Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsMatthew Whalley & Ian Rodwell. January 2012www.blplaw.com
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsContentsIntroduction .......................................................
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsIntroductionIn June 2011 we carried out a survey of in-house KM professio...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsSurvey DetailsThe survey took two parts. Firstly, clients were asked to r...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey Results                                                                 Efficien...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsLaw Firm InvestmentCost was assessed according to 3 investment factors (t...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey Results                                                    Investment           ...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsDiscussionClient Value CategorisationThe high degree of correlation betwe...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsLaw Firm Investment SummaryNo single factor proved to be consistently hig...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsCombined ResultsHaving assessed the client value and divided into separat...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsClient Efficiency Value & Law Firm InvestmentWhen looking at Client Effic...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsLaw Firm Investment & ScalabilityReviewing Potential Economy of Scale (Sc...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsNext stepsThe study provides a useful indication of which services should...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendicesAppendix 1: Graphical display of client survey scores by value ...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAwareness“increasing your awareness of relevant legal and regulatory deve...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsEfficiency/Effectiveness“reducing the time it takes to do your job or ena...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsRisk Management“helping you to identify and manage legal risk on behalf o...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsEnabling“enabling you to undertake work or tasks that wouldn’t have been ...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 2: Chart Showing Law Firm Investment plotted with Economy ofScal...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 3: Plotting Knowledge vs Awareness CorrelationThe good correlati...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 4: Testing for Correlation between Efficiency vs EnablingAlthoug...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 5: Distribution of services by CKV and CEVThe comparison below s...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 6: Original Client Survey                                       ...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey Results                                                                      Eff...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 7: Suggested modifications to the original Client SurveyWe recei...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 8: Original Law Firm Survey                                     ...
Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey Results                                                                         ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Valuing "value-add" services received from Law Firms

2,182 views

Published on

Results of original research carried out by Matthew Whalley and Ian Rodwell. You should read this document if you are involved in either coordinating the value-add you receive from law firms or
are responsible for maanging client facing services within a law firm.

Published in: Business
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,182
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
51
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Valuing "value-add" services received from Law Firms

  1. 1. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsMatthew Whalley & Ian Rodwell. January 2012www.blplaw.com
  2. 2. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsContentsIntroduction ......................................................................... 2Survey Details....................................................................... 3 Client Value ..................................................................... 3 Law Firm Investment........................................................ 5Discussion ............................................................................ 7 Client Value Categorisation ............................................... 7 Law Firm Investment Summary......................................... 8 Combined Results ............................................................ 9 Client Knowledge & Law Firm Investment ..................... 9 Client Efficiency Value & Law Firm Investment ............ 10 Law Firm Investment & Scalability .............................. 11 Next steps ..................................................................... 12Appendices......................................................................... 13 Appendix 1: Graphical display of client survey scores by value category for each service ........................ 13 Knowledge ................................................................ 13 Awareness ................................................................ 