Page 37 - MASTER COPY LEADERS BOOK 9editedJKK (24)_Neat
P. 37
Leaders in Legal Business
the “grey hair” and experience of its consultants. All of these approaches are appropriate sometimes, and likely a
combination will help achieve the desired outcomes.
The methodology that a consulting firm applies is equally important. This is because the field of
consulting does not have an easy reference point similar to codified law or generally accepted accounting
standards that define lawyers’ and accountants’ advice they provide to their clients. Experienced consultancies
continuously refine their methodologies as their main reference points in how they provide and tailor advice to
help solve their clients’ challenges. For example, we often rely on a proprietary assessment methodology that
allows us to get to the heart of any professional services firm quickly; the methodology combines the Balanced
Scorecard, Intellectual Capital, and the McKinsey 7S, and is uniquely suited to law and other professional services
firms. We also have developed a certain way of designing our partner workshops in a way that is particularly
engaging (and disarming!) of highly intelligent and equally critical law firm partners.
In short, the firm’s approach and methodology needs to be appropriate for the challenge to be overcome
or goal to be reached, and both approach and methodology need to resonate with the law firm’s approach, culture,
and way of doing business.
Additional things to expect in a proposal: In addition to scope and fees, any proposal should contain a
clear understanding of what value-add the law firm seeks to gain from the consultancy’s involvement. Measuring
this value-add sometimes is simple (“help us achieve a reduction in WIP days by 20 days”); sometimes it is not
(“help us overcome our non-confrontational partner culture”). Where hard financial measures are difficult to come
by, law firm and consultancy should agree at least on a qualitative indication of what the client hopes to achieve.
The consultancy also will usually spell out a short track record that proves the consulting firm’s expertise
in handling similar issues. Where relevant, specialist, or professional qualifications of the team members also
should be explained. In our experience, it is helpful to have a team of several qualifications working with a client
organization, whether this is in consulting or in accounting, psychology, finance, law, economics, or banking, just
to name a few examples.
Terms of business should include assurances of confidentiality of your sensitive information. It is our
approach that we don’t generally disclose who we work for unless we have permission. We do make proper
introductions to existing clients once a new client has made the “but for” decision to work with us.
Our firm also provides an unconditional satisfaction guarantee for most work. We are comfortable
providing this because we are experts at what we do, and we can always deliver against the scope upon which we
have agreed. This approach also sets up early discussions if there is dissatisfaction looming instead of a soured
relationship at the end of the engagement.
A Final Word on Consultancy
A statement of the blindingly obvious is that no law firm should seek to spend money unnecessarily on
engaging outside consultants. Some larger firms have dedicated internal resources in order to help them find most
answers for themselves. On the other hand, many firms labour on, making unnecessary mistakes and missing
opportunities because the MP or some of the senior partners have a jaundiced view of consultants. When clients
have had poor experiences with consultants, this is so usually for one fundamental reason: usually it turns out
that the client and consultancy didn’t work hard enough to clearly spell out expectations, outcomes, and value-
add the work was to achieve at the outset of the engagement. Sometimes, of course, insufficient expertise by the
consultancy of the subject matter, knowledge of the legal sector, or an understanding of how professional
partnerships work is also to blame.
Faced with a real problem impacting competitive capability that is beyond the ability, experience, and
resources of the firm to resolve in-house, the timely involvement of a properly selected consultancy can produce
huge value, open up possibilities that were closed, and increase the satisfaction and sense of purpose of the
partnership. Not to overstate the case, but having the right people on your side can even help ensure survival in
the most intensely competitive markets we have ever experienced.
30
the “grey hair” and experience of its consultants. All of these approaches are appropriate sometimes, and likely a
combination will help achieve the desired outcomes.
The methodology that a consulting firm applies is equally important. This is because the field of
consulting does not have an easy reference point similar to codified law or generally accepted accounting
standards that define lawyers’ and accountants’ advice they provide to their clients. Experienced consultancies
continuously refine their methodologies as their main reference points in how they provide and tailor advice to
help solve their clients’ challenges. For example, we often rely on a proprietary assessment methodology that
allows us to get to the heart of any professional services firm quickly; the methodology combines the Balanced
Scorecard, Intellectual Capital, and the McKinsey 7S, and is uniquely suited to law and other professional services
firms. We also have developed a certain way of designing our partner workshops in a way that is particularly
engaging (and disarming!) of highly intelligent and equally critical law firm partners.
In short, the firm’s approach and methodology needs to be appropriate for the challenge to be overcome
or goal to be reached, and both approach and methodology need to resonate with the law firm’s approach, culture,
and way of doing business.
Additional things to expect in a proposal: In addition to scope and fees, any proposal should contain a
clear understanding of what value-add the law firm seeks to gain from the consultancy’s involvement. Measuring
this value-add sometimes is simple (“help us achieve a reduction in WIP days by 20 days”); sometimes it is not
(“help us overcome our non-confrontational partner culture”). Where hard financial measures are difficult to come
by, law firm and consultancy should agree at least on a qualitative indication of what the client hopes to achieve.
The consultancy also will usually spell out a short track record that proves the consulting firm’s expertise
in handling similar issues. Where relevant, specialist, or professional qualifications of the team members also
should be explained. In our experience, it is helpful to have a team of several qualifications working with a client
organization, whether this is in consulting or in accounting, psychology, finance, law, economics, or banking, just
to name a few examples.
Terms of business should include assurances of confidentiality of your sensitive information. It is our
approach that we don’t generally disclose who we work for unless we have permission. We do make proper
introductions to existing clients once a new client has made the “but for” decision to work with us.
Our firm also provides an unconditional satisfaction guarantee for most work. We are comfortable
providing this because we are experts at what we do, and we can always deliver against the scope upon which we
have agreed. This approach also sets up early discussions if there is dissatisfaction looming instead of a soured
relationship at the end of the engagement.
A Final Word on Consultancy
A statement of the blindingly obvious is that no law firm should seek to spend money unnecessarily on
engaging outside consultants. Some larger firms have dedicated internal resources in order to help them find most
answers for themselves. On the other hand, many firms labour on, making unnecessary mistakes and missing
opportunities because the MP or some of the senior partners have a jaundiced view of consultants. When clients
have had poor experiences with consultants, this is so usually for one fundamental reason: usually it turns out
that the client and consultancy didn’t work hard enough to clearly spell out expectations, outcomes, and value-
add the work was to achieve at the outset of the engagement. Sometimes, of course, insufficient expertise by the
consultancy of the subject matter, knowledge of the legal sector, or an understanding of how professional
partnerships work is also to blame.
Faced with a real problem impacting competitive capability that is beyond the ability, experience, and
resources of the firm to resolve in-house, the timely involvement of a properly selected consultancy can produce
huge value, open up possibilities that were closed, and increase the satisfaction and sense of purpose of the
partnership. Not to overstate the case, but having the right people on your side can even help ensure survival in
the most intensely competitive markets we have ever experienced.
30
