VICTOR LEGAL SOLUTIONS
TEL: 310.440.9320  kc@victorls.com

  I love lawyers.

I am a lawyer. I am married to a lawyer. I am the friend of hundreds of lawyers and hold thousands more in great regard. If you're a lawyer (or love them), welcome. I invite you to share your thoughts and ideas in this space.

Tattoo Removal

A cynical and successful business lawyer I know believes there are three universal questions within law firms: “Who’s boss?”, “How loyal are you?”, and “How long are you planning to stay with the firm?” Some might say that the mere act of considering these questions as paramount undercuts any real concern for colleagues. Still, from what I have seen, as a rainmaking and recruiting consultant, most firms include lawyers who work well together and like each other. However, when significant energy is spent on intra-firm power and money struggles the result is unhappy lawyers, or worse. Sometimes the power plays and money divisions are so intolerable to lawyers that they start to leave the firm. When enough people leave, it can start a dangerous downward spiral. Over the years, local and national law firms of varying sizes have been significantly harmed, and sometimes closed, over the issue of how authority and money is divided.

Since January is the month in which most law firms are considering how to divide their profits, it’s a good time to explore the compensation implications surrounding the harsh but crucial questions of who’s boss, how loyal the attorneys are to the firm and how long they expect to stay.

Frequently, client origination is given the highest weight in deciding partner compensation. Although I do not believe that is always the best model, (See: “The Ideal Law Firm Compensation System”), emphasizing client origination can work well, provided that clients are not tattooed to lawyers. When the lawyer who originally brings in a client retains all the client credit, even when doing little or no continuing work, the originator is inevitably resented. To run a firm with cooperative and contented partners, “client tattoos” must be removed; the wealth must be shared with at least some fairness.

Bringing in a client is a big deal. However, when other lawyers have nurtured, expanded or maintained the client relationship and worked hard with that client over the years, origination credit should diminish over time. This is especially true when the client is neither a relative nor a friend of the originator. In those cases, clients often transition into thinking one or more non-originators are his or her lawyers. Such clients can, and do, leave with the person who has become “their” lawyer, the person running their deals or litigations.

Tatooing clients to the lawyer who made the original connection encourages resentment from those who have taken over the hoeing and watering. Even when a client is unlikely to remove all of its work because the original procurer is a relative or friend, the disruption caused by departures of one or more of the client’s “service” partners hurts both the client and the firm. That client will often send at least some business to the new firm where the lawyer who worked with them has landed.

The exact factors to be considered in dividing a firm’s profits can legitimately vary from firm to firm. However, it is always a mistake, for the individuals involved and the firm as a whole, to place enormous weight on an introduction that occurred years ago, and particularly the lawyer has not continued to significantly work on that client’s matters.

This entry was posted in Compensation, Internal Firm Relations, Law Firm Profits and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Tattoo Removal

  1. Joanna Norland says:

    Interesting! I used to be a firm believer in lock step — for one thing, it saves everyone so much time and angst, and ties the partners’ futures to the well being of the firm as a whole. But even first that cherished lock step for years have abandoned it, so i’m guessing it’s just not possible in a market of big players, and very uneven demands — i.e., where the hardest working partners contribute 24/7, and others choose to work much less.

  2. Joanna Norland says:

    sorry, i meant ‘even firms’, not ‘even firsts’

  3. K.C. Victor says:

    Lock-step is also my favorite method of dividing booty. It has vanished in all but a few big firms. (I can only think of three.) Some very small firms divide profits equally among equity partners regardless of who did what. Both systems work only when it is believed that everyone is contributing in about the same proportions or people have unusually non-self centered desires.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*