The 21st Century Law Firm


Published on

Trends In Law Practice, With Statistics On The Law Business In Illinois

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The 21st Century Law Firm

  1. 1. The 21 st Century Law Firm Presenter: William A. Price, Esq.
  2. 2. What we’ll cover today … <ul><li>Legal Employment And Establishments: Nationwide and Illinois Data </li></ul><ul><li>Ethics And Technology Forecasts </li></ul><ul><li>Law Practice Technologies: Practical And Ethical Methods? </li></ul><ul><li>Law Business Models: Practical and Ethical Growth? </li></ul><ul><li>Plan the next steps for your law practice </li></ul>
  3. 3. I. Legal Employment and Establishments Nationwide and Illinois Data
  4. 4. New York Times , January 8, 2010: “Is law school a losing game?” Since 2008, some 15,000 attorney and legal-staff jobs at large firms have vanished, according to a Northwestern Law study.
  5. 5. National Employment Projections, 2008-2018 <ul><li>Lawyers 2008 360.2k 2018 410.5k, up 13.96% </li></ul><ul><li>All professional/technical 2008 369.9k 2018 424.8k, up 14.83% </li></ul><ul><li>All wage/salaried workers, all industries: 2008 560.6k, 2018 649.4k, up 15.83% </li></ul><ul><li>Source: US Dept. of Labor </li></ul><ul><li>Note: only firms > 50 employees </li></ul>
  6. 6. Significance of NWU Study <ul><li>NWU Estimate shows 15,000 large firm jobs lost 2008-2010 </li></ul><ul><li>2008 DoL projections predicted 10,600 jobs increase during that period </li></ul>
  7. 7. Even using pre-2008 trends, law jobs were growing more slowly than other professions <ul><li>Lawyers 2008 360.2k 2018 410.5k, up 13.96% </li></ul><ul><li>Accounting, payroll, & tax services 2008 1.2k 2018 1.3k, up 14.03% </li></ul><ul><li>Architectural, engineering, & related services 2008 0.6k 2018 0.7k, up 24.02% </li></ul><ul><li>Management, scientific & technical consulting 2008 3.5k 2018 6.5k, up 85.95% </li></ul>
  8. 8. Illinois Lawyers 1998-2008 <ul><li>Establishments with employees up 3%, from 7600 to 7800 </li></ul><ul><li>Non-employer establishments up 14%, from 10,400 to 11,800 </li></ul><ul><li>Source: BLS, County Bus. Patterns, IRS </li></ul>
  9. 9. Illinois Lawyer Income, 1998-2008 <ul><li>Law firm payrolls up 82%, </li></ul><ul><li>from $2.9 million to $5.4 million </li></ul><ul><li>Nonemployer income up 39% </li></ul><ul><li>from 528,000 to 735,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Source: BLS, County Bus. Patterns, IRS </li></ul>
  10. 10. 1998-2008: IL lawyers vs total other IL professions <ul><li>Lawyer Establishments: up 3% employer, 14% solo </li></ul><ul><li>All professional, technical: up 15% employer, 19% solo </li></ul><ul><li>Source: BLS, County Bus. Patterns, IRS </li></ul>
  11. 11. 1998-2008 growth: IL law firms vs other IL professions by groups <ul><li>Lawyer Establishments up 3% employer, 14% solo </li></ul><ul><li>CPAs up 5% employer, down 4% solo </li></ul><ul><li>Architects up 10% employer, down 8% solo </li></ul><ul><li>Engineers down 2% employer, down 9% solo </li></ul><ul><li>Managementt Consulting up 90% employer, up 56% solo </li></ul><ul><li>Source: BLS, County Bus. Patterns, IRS </li></ul>
  12. 12. 1998-2008: IL law firm income growth vs other professions <ul><li>Employer payrolls up 82%, nonemployer up 39% </li></ul><ul><li>All professional, tech employer payrolls up 70%, nonemployer up 42% </li></ul><ul><li>Source: BLS, County Bus. Patterns, IRS </li></ul>
  13. 13. 1998-2008 incomes : IL law firms vs. other IL professions <ul><li>Law Firms employer payrolls up 82%, solos up 39% </li></ul><ul><li>CPAs employer payrolls up 47%, solos up 37% </li></ul><ul><li>Architects employer payrolls up 59%, solos up 8% </li></ul><ul><li>Engineers employer payrolls up 64%, solos up 28% </li></ul><ul><li>Management consultants employer payrolls up 71%, solos up 58% </li></ul><ul><li>Source: BLS, County Bus. Patterns, IRS </li></ul>
