|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
by Edward Poll, J.D., M.B.A., CMC
What does the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse on the Outer Banks of North Carolina have in common with the legal profession? They have both been fighting for survival. Due to the shifting of ocean currents and the erosion of the once-wide beach that had protected it since its construction in 1870, the tallest lighthouse in North American was in danger of crumbling into the sea. Just this past summer, it was moved one-quarter mile inland to a new-and hopefully secure-location.
Similarly, events and circumstances-some beyond anyone's control, but others firmly within the grasp of attorneys themselves-are threatening to erode the foundations of sole and small-firm practice. For example, lawyers antagonize clients to the point where they file more complaints with state bar associations than there are lawyers in the state. In California in 1996, there were 130,000 attorneys and more than 140,000 telephonic complaints to the Bar. Nevada and other states have similar statistics.
And some state bars have lost the confidence of their members. California is the first state to have the mandatory bar status examined under the political microscope. Former Governor Wilson vetoed a bill to approve the bar's dues and sent a stinging message saying that the bar had failed its mission. This left the State Bar of California without money to operate, and the disciplinary system was closed. Fortunately, a dues bill was recently enacted, and the California State Bar is recovering-slowly. But attorneys in Texas and other states have also begun to question the mission of the bar. In addition to the loss of confidence from clients, the rising complaints by consumers and now the loss of trust in lawyers' own professional organizations, Congress took a little bit more from the plate of attorneys' performance of legal services when it passed a taxpayers' bill of rights.
One of the provisions in this bill extends to accountants a limited privilege (attorney-client privilege) when representing clients before the Internal Revenue Service. This privilege was previously the hallowed territory of attorneys in representing clients. However, many clients perceive that accountants can perform services for them just as well, if not better, at a lower cost. While one can technically argue that a responsible client would have a disincentive to engage an accountant since this new privilege does not extend to criminal and other matters beyond the appearance before the Internal Revenue Service, attorneys are nevertheless faced with more intrusion into traditional legal practice.
Lawyers will soon be faced with "multi-discipline practices" in this country. Europe, Australia and Canada all have accounting firms providing services in many different disciplines, including the law. And the largest employer of attorneys in the U.S. may well be Arthur Andersen Consulting. In these kinds of practices, professional services are offered under an umbrella organization that provides accounting, legal, financial and other services. It's a "one-stop shop." Real estate matters are now being handled by brokers with pre-printed forms for offers and acceptances. Employee benefits consulting firms prepare pension and profit-sharing plans without the need of attorneys. Environmental consultants frequently never involve attorneys. The list goes on and on.
Can we survive as sole and small firm practitioners? Can attorneys endure this onslaught on the profession?
I believe the answer is a resounding "yes!" Whereas the lighthouse had only two choices: stay where it was and be washed out to sea or allow itself to be moved to a safer inland location, the legal profession has many alternatives.
First, lawyers need to address the client's concerns in a more effective and meaningful way than they've done in the past. Attorneys must become more client-focused. It's not important what you can do, what you want to do or what you think the client wants. The only thing that matters is what the client actually wants. That means that you must start by talking WITH your clients, not just TO your clients. Really listen to your clients; don't just hear them.
Clients want communication with their attorneys and dedication to their concerns more than they want cheap fees. In fact, client focus groups indicate that clients understand that they must pay for their legal representation and they are willing to do so-provided the attorney is giving them the type of service they desire. So ask your clients about the type of service they're looking for. Implement their requests, and tell them you are doing so.
Each client wants to be treated differently. That means you must be flexible; your staff must "buy-in" to this process and become part of an effective team of "service providers." After all, without the client, there really is no need for the lawyer-or the staff. In addition to talking with clients about how they would like to be served, there are specific steps you can take that will endear clients to you. Here are some examples.
Clients appreciate good service and even refer more clients to those who treat them well. But, most importantly, the client will look to an attorney as their lead counsel; counsel in the original sense of being the first person to go to with a problem or challenge. And then you, the lawyer, will resume your traditional role of servicing the needs that you are competent to handle and bringing in your network of experts and advisers to perform the other tasks requested.
This is the way that attorneys can survive-and even flourish-as individuals and as a profession. We can progress and prosper by recognizing the importance of the client and the desire of the client to be treated with respect and care.
© 2024 Edward Poll & Associates, Inc. All rights reserved.
