Law Department Management Consulting

Why is it that journalists fixate on "trends?" I speak with about one every two weeks, and they want to know that some one-off effort, like offshoring, is a trend. To me that means more and more law departments are following the idea, so how can two examples make a trend? The journalists exaggerate a ground swell when it is really an example of "one swallow does not a Spring make." I am very cautious about generalizing on anything regarding law departments.

I have been thinking about models of cost control, as they describe the basic approaches of law departments. Just dictated a long piece, which had the "procurement model" as the last of the five, but I foresee the sixth model. The sixth incorporates the best ideas from the previous models. Any thoughts out there? RWMorrison@hildebrandt.com

Having recently worked on a project where the company's procurement staff became involved, it has struck me that more and more of the procurement mindset will force itself on law departments as they retain outside counsel. Procurement likes process, low cost, electronic retentions, evaluations, consolidation -- all ideas that may be anathema to some law departments. Procurement thinks large-scale and they think small scale, unit costs for example, and these are views that law departments, with their bespoke hiring practices, never consider. The tectonic clash will continue between purchasers and lawyers.

Readers may be interested in another law-related blog. It's run by Ron Friedmann, the head of Strategic Legal Technology, and you can find it at http://www.prismlegal.com/wordpress/

All of this hubbub about offshoring has significance for law departments, despite the hype. A fair number of activities done by inhouse lawyers could be done in low-cost jurisdictions, assuming telecommunications, English, training, and some patience. If there is a US paralegal, why not an Indian lawyer? If advertising review takes lots of time, why not a first pass in South Africa? if preparing NDAs sucks up time, why not someone in the Philipines doing the first draft? I think there will be major changes on the law firm side and the law department side from this development.

All of this hubbub about offshoring has significance for law departments, despite the hype. A fair number of activities done by inhouse lawyers could be done in low-cost jurisdictions, assuming telecommunications, English, training, and some patience. If there is a US paralegal, why not an INdian lawyer? If advertising review takes lots of time, why not a first pass in South Africa? if preparing NDAs sucks up time, why not someone in the Philipines doing the first draft. I think there will be major changes on the law firm side and the law department side from this development.

Having recently spent several days with a law department whose lawyers work in open cubicles, I confess to some amazement. From my first day at Weil Gotshal, all through my selling days and the past 16 years of consulting I have had my own office. Not only is there much more room for books and piles, but I have privacy. Yes, these lawyers can dart off to one of the non-reservable privacy rooms, but that is inconvenient.

The cost is certainly far far less, and this was in London where per square meter costs soar. But I must say it was a shock. Makes you rely much more on email I think, because that is private. Anderson's legal department in Chicago was also open cubicle.

During my 16 years of consulting to law departments, I have run across nearly two dozen organizations for general counsel, as well as the LLD and the ALA's Corporate Government Section for administrators. I suspect every GC could belong to a city or regional group, an industry group, and one or more national groups (including CCA) if they wanted to.

I have been observing the General Counsel Roundtable, from afar, and wondering how close it is getting to consulting. Recently, a General Counsel showed at a conference a form of self-diagnosis for a law department regarding its use of outside counsel. I admired the work and asked her about its source. She said, "a consulting firm." Afterwards, I learned that the firm was the GC Roundtable. They also provide benchmarking data and interpret it. Over time, with Quick Research and spot surveys, they can offer much that the traditional consulting firms do.

I continue to be struck by how little the wealth of technology has penetrated law departments. Sure, everyone uses e-mail and many create their own documents. But as for matter management or extranets or other applications (dictation software, document assembly, graphics in PowerPoint or Excel), there is almost nothing penetrating. And this despite years of preaching about productivity, huge amounts of marketing by vendors, and a rising sense of awareness generally that goes with younger lawyers.

I think the core problem is that, for most in-house lawyers, they know what's on their plate, they don't care much about outside counsel cost control, and words are sufficient (compared to text and other abilities such as hypertext). Stated differently, there is no killer app.

As my first entry on my first blog, I would like readers to know a bit about my background. I am a lawyer who practiced six years (bankruptcy) but who moved to selling software to law departments. After five years of that, about 16 years ago, I moved into consulting and focused completely on law departments.

I am now a partner in Hildebrant International, based in Somerset, New Jersey, and I am interested in all aspects of law departments and how to help them through consulting to manage themselves better. My phone number is 732 560-8888 and my email address is rwmorrison@hildebrandt.com.

If you are interested in how law departments (legal departments) can manage better, please let me know or contribute a comment to the blog.