  14. 14. 1998-2008 IL Law Firm # growth <ul><li>Solos 1998 10.39K 1.8k, up 14% </li></ul><ul><li>All employers, 1998-2008: # of firms up 3% </li></ul><ul><li>1-4 employees 5.5k 1998 5.6k 2008, up 2% </li></ul><ul><li>5-9 employees 1.1k 1998 1.2 k 2008, up 5% </li></ul><ul><li>10-19 employees 532 1998 558 2008, up 5% </li></ul><ul><li>20-49 employees 277 1998 287 1998, up 3% </li></ul><ul><li>50-99 employees from 55 to 73 firms, up 25% </li></ul><ul><li>100-249 employees from 34 to 39 firms, up 13% </li></ul><ul><li>250-499 employees from 16 to 19 firms, up 16% </li></ul><ul><li>500-999 employees same at 5 firms 1998 and 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>More than 1000 employees 0 1998, 3 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>(Source: BLS, IRS) </li></ul>
  15. 15. Illinois Lawyer Hiring/Separations <ul><li>Average hiring per quarter 1999: 5.6k, 2009: 4.2k, down 26% </li></ul><ul><li>Q4 hiring 3,263 in 2008 vs. 3,223 in 2009, down 1% </li></ul><ul><li>Average separations/quarter 6.2 k in 2009, 6.6k in 2009, down 5% </li></ul><ul><li>Average lawyer employment in IL 51,561 in 1999, 55,066 in 2009, up 7% </li></ul><ul><li>Source: Local Employment Dynamics, </li></ul>
  16. 16. NWU study in an Illinois context <ul><li>Illinois lawyer employment overall, 2008: 57k vs 360.2k nationwide: 16% </li></ul><ul><li>Illinois lawyer hiring in 2009 averaged 4.2 k/Q, or 16.9k/yr, 33.8k over 2 yrs </li></ul><ul><li>15k jobs lost nationwide in the NWU study (2.4k in Illinois, @1.2k/year, if IL percentage of all national jobs applies) </li></ul><ul><li>Est. big firm loss, therefore: 7% of IL hiring total </li></ul>
  17. 17. Conclusions: IL Law Firm Patterns <ul><li>Solo law firms growing more than 4 times the rate of growth in employer firms </li></ul><ul><li>Solo income growing at about 1/2 the rate of employer firms </li></ul><ul><li>Concentration of employment by firm growing, especially in >1000 and 50-99 employee firms </li></ul>
  18. 18. IL Law Firms vs Other Professions: Conclusions <ul><li>Employer law firm payroll income up faster than other professions, solos slower </li></ul><ul><li>Employer law firm establishment #s up much slower than management consultants, much slower than other professions (combined), and slower than all other except engineering employer establishments </li></ul><ul><li>Solo law firm establishment #s up slightly slower than the average for all professions </li></ul>
  19. 19. II. Ethics And Technology Forecasts
  20. 20. Cycle of Ethics Revisions <ul><li>Code of Judicial Conduct: 1986-87 (Sample); Amended 1992-93, 2002 </li></ul><ul><li>ARDC: 1973 (Sample), 1983, 1999, 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>Code of Professional Responsibility: New Code 2010 </li></ul>
  21. 21. With new technologies, what will change? <ul><li>What judicial, ARDC, professional ethics rules must consider technology changes expected by 2015, 2020, 2040 and beyond? </li></ul><ul><li>What difference will technology changes make in law practices by 2015, 2020, 2040 and beyond? </li></ul>
  22. 22. Technology Forecasts: who/how <ul><li>Source: World Futures Society </li></ul><ul><li>Method: compiled forecasts from chief scientist, NASA Langley; Futurizon GMBH; a George Washington University professor; Professional Pilot publisher; a senior DoD researcher; staff of Forecasting International; and the founder of the Arlington Institute </li></ul>
  23. 23. Technology Forecasts, 2010-2014 <ul><li>Computers will process as fast as the human brain </li></ul><ul><li>Security, law, technology forecasts: </li></ul><ul><li>- People’s courts on Internet for minor disputes 2012 </li></ul><ul><li>- Virtual reality routinely used in courtrooms for evidence presentation 2013 </li></ul><ul><li>- ID cards replaced by biometric scanning 2014 </li></ul>
  24. 24. Possible Changes, 2010-2014: Judicial, ARDC, Ethics <ul><li>Database AI’s for increased judicial expertise/VR in evidence: “judicial notice” rules need change? </li></ul><ul><li>Internet “People’s Courts”: multijurisdictional arbitration act rules needed? ARDC/UPL definition of “law practice” to include these? </li></ul><ul><li>Biometric card prevents Skokie nonlawyer practice: can we finally get one court access card all over IL, and fly w/o intrusive scanning as officers of the court? </li></ul>
