Joel Hennning disses hourly billing
Nice profile on Joel Henning of Hildebrandt in the Front And Center column of the Sunday Chicago Tribune business section. Most of it is background or Chicago-focused, but I did like this Q and A:
Q: Some attorneys are leaving the profession because they can't compete against billing cheaters--lawyers who inflate their monthly billable hours. Can anything be done to curb this?
A. I'm encouraging corporate general counsel not to put up with that kind of nonsense any longer. Right now, I'm working with a $30 billion company. They're demanding they be treated better, with a consistent team to work on their matters and a competitive price, not necessarily the cheapest, but competitive.
So his answer acknowledges the problem, and then makes it look as if corporate general counsel are not demanding enough. I agree, but I hope he's really encouraging them to demand much more than a steady team and a competitive price. At the sake of repeating myself, in-house counsel have enormous power. They have what every outside lawyer seeks--business. Demand more and I believe you'll get it. Maybe not from your current counsel, but from someone just as good who won't take your business for granted.
I read (1) the Tribune article on Henning, (2) Henning's comment you quoted that he was encouraging general counsel to not put up with billing cheaters and (3) your more expansive comment (which I loved) implying that GCs should demand more in any event.
In the last few years, our boutique firm has seen good clients leave major law firms of the type in which we were once partners and come to us, a much smaller shop. In my experience, good clients don't switch for price even if they think they are doing that. It's almost a cliche, but it is real service they want: genuine attention and their strong gut feeling that you understand their business, you worry about them off the clock, and you get things done.
Initially, some of our "refugee" clients, notably the larger ones, behave somewhat like abused children--eternally grateful for the most basic and (to my mind) just average level of attention and responsiveness that most large law firms (100+)could be expected to deliver. In many cases, the quality and delivery time of the service/product is roughly the same as in the former large firm. And price is about the same.
If we have done anything right, it is that have tried to surprise the client a bit by giving it something beyond what it expects. But it's just not that hard to do. Is our standard higher? Maybe--but what I think is happening is that past experiences have made even the best clients have low expectations. So surprising them and competing on service becomes easier than it should be.
You really can compete and keep great clients on service alone. That's great for lawyers--but it's really unfortunate for clients.
