Quantcast

Changing the Billing Paradigm – Parts 6, 7 & 8: Dealing with the entire Pre-billing Process

By on July 10, 2011

Law firms can improve cash flow and increase profitability if they improve their billing process and practices.

 The client billing process, in many firms is based on a slow, painful monthly schedule. Why … because it’s always been that way. In part 1 of this series we identified the nine (9) current painful and costly steps to client billing. In this posting we’ll discuss the issue of the entire pre-billing process.

 Here is how to improve cash flow and profitability by dealing with both the pre-bill process and the attorneys who review the pre-bills:

  1. The entire pre-bill review process is, quite frankly a poor process to start with. Why do you need to review a pre-bill, what are you looking for? Time entered against the wrong client/matter, time that can’t be billed, lousy narrative …. this is like taking every car off the production line and having to redo poor workmanship in the QA department.
  2. Should bills be reviewed, maybe the larger, more complex ones. If the billing attorney properly supervises work done on his/her matters, a complete pre-bill review should not be necessary.
  3. Pre-bill reviews should be done to match the continual billing throughout the month as covered in my earlier post.
  4. Print pre-bills on a slightly off color paper so that they are real easy to recognize on a crowded desk. .
  5. Set a pre-bill review deadline, for example 3 business days after delivery. Enforce this review time. Where possible allow secretaries to edit narrative for all pre-bill changes and accounting can do such things as adjustments and transfers. Maintain an ongoing list of all outstanding pre-bills by billing attorney, if they are late contact them or their secretaries and work out a timeframe for submission.

 In summary, getting pre-bills reviewed and ready for billing is the final critical step and sometimes the most costly one.

 In the next post we’ll look at finalizing bills and getting them to the clients, why is it a problem and what can you do to improve the process and become more profitable.

Comments (0)
Categories: AFA - alternative fee arrangement, Best Practices, Law firm billing, Productivity

Searching the Searches

By on September 7, 2010

The phone rang in the New York office about six hours before it rang in Chicago. Litigation attorneys in both offices were eager to talk to a new very large potential client. Both were able to gather enough facts to start a new matter intake form with basic conflict search criteria and assured the client that they should be able to respond in a day or two. The client was eager to get things rolling and time was critical. Luckily the firm had excellent procedures in place and highly qualified paralegals ran the conflict searches in both offices, they were free and clear, no issues whatsoever.

We have a new client!  Like clockwork, engagement letters went out to each of the inquirers and work had already begun. It wasn’t until the Friday “new client/matter” report came out to the partners that the discovery was made, it was the same client. Obviously the client had internal issues with more than one contact seeking legal assistance, but nonetheless, the firm too was embarrassed. Could it have been much worse, sure … the firm could have been representing multiple opposing parties in a complex matter.

So, how do you know in a multi-office, distributed environment if the firm isn’t talking to the same or opposing parties on a conflicting matter that surface in a short period of time? The answer is to structure your conflict search system to not just search on the normal stuff, but to also search on “ searches.” If the system allowed the search on searches capability, the second occurrence would have immediately caught the first search and pending engagement, allowing one of the two attorneys to inform the client of the situation. The client would have been impressed with the level of communication within the firm even between remote locations.

Searching previous searches also provides another valuable business tool, why was past representation turned down? In most systems there is probably no record of past declined opportunities and the reason they were declined. Many declines for representation are not legal conflict issues, they are business issues. Without a well constructed database and proceedure to providing the reason for declining an engagement and the ability to find all this on a conflicts search what we declined yesterday, might be accepted today.

Searching on searches is a Best Practice for all law firms.

Comments (0)
Categories: Best Practices, Financial Management, Practice Management, Productivity, Technology, The Legal Market

Legal Project Management – 3rd Big Disconnect

By on July 7, 2010

In my June 17th and June 28th postings I discussed the 1st and 2nd Big Disconnects that law firms have with Legal Project Management.

The 3rd Big Disconnect is – “who’s in charge of the project”.

Wikipedia defines Project Management as “ the discipline of planning, organizing, and managing resources to bring about the successful completion of specific project goals and objectives”.

OK, so the law firm has just taken on a major new litigation case and the client is looking for the firm to get staffed up and started immediately. If the firm is representing the defendant there may already be a complaint filed. If the firm represents the Plaintiff, the client is anxious to get the process started.  We have a “billing attorney” identified, probably a senior partner, and this partner will have a pick of key attorneys and paralegals from within the department to assign work to.

Sounds like we are in pretty good shape, how soon can we expect some “action”. But wait … we haven’t selected the Project Manager; we don’t have a Project Plan in place nor a Project “launch date”.

Will the Legal Project Manager really have any authority to “manage a project”? Might this just be an exercise in updating a project planning tool so that the client is pleased that the firm has “project management”. This is the real issue, is the Project Manager really in charge of anything? Well we don’t exactly know any of this yet because there is very little Legal Project Management taking place today.

Firm management should first define and get partner consensus on exactly what role a Legal Project Manager will take before going down this path. Are you looking for someone to track events and activities (a docket clerk?), someone to enter case notes ( a paralegal?) or someone to actually make decisions and manage a case?

Comments (0)
Categories: Best Practices, Practice Management, Productivity, The Legal Market

Mid-size Firm Managing Partner’s – Poor View of Technology

By on July 7, 2010

I was a little shocked to see the Hildebrandt story on how a dozen managing partners felt about their technology investments. Their perspective was they just wanted to make sure the network was reliable and maintained at a reasonable cost.  We don’t know all the details of the discussions that took place with the partners but one thing is certain, “they are missing the boat.” One of two possibilities come to mind, either the partners just couldn’t articulate the benefits of the technology the firm actually uses beyond stable networks, or their firms really don’t use technology for much more than email, document storage and a few legal software applications.

Technology can be a game changer for a mid-size firm, here are some examples:

  • Business Development – without a good contact management system (other than just Outlook) it’s just not possible to manage relationships and track the effectiveness of marketing campaigns.
  • Business Process Improvement (BPI) – business processes used by firms may not have changed very much in the last 10-20 years. Most of these processes are manual, paper based systems, for example, new client/matter intake, requesting a check, requesting a vacation day etc. These are just ripe for cost reductions and improvements in service.
  • Attorney Dashboards – at a glance, how am I doing compared to the requirements? Am I missing time for a certain day, do I have excessive client un-billed costs aging over 60 days, is my billing realization dropping below 95 percent? Attorneys need on-demand access to hard-hitting performance related information, gone are the days of sending out reporting packages (aka, paper).
  • Green Billing – stop sending your corporate clients paper bills, they don’t want paper. Green billing allows your firm to send clients a digitized bill, ready to be immediately imported into their in-house system for processing and approval. Happier clients and faster payment cycles is a win-win for both parties.  

Of course, the list could go on and on, the overall message is that when the managing partner can say that technology is being used by the firm as a strategic advantage in the marketplace his firm will be in a much better position to compete and quite possibly more profitable.

Comments (0)
Categories: Best Practices, Productivity, Technology, The Legal Market
Gallery
ist2_5516813-business-people-joining-their-hands ist2_11425109-business-woman-with-colleagues-at-the-back ist2_7730216-library-tables
Blogroll
Follow RainMaker