  25. 25. Law Practice Changes, 2010-2014 <ul><li>“ Big Firm” must include VR/AI creation & comment capabilities: sources for solo/small to be the bar associations/selected vendors? </li></ul>
  26. 26. Law Practice Changes, 2010-2014 <ul><li>Internet “peoples courts”: Will this mean nonlawyer judges? Nonlawyer advocates? Where is UPL then? Effects on dealing with nonlawyers, legal assistant, client control rules…? </li></ul>
  27. 27. Law Practice Changes, 2010-2014 <ul><li>Biometrics: Can these be hacked? Duplicated? Effects on respect for privacy rights rules? On discovery and lawyer communications rules? </li></ul>
  28. 28. Technology Forecasts 2015-2019 <ul><li>By 2015: 25% of TV celebrities are synthetic: Self-diagnostic, self-repairing robots Houses built by robots Self-monitoring infrastructures Robots for almost any job in homes and hospitals </li></ul><ul><li>By 2017: Some implants start to be seen as status symbols </li></ul><ul><li>By 2018: All computing technology imitates processes of human brain Reservations required for some key roads </li></ul>
  29. 29. Possible Changes 2015-2019 Judicial, ARDC, Ethics <ul><li>With human brain speed computers, VR courtroom displays, and some AI, when will we have the first computers applying for admission to the bar? To the bench? </li></ul><ul><li>Will non-implanted lawyers be able to compete? To require implants be turned off for jurors/other counsel? </li></ul><ul><li>Do your designers create conflicts of interest for the implanted lawyer? </li></ul>
  30. 30. Possible Law Practice Changes, 2015-2019 <ul><li>Will robotic/sensor input data availability allow better planning, or just mean perfect evidence of construction delay damages and medical malpractice? </li></ul><ul><li>If infrastructure agencies ignore monitoring signals, can the infrastructure’s beneficiaries sue? </li></ul><ul><li>If all roads are private, how will public interest lawyers afford to get to court? </li></ul>
  31. 31. Technology Forecasts 2020-2024 <ul><li>By 2020: Machine knowledge exceeds human knowledge; Library of Congress contents available in sugar- cube sized device; Small animals with artificial brains; Electronic life-form given basic rights </li></ul><ul><li>By 2021: Desktop computer as fast as human brain </li></ul><ul><li>By 2023: Experience-recording technology </li></ul>
  32. 32. Possible Changes 2020-2024: Judicial, ARDC, Ethics <ul><li>Artificial persons and enhanced pets full citizens? Judges and Lawyers? </li></ul><ul><li>Conflicts of interest by species, programming/data sets? </li></ul><ul><li>Any privacy left? Client confidentiality? </li></ul>
  33. 33. Law Practice Changes, 2020-2024 <ul><li>Universal data access at all times a client expectation </li></ul><ul><li>Solo/small firms at greater disadvantage vs IT-enhanced humans, canine paralegals … “neutral” eagles for day judges, owls for night court? </li></ul><ul><li>Experience recordings as evidence: replay and data sorting to be done how? DSM to disqualify? </li></ul>
  34. 34. Forecasts, 2025-2040 plus <ul><li>2025: Life extension at one year per year </li></ul><ul><li>2032: Robots are physically and mentally superior to humans </li></ul><ul><li>2035: Robots completely replace humans in workforce </li></ul><ul><li>2040: Teleportation of a human being </li></ul><ul><li>2040: Asteroid diversion technology used as weapon </li></ul>
  35. 35. Possible Changes, 2025-2040 Plus: Judicial, ARDC, Ethics <ul><li>Multiplanetary bar? </li></ul><ul><li>Alternative judicial processes: accept robotic/AI result or take species-specific court(s)/adjudicators? </li></ul><ul><li>Robot/human law partnerships? </li></ul><ul><li>Robot clients? Data communications ethics and legal/robot legal marketing? </li></ul><ul><li>Reporting of high speed process misconduct? (See recent SEC hearings on mini-crash.) </li></ul>
