Debra Bruce has been quoted in the cover story of the September 2008 ABA Journal. The article by Leslie Gordon is titled “Midcareer Malaise: How to find a new path for your 40s.” She presents a number of different perspectives (including Debra’s) on why lawyers develop malaise in the mid-years of practicing law, and what to do about it.
It will be no news to you that big law firms are struggling to retain associates. Almost all of them suffer from an enlarging associate vacuum after the 3rd year. The national attrition average at the 5 year point is around 80%! It really hurts firms to lose associates during what would be their most profitable years, not to mention the impact on firm morale when so many jump ship.
Some law firms are finally getting the message and starting to develop new associate programs aimed at keeping their talent. Although the programs may feel revolutionary inside the firm, in reality, many firms are just dipping their toes in the water. It’s hard to be forward-thinking and innovative when your whole culture is based on looking backwards and following precedent.
To get a peek at what some firms are doing, read the excellent New York Times article “Who’s Cuddly Now? Law Firms?” published yesterday. Most are trying to create more flexibility. Their plans purportedly allow lawyers to decide for themselves whether they want to be hard chargers racing to the holy grail of partnership, or whether they are willing to accept a later partnership entry in exchange for healthier working hours. It will be interesting to see whether the firm cultures really do reward either path.
Some lawyers question whether a lawyer can fulfill her ethical duty to zealously represent her client in a collaborative process where the parties agree to open communication and information sharing. The challenge mainly arises out of the requirement that the lawyer must withdraw from the representation if the collaborative process breaks down, and the parties pursue litigation. In August 2007 the ABA published its Formal Opinion 07-447 about Ethical Considerations in Collaborative Law Practice, and opined that the Collaborative Law process is ethical.
This is an important stride for the Collaborative Law process, and for clients. Today many clients want lawyers to help them resolve disputes without getting so caught up in “winning” that they lose sight of the real interests of the client. Clients know that all-out warfare is often deadly to their health and well-being, as well as to their bank accounts.
The Christian Science Monitor recently published a succinct and informative piece on Collaborative Law and the recent ABA Opinion. If you want more information about Collaborative Law, check out the website of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals. You can also read an article I wrote a few years ago about the spread of Collaborative Law from family law disputes to business disputes.
A landmark event in the legal world launched in May. This event will ultimately change the course of the practice of law. Or perhaps it is just further evidence of how dramatically the legal world has already changed in the last 10 years.
Australian Law Firm Goes Public
An Australian law firm went public and was listed on the Australian Stock Exchange on May 21, 2007. Australia adopted legislation that permits non-lawyers to invest in the ownership of a law firm, and capital to be raised publicly. The 140-lawyer firm, Slater & Gordon, will initially have shares owned by 42 lawyers and staff, according to a June 1, 2007 article in The American Lawyer. Legislation has also been introduced in the United Kingdom to permit law firms there to sell stock publicly.
[…]
An Australian law firm went public and was listed on the Austrailan Stock Exchange on May 21, 2007. Australia adopted legislation that permits non-lawyers to invest in the ownership of a law firm, and capital to be raised publicly. The 140-lawyer firm, Slater & Gordon, will initially have shares owned by 42 lawyers and staff, according to The American Lawyer. Legislation has also been introduced in the U.K. to permit law firm IPOs.
If the UK permits law firms to go public,it will probably be the beginning of a wholesale shift in the lawbiz. There will be many detractors and much resistance in the U.S., but moving mega-firms away from the partnership structure to a real corporate structure may have significant benefits. As true business managers and marketing experts have the opportunity to share in the profits of a law firm, the great class chasm between lawyers and non-lawyers may finally disappear. Innovation may become more valued in firms. The billable hour may fall away to value-billing or other creative structures. Firms may develop more balanced methods of valuing the contributions of its employees. Hey! Perhaps even teamwork could become popular.
I confess that I am having some difficulty imagining how a public law firm would work in the near term. I can imagine the possibility of a serious decline in the professionalism of law practice. Even commoditization of many legal services. We are already headed that way, however, and I’m not sure that the public opinion of lawyers can sink much lower.
One result may be that many lawyers will make less money, with most becoming part of the working middle class, instead of the professional elite, and a few becoming ultra-wealthy titans. One could say we are seeing that trend already, however. As firms go public, they will probably stratify more, with legions of paralegals and other non-lawyers. As bright line distinctions […]
The December 2006 issue of the Texas Bar Journal includes an article about why and how lawyers are using coaches. The article is entitled “Suit Up, Johnson, You’re Going In,” and it quotes yours truly, Debra Bruce. Here is a link to the article on lawyer coaching, in case you want to read it.
It’s growing and it’s infectious. Could we be experiencing an epidemic of civility and candor among our fellow lawyers? Collaborative Law, once contained to the family law sector, may be breaking through to the resolution of business and other civil disputes. A recent rash of events evidences the spread of the contagion.