Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse tincidunt sagittis eros. Quisque quis euismod lorem.
When we think about traditional, partner-track law firms–which is how most law firms choose to organize themselves–we often imagine them in a favorable light: lawyers in suits, busy with important work, but somehow still managing to do their jobs and complete their tasks with high efficiency. But law firms are like automobiles in a lot of ways: they require routine maintenance, replacement parts, and fuel. But some cars (like the Ford Pinto) simply cannot be fixed. In that way, traditional, partner-track law firms are more like a Model-T, as their formal structure was created in the 1890s. Unlike a Model-T, however, law firms still follow the traditional, partner-track model all over the country. At All Rise! we think it is time to pop the hood and investigate some of those issues with traditional, partner-track law firms that can negatively affect clients:
1. The Waterbed Effect: One issue for partner-track law firms is, you guessed it, the partners themselves. Too often, law firms allow, and sometimes even encourage, the mistreatment of associate attorneys and staff by predatory, arrogant partners. By ignoring this issue, other law firms suffer from what economists call the Waterbed Effect. Imagine a waterbed, literally. When one side gets pushed down, the other side goes up. In law firms, the water is replaced with people. Meaning, the focus is often the happiness and satisfaction of the customer, to the detriment of the employees. The more pressure the firm puts on workers may, indeed, lead to more customer satisfaction in the short term, but over time the employees will break under the pressure. It takes time and effort to ensure the appreciation and satisfaction of one’s employees, and most firms choose to expend this time and effort elsewhere. If employees are tired, unhappy, or underappreciated there is no doubt this will lead to an unhappy customer as well. Treating employees of a firm with the respect they deserve, as people, will solve this problem, but just like the Ford Pinto, some partners simply can’t be fixed.
2. Diseconomies of Scale: Traditional, partner-track law firms also tend to struggle with, or fail to manage, growth. Most firms try to get as big as possible, as soon as possible. This often results in too much work in comparison to the number of attorneys at the firm and a general lack of expertise at the firm in particular practice areas. In principle, at least, each new case makes a law firm less effective, and most firms fail to recognize that inherent difficulty. The difficulty can, of course, be off-set by restricting the number of cases at a law firm, restricting the workload of each attorney, or by hiring more employees, but traditional, partner-track law firms often fail to make any changes whatsoever and just let their employees drown in a higher case load.
3. The Planning Fallacy: In law firms, people have a tendency to overestimate their abilities in general, and this is certainly true as it relates to the ability to complete work in the amount of time we expect. This leads to missed deadlines and can create stress for the entire office. Law firms can, and should, track the time it takes to complete prior projects and appreciate those known time frames as they create project estimates for current or future projects. In fact, firms that fail to account for their historic performance on projects will overestimate their own abilities by as much as 66%, as the firm can only guess how long individual tasks and projects will take to complete.
4. The Peter Principle: This concept stands for the proposition that in most workplaces an employee will expect to be promoted, again and again, until they are placed in a position that they may not be qualified for. Think of a fast-food restaurant fry cook. The cook, who is an excellent cook, will probably seek a promotion to restaurant manager for higher wages, better benefits, etc. But the cook may not have the necessary and required skills of a good manager. If the cook gets the promotion, the restaurant has now lost a great cook and gains a bad store manager. In a law firm, an attorney can be great at one job, like litigation, while also lacking business qualifications and prior entrepreneurial experience to be a successful managing partner. Regardless, most associate attorneys will compete for a managing partner position, despite failing to recognize the business acumen necessary to run a law firm as a business (And please let us know if you have met a managing partner that will admit they lack business skills for their position.).
5. The Secret Salaries and Game Theory: Imagine working on the same project as your classmates in school. Everyone can understand how frustrating it would be to see other students get higher grades for doing the same exact work. The same goes for law firms. More often than partners probably realize, associate attorneys are keeping track of how other associate attorneys in the same legal market are progressing, and even know what kind of work those other associates are doing. Because salaries are not widely published across the spectrum of all law firms, associates can never truly know if they are being paid a fair wage–and that is by design. Associates can very quickly become disillusioned with their own law firm, in comparison to others, which seem to value their associates more. This causes higher turnover across the market, with associates constantly interviewing and seeking out new opportunities in the pursuit of fair pay. It is becoming more common for associate attorneys to leave a firm after only one (1) year. All the while clients suffer as they are forced into a steady stream of new attorneys who they must learn to trust and confide in.
All that to say, traditional, partner-track law firms have many issues that risk negative impacts for clients, cases, and employees, and these issues are rarely discussed. In contrast, All Rise! is organized according to a legal cooperative model; a model that is meant to address the typical issues associated with a partner-track firm.
Legal Cooperatives completely reimagine this law firm organization for the betterment of everyone involved. It is a special kind of firm in which all of the attorneys are regarded as self-accountable leaders. The attorneys all have a say in how the firm is run and they all directly share in the rewards of their own hard work and perseverance. It is a workplace in which fairness, sharing, and cooperation are vital, not just preferred.
For example, legal cooperatives do not struggle with the Waterbed Effect; in fact, all of the attorneys instead manage the cooperative as a Board. These attorneys vote on their own benefits, cooperate on each other’s cases, and maintain democratic control of firm policies. All of these attorneys share a spot in the same boat, working together, keeping the proverbial ‘waterbed’ perfectly balanced. Furthermore, the Peter Principle and Secret Salaries are not an issue as every patron-attorney keeps 80% of the profits earned from their work regardless of title. And there is no risk of the attorneys overcommitting as All Rise! has a strict restriction on weekly hours, ensuring a healthy work-life balance of the attorneys.
All Rise! is a team of attorneys where everyone plays and everyone respects their teammates. In short, a legal cooperative like All Rise! addresses those issues typical of a traditional law firm by creating a fair, balanced, and supportive environment where everybody wins.
If you need legal help, elevate your representation with All Rise!
Drop us a line.