  36. 36. Possible Law Practice Changes, 2025-2040 Plus <ul><li>Robots may be “better”, but will they be ethical? Only if they are programmed to be. (Good luck!) </li></ul><ul><li>Teleportation eliminates VR/phone tag/other inefficient distance communications: FTF meetings are back! </li></ul><ul><li>If the asteroids fly, we’re toast. </li></ul>
  37. 37. III. Law Practice Technologies: Practical And Ethical Methods?
  38. 38. Trend I: The Real Time Enterprise <ul><li>LPM systems mean instant supervisor/firm/client(?)/court(?) access to all hours, documents, discovery, billable time per person/project, research products, comparable projects for other clients? Or at least for this one? </li></ul>
  39. 39. Ethics rules to check <ul><li>1.1 Competence </li></ul><ul><li>1.2 Scope of Representation and Authority of Client and Lawyer </li></ul><ul><li>1.6 Confidentiality of Information </li></ul><ul><li>1.9 Duties to former clients </li></ul><ul><li>5.1, 5.2, responsibilities of supervisory, subordinate lawyers </li></ul>
  40. 40. Real Time Enterprise Opportunities <ul><li>Adjust billing rates/billers based on changed projects/staffing needs (e.g. outsourced doc review vs trial attorneys costs) </li></ul><ul><li>Frequent bills improve cash flow </li></ul><ul><li>Capture LPM data to project costs/do value-based billing bids/alt. fees </li></ul>
  41. 41. “ There’s An App For That”: Document Assembly Ethics <ul><li>Check rules on initiation of representation, vs. “just” publishing forms </li></ul><ul><li>Attorney function in forms review, check scope of representation rules, facilitation of UPL rules </li></ul><ul><li>“ Document prep” services cases applied to programming houses/law firm affiliated services? </li></ul><ul><li>Publisher UPL? Il lawyer UPL to publish/prepare for other jurisdictions? </li></ul>
  42. 42. Document Assembly Opportunities <ul><li>“ Blue Flag Regulatory”: Linklaters service for bank compliance documentation </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunity: Sarbanes-Oxley Compliance? </li></ul><ul><li>Initial forms for simple divorce, incorporation/entity formation and registration, small claims, etc... </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunity: Flat Fee services, simple cases? </li></ul>
  43. 43. Technology Trend: Mobile Everything <ul><li>Ethics rules on confidentiality of communications </li></ul><ul><li>Ethics rules on fees: what additional costs can be captured, which not? </li></ul><ul><li>Multi-jurisdictional practice services provision (MacDonald’s orders example) </li></ul><ul><li>Supervision rules/responsibilities re time outside the office? </li></ul>
  44. 44. Mobile Opportunities <ul><li>Client interaction 24/7, everywhere </li></ul><ul><li>Data capture, so no phone or other time is lost for project budgets or time billing </li></ul><ul><li>Meeting setup, other convenience apps </li></ul><ul><li>Client/project site focus for location of all </li></ul><ul><li>Video and audio conferencing instead of FTF for firm, associations, clients, witnesses, outside services </li></ul><ul><li>Phone camera document/receipt scanning </li></ul>
  45. 45. Social Media <ul><li>Ethics: Communication with prospective clients rules 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 </li></ul><ul><li>Ethics: Firm names and letterheads vs screen name and avatars </li></ul><ul><li>Ethics: multidisciplinary practice and referrals rules vs “friending” and “contacts networks” ID of selected other professionals </li></ul>
  46. 46. Social Media Opportunities <ul><li>Asynchronous law reform/bar meetings </li></ul><ul><li>Communities of interest for expertise, forms, advice exchange among interested lawyers and other (?M&A? Environmental?) professionals </li></ul><ul><li>Prospective client communications through Q&A/white papers: safer, since public information? </li></ul><ul><li>Outbound expertise by Twitter, social sites, blog: define and inform your maximum possible information/ communication neighborhood? </li></ul>
  47. 47. IV. Law Business Models: Practical and Ethical Growth?
