might wonder:” What if I miss a staff meeting already scheduled?” Of course you should not fail meeting any tasks set before hand. Nor should you pass any new business opportunities. If you are overloaded by operative tasks try the next step…

Delegate tasks and charges: This is a big burden on lots of managers, for they love to centralize saying they can’t loose control.

Centralizing is not the same as controlling.

One centralizes when you don’t trust anyone or you don´t want anyone else to do operative tasks. By delegating you are free for the strategic. Check if the operative tasks are realized, though. There isn’t much of a future if you centralize data, tasks and responsibilities on yourself.Be a team professional and profit from all the talent you’ve got working at your firm.

Delegate operative tasks. Give responsibility positions, so your firm may thrive on individual talents and not just keeping all to yourself.

Reserve time for yourself: many find this selfish or impossible to achieve given the busy lives they lead.

Take some time off, even if it is just half an hour a day for yourself. Give yourself a treat… and to your family. The firm will appreciate having a much fitter, more lucid and more market driven  employee.

Time for yourself is key. By doing that you are opening to new possibilities, to broaden your net of contacts and to bring new clients in.

To conclude, you only 24 hours in a day. It is up to you how to spend them. Make an intelligent choice, use your time wisely and you’ll gain on productivity and fulfilment. Being realized at your work is not enough. You should feel happy outside your job as well. The secret is inside of you, not outside. Think. Rationalize. Prioritize. Be yourself. This will lead to your professional success and your firm’s.

Post by Jared Correia. Jared is the law practice management advisor with the Massachusetts Law Officer Management Assistance Program, providing free and confidential law practice management consulting to Massachusetts attorneys.  True to certain veiled promises, he makes his thoughts on law practice management available generally online, most notably through the LOMAP Blog and his Twitter account.

As a law practice advisor for Massachusetts’ Law Office Management Assistance Program, I am afforded a ringside seat for the viewing of trends in the legal field, through, what has become, my informal, detached study of modern lawyers’ habits.  One of the trends that I have noticed, over the time that I have spent in my current capacity, is that most of the attorneys with whom I consult are desirous of finding appropriate new technologies, that can: (1) unlock previously undiscovered efficiencies within their practice; and, (2) save them money. Given these qualifying motivations, it is, perhaps, unsurprising that many of the attorneys with whom I meet are ready, and most willing, to begin to incorporate SaaS solutions into their practices, to the extent that they have not already done so.

SaaS systems essentially (and, I won’t belabor this point, because if you’re a regular reader of LawRD’s “Your Law Firm in Progress” blog, you likely already know what SaaS systems are, and what they do) move the traditional software program from residence on your computer/system to residence on the web, accessible through a secure portal by you (and invited collaborators), following a set of security checkdowns.  SaaS systems, especially SaaS systems with practice management features, like the LawRD: Reports on Demand program, answer for the above-referenced requirements respecting efficiency and cost.  Online practice management systems are, in my experience, more accessible, easier to learn, more intuitive to use and faster in operation than those systems that continue to reside on your own computer systems. Given that certain systems, like LawRD’s, offer practice management components, for the better leveraging of client matter and contact management and for time and billing (among a number of useful features), the efficiency upgrade will be obvious in terms of adding a practice management system where, perhaps, none existed before; and, generally, the ease of use/intuitiveness, and speed additional to such programs, means that you’ll be working faster, and more efficiently, not harder.  Of course, one of the obvious reasons for the speed advance achieved with the use of SaaS systems is the fact that such programs are removed from your own computer system, and are not competing directly for space, memory and processing speed with the other applications that you have already downloaded to your machine; this also means that you’ve got fewer costs related to desktop/system support moving forward, and that the remainder of your traditional software systems will work faster, as well (competition having been removed), making you more efficient, saving you more money.  The cost savings of a move to SaaS are also inherent in the pricing models of most of these systems versus the pricing models of traditional software programs.  Generally, with traditional software systems, you’re paying a significant initial rate, plus for program updates, usually each year. With an SaaS system, you’re paying a fairly reasonable monthly rate (rather than a significant up-front cost), with updates taking place automatically, and behind the scenes, and without additional charge. The cost savings can become large-scale, depending upon the SaaS system you select, and depending upon the size (in terms of accessing employees) and needs of your firm; and, the additional efficiencies achieved through the immediate application of important updates and upgrades, without your spending any time to apply same, can also become significant.

If you want to learn more about SaaS, check out the “The Use of SaaS in the Legal Field” episode of my podcast.  With respect to the vetting of SaaS providers, and some of the security questions related to the utilization, by lawyers, of SaaS systems, look over my blog post respecting a North Carolina Bar Association proposed ethics opinion that attempts to provide some clarification in that space.  And, of course, you should continue to follow LawRD’s “Your Law Firm in Progress” blog, for product-related updates, and information relative to SaaS.