14 Efficiency/Effectiveness.............................................. 15 Risk Management ...................................................... 16 Enabling ................................................................... 17 Appendix 2: Chart Showing Law Firm Investment plotted with Economy of Scale ........................................ 18 Appendix 3: Plotting Knowledge vs Awareness Correlation..................................................................... 19 Appendix 4: Testing for Correlation between Efficiency vs Enabling ..................................................... 20 Appendix 5: Distribution of services by CKV and CEV ............................................................................... 21 Appendix 6: Original Client Survey .................................. 22 Appendix 7: Suggested modifications to the original Client Survey...................................................... 24 Appendix 8: Original Law Firm Survey ............................. 25www.blplaw.com Page 01 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  3. 3. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsIntroductionIn June 2011 we carried out a survey of in-house KM professionals. The purpose of the survey was todevelop a cross-client perspective of the relative values of “value-add” services provided by law firms.The client survey was followed by a survey of law firm professionals of their views of the perceived cost tolaw firms of delivering these “value-add” services.The results demonstrate which services are valued by clients in terms of “Knowledge” and “Efficiency”measures as well as their contribution towards the management of legal risk. They also highlight the relativecosts of providing the services and which services can be developed for delivery to multiple clients forminimal investment per client.The results also raise questions with regards to efficiencies gained on the client side and whether there is agap with regards implementation of knowledge services, to the detriment of the client.If you have any comments or questions about this report, or would like to participate by completing a surveyon behalf of your organisation, do please get in touch.Matthew Whalley (matthew.whalley@blplaw.com)Ian Rodwell (ian.rodwell@linklaters.com)www.blplaw.com Page 02 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  4. 4. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsSurvey DetailsThe survey took two parts. Firstly, clients were asked to rate the value of the “value-add” services theyreceived from law firms. Secondly, law firms were asked to assess the cost of providing these services.Client ValueThe client value survey was designed to capture in-house Legal and Support staff attitudes towards the“Value-add” services they received from their law firms. Respondents were asked to rate services withrespect to 5 measures: Knowledge increasing your knowledge and understanding of legal and regulatory issues related to specific line of work Awareness increasing your awareness of relevant legal and regulatory developments Efficiency/Effectiveness reducing the time it takes to do your job or enabling you to do the job better Risk Management helping you to identify and manage legal risk on behalf of your clients Enabling enabling you to undertake work or tasks that wouldn’t have been possible if the service wasn’t providedScores were given on a scale of 1-5, where1 = Excellent, extremely valuable, essential service – couldn’t work without it2 = Very Good, very valuable, fully appreciated3 = Good, of general value overall, appreciated4 = Poor, of little value, not really appreciated5 = Very poor, no added-value, not appreciatedThe average result across each of the 12 selected services (multiplied by 1000 for ease of comparison) isshown in Table 1, over the page.Results for each of the 5 categories is colour coded as being either “of little or no value” (red), “of generalvalue” (amber) or “highly valued” (green).Scores for the full list of services included in the original questionnaire are displayed in Appendix 1.www.blplaw.com Page 03 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  5. 5. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey Results Efficiency/ RiskKM Offering Knowl’dge Awaren’ss Effect’ness Managem’t Enabling OVERALLLegal Secondees 1643 1286 2857 1929 3286 11000Support Secondees 2273 1909 2909 1727 3000 11818Legal Research Helpdesk 2714 2143 2429 1357 1643 10286Legal Advisory Hotline 3091 2273 2818 2000 1909 12091Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Updates 2000 2714 1643 1643 1000 9000Industry Specific Bulletins 3143 3214 2500 2357 1357 12571Thought leadership piece 2321 2000 1143 1500 786 7750Microsites/Online Tools 2786 2500 2143 2357 1214 11000Standard Training Seminars 2857 2929 2000 1643 1214 10643Bespoke Training 3643 3214 2727 2500 1786 13870Round Table Discussions 3182 3091 2385 2000 1364 12021Post transaction reviews 2923 2833 2500 2308 1462 12026Colour Scale Less than 1700 = Poor in category, little or no value More than 1700, Less than 3000 = Good, of general value, appreciated More than 3000 = Excellent, high value, very appreciated Table 1: Summary of client survey responseswww.blplaw.com Page 04 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  6. 6. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsLaw Firm InvestmentCost was assessed according to 3 investment factors (time required, level of expertise and scarcity ofresource) plus the potential for the service to be delivered to multiple clients (scalability).Each value-add service was rated according to 4 measures: Time invested this will be determined by the size or duration of the support; the level of creation/adaptation required; and the level of expertise available Level of expertise this will determine the cost of the resource required Scarcity of resources for example, assistance from non-lawyers or specialists such as PSLs may be more difficult to secure. The measure can also relate to technological resources So, the scarcer the resources, the higher the investment score Economies of scale can the investment be leveraged to provide support to multiple clients? So the greater the scope for economies of scale, the lower the investment score.The average investment and economy of scale (scalability) scores are shown in Table 2, below.Results for each of the three investment categories is colour coded as being either “high investment” (red),“moderate investment” (amber) or “little or no investment” (green).Results for scalability are coded as “good economy of scale” (green), “moderate economy of scale” (amber)or “little or no economy of scale” (red).Scores for the full list of services included in the original questionnaire are displayed in Appendix 2.www.blplaw.com Page 05 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  7. 7. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey Results Investment Time Level of Scarcity of Overall Economy KM Offering Investment Expertise Resource Investment of Scale Legal Secondees 3571 3143 3000 9714 1143 Support Secondees 3000 3000 3667 9667 1500 Legal Research Helpdesk 1857 2857 2286 7000 2857 Legal Advisory Hotline 2000 3143 2286 7429 2571 Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Updates 2143 2286 2143 6571 3857 Industry Specific Bulletins 2714 3143 2857 8714 2714 Thought leadership piece 3429 3714 3286 10429 3143 Microsites/Online Tools 3333 3167 3000 9500 3833 Standard Training Seminars 2143 3429 2571 8143 3429 Bespoke Training 3000 3286 3286 9571 2143 Round Table Discussions 3143 3429 3714 10286 2857 Post transaction reviews 2333 2833 3000 8167 1667 Investment Economy of Scale Less than 2500 = Little or no Greater than 3000 = good investment economy of scale Less than 3000, greater More than 2500, Less than 3500 than 1500 = moderate = Moderate Investment economy of scale More than 3500 = High Less than 1500 = poor Investment economy of scale Table 2: Summary of Law Firm Survey Responseswww.blplaw.com Page 06 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  8. 8. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsDiscussionClient Value CategorisationThe high degree of correlation between Knowledge and Awareness (see Appendix 3) leads us to believe thatthese two measures can be combined into what we will call “Client Knowledge Value”, or CKV.Within this correlation, there is a definite preference for services which enhance knowledge. That shouldn’tmean services that serve to increase awareness should be entirely disregarded. There is substantialanecdotal evidence that, with the right distribution mechanisms, simple awareness services can addsignificant value.When reviewing the correlation between “Efficiency/Effectiveness” and “Enabling” (see Appendix 5), it isdifficult to ignore the two outlying values for Legal and Support Secondees. Although these data points areout of line with the rest of the measures, we feel this is due to the nature of the terms used.By becoming more efficient at an existing process, time is freed. This freed time, if the efficiencies are greatenough, can be used to enable additional work to be taken on, increasing the amount of work that a legaldepartment can undertake.In the case of legal and support secondees, additional work is enabled due the fact that the base resource(lawyer time) is increased, rather than due to improved efficiency. The two are therefore two sides of thesame coin, enabling additional work to be carried out.We feel therefore that it is appropriate to create a more broadly defined efficiency measure: Client EfficiencyValue (CEV).Finally, the services surveyed are perceived as delivering little value in managing legal risk. The results inthis measure are therefore excluded from further analysis in this report. Although Legal Risk is excluded,Law Firms’ should still have a major role in assisting in-house counsel to identify and manage theirorganisations’ legal risks.www.blplaw.com Page 07 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  9. 9. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsLaw Firm Investment SummaryNo single factor proved to be consistently high in contributing to the cost of services (see Figure 1), leadingus to simplify this measure into a single factor, Law Firm Investment (LFI). Overall, investment in 75% ofservices is seen as moderate to high. Law Firm Investment Breakdown 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 t l fic B t e s Up e g s du gula y H k ns e s on s s s Tr s in ry tory tlin w Re iso d es Di inin e ol ec r ch d ee ok in a t io sio de St icro der llet da vie To pi o dv elp a on s m re u ip n s scu e Be S e in H ec ec sh n r e nl lS tS ng /O i ec Le ear ac ga le sp or ni ea es Po Tab Sp pp ga al A Le ai es sit Tr tra Su lR Scarcity of Resource gh g d st rd un st ga l& ou da M Ro Le Expertise Th In an Le Time lla ni Va Figure 1: Law Firm Investment ScoresGeneral opinion within law firms seems to be that the majority of value-add services are potentially scalablegiven the right level of investment. 