  48. 48. 2020 Legal Transformation Study <ul><li>Study Co-Sponsors </li></ul><ul><li>• Partner level </li></ul><ul><li>– Encore </li></ul><ul><li>• Premium level </li></ul><ul><li>– Altman Weil, Inc. </li></ul><ul><li>– Jomati Consultants, LLP </li></ul><ul><li>• Supporting </li></ul><ul><li>– Bridgeway </li></ul><ul><li>– DuPont Legal </li></ul><ul><li>– Deloitte Financial Advisory Services, LLP </li></ul><ul><li>– Eversheds </li></ul><ul><li>– Intellevate </li></ul><ul><li>– Meritas </li></ul><ul><li>– Solomon Page Group LLC </li></ul>
  49. 49. Study Methodology <ul><li>Interviews with multiple stakeholders, including esp. major clients </li></ul><ul><li>Identification of forces, trends, and resulting possible scenarios </li></ul>
  50. 50. Change: Slow or Fast <ul><li>Lawyers slow to change </li></ul><ul><li>Clients, communities, industries served changing fast </li></ul>
  51. 51. Game Changers: Disruptive Events <ul><li>Enron </li></ul><ul><li>Sarbanes-Oxley </li></ul><ul><li>9/11 </li></ul><ul><li>Credit Crunch/Economic Slowdown </li></ul><ul><li>Next? </li></ul>
  52. 52. Trends Identified <ul><li>1. Unbundled, outsourced and bifurcated legal services </li></ul><ul><li>2. Increased application of technology </li></ul><ul><li>3. Expanded globalization of legal practice </li></ul><ul><li>4. Heightened demand for legal work from economic and regulatory forces </li></ul><ul><li>5. Standardized legal information </li></ul><ul><li>6. Deepened interest in work/life balance issues </li></ul><ul><li>7. Increased Internet-based service delivery </li></ul>
  53. 53. Trends Identified <ul><li>8. Heightened demand for specialized experts </li></ul><ul><li>9. Enhanced role of non-lawyer business managers in law firms and legal departments </li></ul><ul><li>10. Increased authority of corporate management in legal purchasing decisions </li></ul><ul><li>11. Shifted focus to process orientation </li></ul>
  54. 54. Major Uncertainties <ul><li>1. What purchase and delivery models will develop for legal services? </li></ul><ul><li>2. What type of regulatory and compliance environment will exist? </li></ul><ul><li>3. What will the global economy look like? </li></ul><ul><li>4. To what extent will non-attorney legal service competition move upstream? </li></ul><ul><li>5. Will the legal profession become deregulated? </li></ul><ul><li>6. Will the industry face a skill shortage? </li></ul>
  55. 55. Major Uncertainties <ul><li>7. How much will third parties focus on cost? </li></ul><ul><li>8. How much of a role will privacy and data security issues play in litigation? </li></ul><ul><li>9. Which litigation model will prevail globally? </li></ul><ul><li>10. Will non-governmental organizations shape and influence regulatory regimes? </li></ul><ul><li>11. How much will smart technologies that mimic attorney tasks penetrate the legal services market? </li></ul>
  56. 56. Scenario A: Mega Mania <ul><li>Middle size law firms forced to consolidate or join very integrated networks to offer the bench strength and international coverage sought by their clients. </li></ul><ul><li>Aggregators have reduced costs by leveraging outsourcing and using local expertise to offer lower cost for volume work. </li></ul><ul><li>The complexity and intensity of various regulatory environments has increased the ability of law firms to demonstrate value, thus conserving their margins. </li></ul><ul><li>Continued high margins and potential for international development have made law an attractive profession. </li></ul><ul><li>Technology is limited to workflow, process and data management; has not delivered for critical analysis. </li></ul>