When deciding on the purchase of SaaS products in the legal space, you might consider LawRD’s flagship “Reports on Demand” program; you should also consider, as well, (LawRD parent company) muchBeta’s other useful SaaS product offerings: Teepin and Yoomit.

Post by Nuno B.M. Lumbrales, lawyer, partner at Lumbrales & Associados and LawRD user:

Recently a lot has been said on legal practice marketing i.e. the best strategies and procedures for lawyers to make their activities and services widely known.

The deontological rules that govern such practice, though they may vary from country to country, are usually prohibitive or restrictive, to say the least, publicity wise, though.

In fact, given its social responsibility and special trust issues, that any legal service contract implies, be it contentious or not,  this is not a mere commercial activity  for it obeys to specific regulations meant to ensure much tighter ethical standards than those applied to most common commercial practices.

On the other hand, the market itself, namely companies, demands for law practice to be modernized, more “commercial” as to take procedures as companies do, thus prompting standards that bring companies and lawyers closer.

As marketing and publicity are concerned, many who are unaware of the deontological regulations of the legal practice, find it strange that they’re not approached by lawyers as they constantly are by other service providers, what doesn’t bother them at all.

Publicity boundaries, or certain publicity restrictions, are quite justifiable for the legal practice considering the afore reasons. Some countries have total restriction to such publicity, thus being in need of some flexibility, though.

A tale by Gustavo Rocha (lawyer and consultant in management, IT and quality for law firms. He’s the author of Gestão.Adv.br - content in Portuguese only), based upon real events from his clients before hiring services:

Once upon a time there was a lawyer. He read and heard about the changes the legal practice was going through, IT and all, still he thought that his business was going pretty well as it was and so he kept it.

Time went by and his office procedures were the same as always.

Relentless, there came upon his door the technology snags.

At first the lawyer tried to appeal the Supreme Court by writing. No way. Faxing, not allowed. The appeal only could be submitted electronically, which requires a digital certificate. Not knowing at all bout any of this, our lawyer only found about it at 4 PM on the last day for the appeal to be presented…  their was no way he could ever get a digital certificate on time. So, once upon a time there was an appeal deadline…

After this setback, he contacted his Bar Association and got the most needed digital certificate. “That solves it” and back to his office he went. There, he gave it to an intern: “Here you go. Now it is all up to you”, he said, confortably from behind his marble top desk…

While stuck in a traffic jam, another reality struck him: the car he was driving, his hardly earned car, that had cost him many sleepless nights, was now in someone else’s hands. He, of all people, had given his digital certificate and password to an intern, who had just transfered part of the lawyer estate to a sleazeball…

Once upon a time, there was the estate…

The lawyer took legal action against that and got his belongings back. Then, he got himself a new digital certificate and decided that him and him alone would use it…

Still he was not free from arm.

As a law professional, he had overlooked his office management, its procedures systematization on matters and the bussiness itself. That meant that he was tied up by electronic procedures and digital certification… Then he took the decision of hiring the services of consulting agency for updating procedures, implementing IT, legal marketing, etc… they need 12 months for the whole deal, though. “That’s an absurd! 12 months?? I can do it myself in 12 months! Less than that.” Poor devil… 12 months came and went and not much was changed…

Moral of this tale: Once upon a time, there was a lawyer…

Do not allow your business to sink this low. There is a way out if you have will enough, perseverence, love for what you do and hard work, lots of it. If you think you can not do it on your own, look for help from someone who is an expert on that field.

Don’t let yourself be stuck on “once upon a time, there was a lawyer”…

IT and management do really make the difference.

Post by Nuno B.M. Lumbrales, lawyer, partner at Lumbrales & Associados and LawRD user:

The use of social networks for marketing and promoting a vast array of economical activities is definitely in and there are some several examples of its good results.

The opposite is also true, though. Many economy players have real doubts on the return of their companies investments in that area (namely the non physical resources, such as time allocated to that task by employees, among others) which, given its nature, are hard to quantify.

Therefore, there is room enough for debating on the efficacy of this sort of marketing, and which are the best procedures to go about it through all different products and economy branches.

There are sectors, like the legal practice, that are bound to restrictions concerning its publicity, either by deontological or professional culture when displaying their image towards the market and society at large, thus making them more reticent and cautious when using these social tools  of promotion.

However, that trend has been slowly changing and, still far from being a universal attitude, a growing number of lawyers and law firms are taken an open and noticeable stance in that area.

Actually, in a business area where personal trust between lawyer and client is paramount, even more so than in any other business activity, there is a natural and reasonable mistrust as to the efficacy of social networks as tools for promoting and marketing services provided by the legal practice.

But there is no turning back on the increasing numbers of law professionals adopting social networks for promoting their businesses, and in the end time will tell who was right, after all.