Dormant clients

In a recent post, Not quite such a simple solution I argued that time may be better spent looking at ways to develop your active clients; or re-activating your dormant clients.

Others think the same. See Reactivate past clients in Matthew Homan’s The [non] billable hour, which in turn links to John Jantsch’s Seven Tips to Dig out from a Recession. At the risk of repeating it,

Reactivate past customers – Where did I put that customer anyway, I know they are around here somewhere. Sad but true, sometimes we don’t bother to communicate with current customers unless they call with an order. By the time they have decided someone else appreciates their business more, it’s too late. Reach out to lapsed customers and make them an apology, promise to never ignore them again, and make them a smoking hot deal to come back.

Staying alive

If you haven’t read Rob Millard’s post The Greatest Banking Crisis of our Generation on his blog The Adventure of Strategy, you must.

It is very sobering stuff ~ but absolutely spot on

If you have not yet switched the focus of your strategy to creating contingencies to deal with the very serious possibility of survival under the worst possible economic scenarios, then do so now. Do not delay.

1.  Make sure that you have jettisoned all non-essential costs (but not the essential ones)

2.  Make sure that you are getting accurate and objective information from the market …. keep especially close to your key clients

3.  Make sure that you have a plan based on the “What If?” scenarios that you have identified might emerge

4. Keep your eyes peeled for opportunities as well as threats to be warded off

5. Unless absolutely unavoidable, stay true to your core strategic intent

This time will pass. Right now, a clear mind and strong leadership are absolutely essential.

But what of the lawyers indeed?

I suggested to one of my colleagues this morning that he should read The Lex Column, and in particular The law of diminishing returns. The question it put was

But what of the lawyers? As private partnerships, they are shielded from close inspection, but some pain probably lies just around the corner.

The answer?

But there are already signs of forced consolidation, especially among US firms overexposed to a sickly domestic market. Anecdotal evidence from European firms with big overseas networks suggests that several American outfits are desperately seeking mergers. Expensive offices in Hanoi and Bahrain used to be seen as a drain on partners’ takings; now they may be mandatory to survive. Charge-out rates fell, in real terms, during the recession of the early 1990s. Newly qualified lawyers should nail down those six-figure salaries while they can.

The comments were directed at the global players, but they hold good for most law firms. There is little doubt in my mind that consolidation, and pain, is coming. The current economic climate is yet one more accelerator.

It was not all doom and gloom

The good news is that, unlike banking, the industry generally bills on a time-spent basis, so failed deals and falling transaction values won’t annihilate takings. Insolvency and litigation practices, too, should provide a buffer, as businesses fail and claims mount. And there are a few cost levers to pull: routine word-processing and finance functions could be dispatched to cheaper locations worldwide.

Yes and no: time based billing is already under threat (see previous posts) and it is rare that there is not an element of contingency in deal fees.

Legal Week’s poll today is ‘Will a major law firm go the way of Lehman?’ (and see Charon QC’s post Law review; sackings, shortselling and stupidity. . .) And the voting? Currently 68% are saying No – law firms will tough it out and 32% are thinking we are all under threat.

Another legal minefield (says who?)

Read Lawyers bringing blogging under control in the FT. I am not convinced (as a lawyer who blogs). Even so, it’s a good article in Digital Business Web 2.0 Strategy section. I didn’t like the closing quote from “Dave” (an anonymous blogger.

“You might think twice about sending a legal letter if you know it will be published [apparently TechCrunch publishes all its legal communications]. Lawyers have no choice but to use legal language, and that always reads so badly.”

We don’t always (and shouldn’t).

Lunch is most certainly not for wimps

I was intrigued reading the Acknowledgements at the start of Kate Atkinson’s One Good Turn, with the following

. . . Thank you also to David Lindgren for trying, and usually failing to explain corporate law to me and, more importantly, for being a lawyer who lunches.

It wasn’t the opening bit, about explaining corporate law: I know only too well that explaining the finer points of our specialisation is all but impossible. After years spent trying to tell my children what I do, they are no wiser. Perhaps it is the way I tell it. Rather, it was the lunch bit! I am known in my partnership as the partner who lunches (and also for complaining once that the dry cleaners had shrunk my suit) and I have always spent most of my business development budget taking clients, referrers, introducers and providers to lunch. Not for nothing does my Outlook Contacts have a Restaurants category.

It was therefore gratifying to read John Studzinski in the FT’s September 2008 How to Spend It last week,

In most of the world today lunch – or any meal, for that matter – is used as a basis for determining whether people trust and like each other. . . The importance of one-on-one conversation over food is still something that I do not believe has reached its pinnacle. It’s where people learn the most about each other and I don’t think we’ve found anything else as effective at this point in time. Some day maybe, but not yet.

although I was not a little disturbed by his assertion that

In the US and the UK, breakfast is the new lunch.

Not in Plymouth it isn’t!