83% of the listed services (see Table 2) were rated as having moderateto good economies of scale.www.blplaw.com Page 08 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  10. 10. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsCombined ResultsHaving assessed the client value and divided into separate Knowledge (CKV) and Efficiency (CEV) factors, itis interesting to combine these two factors with the simplified Law Firm Investment (LFI). Figure 2, below,compares CKV with LFI. Figure 4 (next page) compares CEV with LFI. It is also interesting to contrast LFIwith the scalability/economy of scale ratings. This is shown in Figure 4.Client Knowledge & Law Firm InvestmentFigure 2 shows that almost all services rated are well valued in terms of the knowledge they deliver. Theexception is Legal Secondees, which appear to be valued almost exclusively as a resourcing aid.It is perhaps no surprise that 3 of the top 4 rated services for “knowledge” (Bespoke Training, IndustrySpecific Bulletins and Standard Training Seminars) would be considered as “traditional” law firm value adds.It is however interesting that the third highest rated service in terms of knowledge is round tablediscussions. This shows that value can be generated not only by delivering law firm knowhow to clients butalso through stimulating discussion and the exchange of knowledge with peers.Among respondents in the client session, legal advisory hotlines were the least well known – perhaps aconsequence of a more discriminatory approach by law firms in offering such support to clients.Investment is high in almost all cases. The goal for law firms (and clients) must be to reduce the requiredinvestment and/or to scale the solutions to generate a better value return across a broader client base.Hitting the sweet spot in the bottom right hand quadrant (Low Investment, High Value) are Vanilla Legaland Regulatory Updates, Legal Research Helpdesk and Legal Advisory Hotline. Client Knowledge Value (CKV) vs Law Firm Investment (LFI) Legal Secondees Support Secondees Law Firm Investment (LFI) Legal Research Helpdesk Legal Advisory Hotline Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Updates Industry Specific Bulletins Thought leadership piece Microsites/Online Tools Standard Training Seminars Bespoke Training Round Table Discussions Post transaction reviews Client Knowledge Value (CKV) Figure 2: Distribution of services by CKV and LFIwww.blplaw.com Page 09 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  11. 11. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsClient Efficiency Value & Law Firm InvestmentWhen looking at Client Efficiency Value (CEV), we can see that services rated far less highly. Less than halfof the services show value. The standout services in this area (Legal and Support Secondees) are both“resourcing” services. It appears that clients are making slow progress in realising any real efficiencies fromthe other value-add services offered.There are two current services however that just about make it into the bottom right hand quadrant (HighValue, Low Investment): Legal Advisory Hotlines and Legal Research Helpdesk. For relatively littleinvestment, both of these services are seen as delivering some modest efficiencies to clients. Client Efficiency Value (CEV) vs Law Firm Investment (LFI) Law Firm Investment (LFI) Legal Secondees Support Secondees Legal Research Helpdesk Legal Advisory Hotline Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Updates Industry Specific Bulletins Thought leadership piece Microsites/Online Tools Standard Training Seminars Bespoke Training Round Table Discussions Post transaction reviews Client Efficiency Value (CEV) Figure 3: Distribution of services by CEV and LFIwww.blplaw.com Page 10 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  12. 12. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsLaw Firm Investment & ScalabilityReviewing Potential Economy of Scale (Scalability) with LFI shows that almost all services are seen as Highinvestment. The exceptions are Legal Research Helpdesks and Vanilla Legal and Regulatory Updates.Of the remainder, it is the services in the top right hand quadrant that warrant further investigation withinLaw Firms, If they have good scalability, is this being realised to the benefit of a greater number of clients.What can be done to bring down the “Client Specific Investment” in these services? Law Firm Investment vs (Potential) Economy of Scale Legal Secondees Support Secondees Legal Research Helpdesk (Potential) Economy of Scale Legal Advisory Hotline Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Updates Industry Specific Bulletins Thought leadership piece Microsites/Online Tools Standard Training Seminars Bespoke Training Round Table Discussions Post transaction reviews Law Firm Investment Figure 4: Overall Investment vs Economy of Scalewww.blplaw.com Page 11 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  13. 13. