1. THE DAVIS REPORT
1. CCHA has an embedded organizational optimism concerning new or prospective employees that
leads to inadequate planning. “Things will be fine once “X” (Chris, Craig, Janet, etc) gets here.
That problem will be taken care of.” It’s rare to find an organization that so believes that
employees will meet or exceed expectations.
2. Partners own a $4 million business with an inadequate accounting system, and all that goes with it.
3. Leadership (executive committee) is conflict-avoidant. Consensus is often not enough for this
leadership model; few decisions are authorized unless unanimous. Ponderous while
consensus/unanimity is being sought; leads to indecision.
4. No clear, collective vision on the direction and size sought for the Firm. How full-service a law
firm should CCHA be? To what degree is profitability a driver for this consideration?
5. There is virtually no command and control and unity of procedures. This yields a Firm
unresponsive to organizational goals. Partner compensation not linked to individual partner
performance. Variable compensation of associates not linked to performance.
6. Partner track is much faster than peer group.
7. The firm doesn’t make enough money, and chargeability expectations are inadequate, compared to
peer group.
8. No “post - Marty” plan for partner retirements and departures.
9. Vast differences in mentoring and staff development depending on which practice areas/clients an
associate gets assigned to.
10. Vulnerabilities exist to partner death / departure, or flagship client loss. How to monetize
partner’s equity in the event of a changed business model. Where does the firm end up: merger or
independence?