Confusing Times for Law Firm Advisors?

The stress and financial turmoil roiling through law firms must make marketing very difficult for established consultancies such as Altman Weil and Hildebrandt. Let me give you one personal example.

This week, I will attend a meeting where we’ll hear from Ward Bower of A-W on “Opportunities for Mid-Sized Firms in the Current Economy.” Many of my friends at places like the Legal Water Cooler, Law Firm CI and folks I’ve seen speaking recently have been referring to the compression in legal budgets among corporations as a chance for mid-sized and boutique firms (read: less costly) to make some inroads in a market that has been dominated by large “safe bets” among the AmLaw 100.

I listened avidly at the Legal Marketing Association Conference the first of this month to Tom Clay of the same firm detail their recent “Legal Transformation Study” that used scenario planning to posit the possible fields of play in 2020, about a decade away. When the researchers asked a wide group of law firm managers and partners which of the four scenarios were most likely to be reality in 2020, there was almost an even divide among them. By this we see clearly there is no agreement among law firms on the likelihood of a particular end point for the legal industry.

So, we’ll hear Mr. Bower opine on the kinds of opportunities firms like the one I work at might salivate over and, frankly, need to keep growing.

Then, in my email yesterday, comes a missive from Pam Woldow, a “Ramper” at LegalOnRamp.com, and a consultant at…Altman Weil. In this lengthy opinion, largely designed, it seems, to show the benefits of LegalOnRamp.com membership and participation, Ms. Woldow says:

“Dear General Counsel or Chief Legal Officer:
If you feel like you are in a classic double bind these days, you are not alone. I have spoken with dozens of GCs in the last few months, and Altman Weil has surveyed hundreds more, many of whom report themselves on the horns of a risky dilemma.

They say they are inclined to join the cost-saving trend to move “down market” (their term) to midsized and boutique firms that have lower costs bases, but are afraid the move will put them in hot water, no matter what the cost savings.”

Later, after a long description of the process by which a corporate general counsel might put the squeeze on its current BigLaw vendors and use LegalOnRamp.com as the big stick to “help firm XYZ convert to your religion”, she continues:

“The bottom line in law is that quality is quality. Cost is not quality. Risk-reduction is not quality. In every instance the highest quality firm will be the lowest cost, but that means you have to think about quality in terms of outcomes, not inputs – or even likelihood of substandard performance by outside counsel. Once you start focusing on true quality to the client – that’s you and your company – you’ll see a variety of ways to reduce costs. You’ll also find that lots of firms, including, ultimately, your incumbent service providers, will be willing to play ball according to the new rules of the legal game.”

Oh, oh, oh. I wonder how these consultants reconcile their various messages. Which opportunities do the corporate clients hear, the large providers get told about and which are left to the mid-size and boutiques? Are they talking among themselves about this? At Altman Weil, the evidence is that they are not. This double-speak may eventually trip them up and a fall could be disastrous in this economy.

Would you hire a consultant from a company that pitches your possible clients and competitors on a way to prevent your success?