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsNext stepsThe study provides a useful indication of which services should be offered to clients and where to focusinvestment to realise economies of scale. It does however raise questions. Some follow-up actions aredetailed below, for consideration by law firms and client organisations. Produce a simplified, online version of the original This could be a useful next step in confirming some survey. of these early results across a broader number of respondents. The development of the simplified measures of value and cost (CKV, CEV, LFI and Scalability) will make future surveys less complex. Generate robust empirical data about the cost of It seems obvious that the subjective nature of the provision of certain services and the likely return on survey approach raises issues. There is much room investment. for further development of ROI models within law firms. Clients should work to analyse their internal For clients, it would seem that there is significant processes and develop strategies for room for in-house KM or operations staff to realise aligning/integrating law firm know-how with internal greater efficiencies from the services that are practices - with the ultimate goal of saving their in- offered to them. Involving law firms in this process house lawyers’ time. would help the firms to better understand client needs, what services would be of most value and therefore where to focus their energies to help.www.blplaw.com Page 12 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  14. 14. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendicesAppendix 1: Graphical display of client survey scores by value category for eachserviceKnowledge“increasing your knowledge and understanding of legal and regulatory issues related to specific line of work” Knowledge Scores 4000 3500 Bespoke Training Legal Advisory Hotline Industry Specific Bulletins Round Table Discussions 3000 Standard Training Seminars Legal Research Helpdesk Post transaction reviews Microsites/Onlne Tools 2500 Thought leadership piece Support Secondees E-learning Vanilla Legal & Regulatory 2000 Business Hotline Updates Webinars KM/IT Consultancy Legal Secondees 1500 Reporting Invested Time Soft Skills Training 1000 500 0Less than 1700 = Poor in category, little or no valueMore than 1700, Less than 3000 = Good, of general value, appreciatedMore than 3000 = Excellent, high value, very appreciatedwww.blplaw.com Page 13 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  15. 15. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAwareness“increasing your awareness of relevant legal and regulatory developments” 4000 Awareness Scores 3500 Industry Specific Bulletins Bespoke Training Round Table Discussions 3000 Standard Training Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Post transaction reviews Seminars Updates Microsites/Onlne Tools 2500 Legal Advisory Hotline E-learning Legal Research Helpdesk Webinars 2000 Support Secondees Thought leadership piece Business Hotline 1500 KM/IT Consultancy Reporting Invested Time Legal Secondees 1000 Soft Skills Training 500 0Less than 1700 = Poor in category, little or no valueMore than 1700, Less than 3000 = Good, of general value, appreciatedMore than 3000 = Excellent, high value, very appreciatedwww.blplaw.com Page 14 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  16. 16. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsEfficiency/Effectiveness“reducing the time it takes to do your job or enabling you to do the job better” Efficiency Scores 4000 3500 Support Secondees 3000 Legal Advisory Hotline Bespoke Training Legal Secondees 2500 Industry Specific Bulletins Post transaction reviews Round Table Discussions Legal Research Helpdesk Business Hotline Microsites/Onlne Tools Soft Skills Training KM/IT Consultancy 2000 Standard Training Seminars E-learning Webinars Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Reporting Invested Time 1500 Updates Thought leadership piece 1000 500 0Less than 1700 = Poor in category, little or no valueMore than 1700, Less than 3000 = Good, of general value, appreciatedMore than 3000 = Excellent, high value, very appreciatedwww.blplaw.com Page 15 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  17. 17. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsRisk Management“helping you to identify and manage legal risk on behalf of your clients” Risk Management Scores 4000 3500 3000 Industry Specific 2500 Microsites/OnlneBespoke Training Bulletins Post transaction Tools reviews Legal Secondees Legal Advisory Round Table 2000 Hotline Discussions Support Secondees Vanilla Legal & Standard Training Regulatory Updates E-learning 1500 Seminars Business Hotline KM/IT Consultancy Thought leadership Legal Research piece Webinars 1000 Helpdesk Reporting Invested Time 500 Soft Skills Training 0Less than 1700 = Poor in category, little or no valueMore than 1700, Less than 3000 = Good, of general value, appreciatedMore than 3000 = Excellent, high value, very appreciatedwww.blplaw.com Page 16 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  18. 18. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsEnabling“enabling you to undertake work or tasks that wouldn’t have been possible if the service wasn’t provided” Enabling Scores 4000 3500 Legal Secondees 3000 Support Secondees 2500 Legal Advisory Hotline 2000 Business Hotline Bespoke Training Soft Skills Training KM/IT Consultancy 1500 Legal Research Helpdesk Industry Specific Bulletins Round Table Discussions Post transaction reviews E-learning Standard Training Reporting Invested Time Vanilla Legal & Regulatory 1000 Microsites/Onlne Tools Seminars Webinars Updates Thought leadership piece 500 0Less than 1700 = Poor in category, little or no valueMore than 1700, Less than 3000 = Good, of general value, appreciatedMore than 3000 = Excellent, high value, very appreciatedwww.blplaw.com Page 17 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  19. 19. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 2: Chart Showing Law Firm Investment plotted with Economy ofScale Overall Investment and Economy of Scale 11000 4000 10000 3500 9000 3000 8000 2500 7000 2000 6000 5000 1500 4000 1000 s e sk ng e ns s s es s S e ls s ar ec te ee tlin w tin o de io ni de in vie da To pi nd lle Ho ai ss m lp on Up p re Tr Bu co e cu He hi ec ry in n Su l Se rs e tr a D is ry nl c Re iso t io ng tS ok h ifi de to O rc ac ec ni dv ga sp or e la s/ ea ea bl ai ns Sp i te gu lA pp Be Le es Ta tl Tr os ga gh Investment lR ry rd d icr st Le ou un st l& da ga du M Po Th Economy of Scale Ro an ga Le In St Le lla ni Vawww.blplaw.com Page 18 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  20. 20. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 3: Plotting Knowledge vs Awareness CorrelationThe good correlation between Knowledge and Awareness led us to combine these two value measures into asingle measure: Client Knowledge Value (CKV). Knowledge vs Awareness (CKV) Legal Secondees 3500 Support Secondees 3000 Legal Research Helpdesk Legal Advisory Hotline 2500 Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Updates Awareness 2000 Industry Specific Bulletins 1500 Thought leadership piece Microsites/Online Tools 1000 Standard Training Seminars 500 Bespoke Training 0 Round Table Discussions 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Post transaction reviews Knowledgewww.blplaw.com Page 19 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  21. 21. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 4: Testing for Correlation between Efficiency vs EnablingAlthough the “Legal Secondees” and “Support Secondees” data points are out of line with the rest of themeasures, we feel it is appropriate to create a single efficiency measure: Client Efficiency Value (CEV).By becoming more efficient at an existing process, time is freed. This freed time, if the efficiencies are greatenough, can be used to enable additional work to be taken on. In the case of secondees, additional work isenabled due the fact that the base resource (lawyer time) is increased, rather than due to improvedefficiency.Combining the two measures may lead to a downgrade in existing “efficiency/effectiveness” scores, asrespondents take into account whether the efficiency savings are great enough to enable further work to betaken on. Efficiency vs Enabling (CEV) 3500 Legal Secondees 3000 Support Secondees Legal Research Helpdesk Legal Advisory Hotline 2500 Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Updates Industry Specific Bulletins Enabling Score 2000 Thought leadership piece Microsites/Online Tools Standard Training Seminars 1500 Bespoke Training Round Table Discussions Post transaction reviews 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 Efficiency Scorewww.blplaw.com Page 20 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  22. 22. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 5: Distribution of services by CKV and CEVThe comparison below shows the significant weighting of client value towards Knowledge rather thanEfficiency.The services provided by Firms are generally good at passing on knowledge of legal issues (with theexception of Legal Secondees and Standard Seminars), but that clients are poor at realising efficiencies fromthese services.This is surprising. One of the key aims of the provision of value-add services is to make clients’ lives “easier”,i.e. save them time and make them more efficient. There would seem to be a great deal of work to do onboth sides in realising efficiencies from the gamut of value-add services available. Knowledge (CKV) vs Efficiency (CEV) Legal Secondees Support Secondees Client Efficiency Value (CEV) Legal Research Helpdesk Legal Advisory Hotline Vanilla Legal & Regulatory Updates Industry Specific Bulletins Thought leadership piece Microsites/Online Tools Standard Training Seminars Bespoke Training Round Table Discussions Post transaction reviews Client Knowledge Value (CKV)www.blplaw.com Page 21 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  23. 23. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 6: Original Client Survey Efficiency/Effectiveness Risk Management Value Add Activity Knowledge Awareness Enabling1. Secondees 1 (excellent) 2 (very good) 3 (good) 4 (poor) 5 (very poor). Full definitions listed on page 1.1.1 Legal SecondeesQualified lawyers 12345 12345 12345 12345 123451.2 Support SecondeesPSLs, Information Officers etc. 12345 12345 12345 12345 123452. Hotlines/Helpdesks2.1 Legal Research HelpdeskDirect access to library team or PSLs 12345 12345 12345 12345 123452.2 Legal Advisory HotlineDirect access to associate or partner 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345for internal lawyers2.3 Business HotlineDirect access to associate or partner 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345for business colleagues3. Know How Publications and Bulletins3.1 Vanilla Legal & RegulatoryUpdates 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345Commentary on dates etc but noadded opinion3.2 Tailored Industry/ClientSpecific Bulletins 12345 12345 12345 12345 123453.3 Thought leadershippublications 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345Industry leading commerciallyaware, “macro” view pieces3.4 Microsites/Online ToolsContextualised content, such as for 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345Data Protection, MiFID, etc.4. Training and Roundtables4.1 Standard Training SeminarsOpen seminars, i.e. where clientsattend a general seminar at a firm’s 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345officeswww.blplaw.com Page 22 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  24. 24. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey Results Efficiency/Effectiveness Risk Management Value Add Activity Knowledge Awareness Enabling4.2 Bespoke Training SeminarsSeminars exclusively for your 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345company. Most usually held at yourown offices at your request.4.3 Round Table DiscussionsSmall group discussions about 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345current industry topic, Legal &regulatory landscape, for example..4.4 Soft Skills TrainingPresentation skills, drafting skills, 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345etc.4.5 E-learningOn-line delivery of standard courses 12345 12345 12345 12345 123454.6 WebinarsLive, web based training 12345 12345 12345 12345 123455. Miscellaneous Activities 1 (excellent) 2 (very good) 3 (good) 4 (poor) 5 (very poor). Full definitions listed on page 1.5.1 Post Transaction ReviewsDiscussion about lessons learned 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345following major transaction5.2 Reporting Invested TimeLaw firm sharing with you the 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345amount of uncharged time5.3 KM/IT ConsultancyAdvice from the firm on how to 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345organise, collect, disseminate know-howwww.blplaw.com Page 23 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  25. 25. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 7: Suggested modifications to the original Client SurveyWe received some suggested enhancements to the survey, namely other services to consider, during theresearch process. For consistency none were implemented but they are recorded here for completeness. Suggested service Comment Relationship management We question whether this should be considered “value-add” given there is a clear revenue generating emphasis. Use of facilities A fairly obvious omission from the original survey and should be included in any further studies. Assistance with precedent This was discussed in the client session and it was concluded that this projects type of project should be considered as part of the Support Secondees service. Narrow “Post transaction For KM purposes the ideal would be for law firm lawyers to participate in review” as “independent the process. This would ensure a two-way exchange of knowledge. review” Independent review is however included in this service category. Include general/ practice We agree and in subsequent studies general management/practice management within KM and management type consultancy should be included as a service category. IT consultancywww.blplaw.com Page 24 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  26. 26. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey ResultsAppendix 8: Original Law Firm Survey Scarcity of resources Economies of scale Level of expertise Time investment Value Add Activity1. Secondees 1 (nil/little investment) 2 (moderate 1 = high investment) 3 (high investment) 4 (very economy of high investment) scale, 4 = low economy of scale1.1 Legal Secondees 1234 1234 1234Qualified lawyers 1234(Assume 6 month period)1.2 Support Secondees 1234 1234 1234PSLs, Information Officers etc. 1234(Assume 1 month period) 2. Hotlines/Helpdesks2.1 Legal Research Helpdesk 1234 1234 1234 1234Direct access to library team orPSLs2.2 Legal Advisory Hotline 1234 1234 1234 1234Direct access to associate orpartner for internal lawyers2.3 Business Hotline 1234 1234 1234 1234Direct access to associate orpartner for business colleagues 3. Know How Publications and Bulletins3.1 Vanilla Legal & Regulatory 1234 1234 1234 1234UpdatesCommentary on dates etc but noadded opinion3.2 Tailored Industry/Client 1234 1234 1234 1234Specific Bulletins3.3 Thought leadership 1234 1234 1234 1234publicationsIndustry leading commerciallyaware, “macro” view pieces3.4 Microsites/Online Tools 1234 1234 1234 1234Contextualised content, such asfor Data Protection, MiFID, etc.4. Training and Roundtableswww.blplaw.com Page 25 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN
  27. 27. Valuing Value-AddAnalysis of Joint Survey Results Scarcity of resources Economies of scale Level of expertise Time investment Value Add Activity4.1 Standard Training 1234 1234 1234 1234SeminarsOpen seminars, i.e. where clientsattend a general seminar at afirm’s offices4.2 Bespoke Training 1234 1234 1234 1234SeminarsSeminars exclusively for yourcompany. Most usually held atyour own offices at your request.4.3 Round Table Discussions 1234 1234 1234 1234Small group discussions aboutcurrent industry topic, Legal &regulatory landscape, forexample..4.4 Soft Skills Training 1234 1234 1234 1234Presentation skills, draftingskills, etc.4.5 E-learning 1234 1234 1234 1234On-line delivery of standardcourses4.6 Webinars 1234 1234 1234 1234Live, web based training5. Miscellaneous Activities 1 (nil/little investment) 2 (moderate investment) 3 (high investment) 4 (very high investment)5.1 Post Transaction Reviews 1234 1234 1234 1234Discussion about lessons learnedfollowing major transaction5.2 Reporting Invested Time 1234 1234 1234 1234Law firm sharing with you theamount of uncharged time5.3 KM/IT Consultancy 1234 1234 1234 1234Advice from the firm on how toorganise, collect, disseminateknow-howwww.blplaw.com Page 26 © Berwin Leighton PaisnerLegal.20108456.2/MWHA/ADMIN.ADMIN

×