  57. 57. Scenario B – Expertopia <ul><li>Regulatory driven world </li></ul><ul><li>Clients are the center of the value chain </li></ul><ul><li>High stakes litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Expertise is at a premium </li></ul><ul><li>Numerous niche players/ breakup of large providers </li></ul>
  58. 58. Scenario C: The E-marketplace <ul><li>Major economic downturn leading to deregulation and harmonization to spur growth </li></ul><ul><li>Flurry of new providers </li></ul><ul><li>Online selection/satisfaction tools </li></ul><ul><li>Commoditization of many services </li></ul>
  59. 59. Scenario D: Techno-Law <ul><li>Customers have demanded that technology be interoperable for cost purposes. </li></ul><ul><li>Technology providers and content providers (legal publishers) have collaborated to create expert systems. </li></ul><ul><li>Senior lawyers with high expertise move to create technology companies that provide these expert systems. </li></ul><ul><li>Neural network AI systems are a reality. </li></ul><ul><li>Political harmony, the UN is working and emerging markets are being supported. </li></ul><ul><li>Peaceful relationship with China. </li></ul><ul><li>Global sourcing is the norm. </li></ul><ul><li>Technology enables aggregators to work and access any local resources. </li></ul><ul><li>Large integrators have entered the market for aggregating and managing legal services. </li></ul>
  60. 60. Another Study/Take On This Topic: Eversheads <ul><li>Company: UK based, but 400 or more US client companies </li></ul><ul><li>Focuses on clients (esp. general counsel) as center of probable practice patterns </li></ul><ul><li>130 General Counsel/80 law firm partners interviewed for their 2010 update </li></ul>
  61. 61. Major Trends Identified <ul><li>Globalization </li></ul><ul><li>Professionalization of General Counsel offices </li></ul><ul><li>Technology </li></ul><ul><li>Change in regulation of legal services </li></ul>
  62. 62. Globalization <ul><li>Major international firms merge with US mega-firms </li></ul><ul><li>Offshored provision of all routine services at minimum cost </li></ul><ul><li>Clients operate across all possible jurisdictions: major firms, specialists must do so as well </li></ul>
  63. 63. Results of GC, Tech Trends <ul><li>Clients demand alternative billing to cut costs/share risks </li></ul><ul><li>Hourly fee “almost dead.” </li></ul><ul><li>39% of law firms investing to standardize legal processes, to communicate more effectively, and cut costs of service delivery </li></ul>
  64. 64. Firm Structure Changes <ul><li>“ Lean” international firm structures </li></ul><ul><li>Partnership model less and less popular </li></ul><ul><li>Client loyalty to firms reduced </li></ul><ul><li>Mid-sized firm growth opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>“ Value resourcing” and unbundled services to least cost sub-provider, not just “value billing” through current legal service providers </li></ul>
  65. 65. Hildebrandt Baker Robbins 2010 Law Department Survey <ul><li>More than 60% of law dep’ts slash outside counsel spending: in-house up slightly (Ave. red’n 5% in US) </li></ul><ul><li>Total legal spending decrease 1% in US, 2% worldwide </li></ul><ul><li>Median legal spend/big corp $24 million US, $34 million worldwide </li></ul>
  66. 66. Hildebrandt study, continued: Increased demand fields <ul><li>Regulatory </li></ul><ul><li>Employment/Labor Relations </li></ul><ul><li>Government Relations </li></ul><ul><li>International </li></ul>
  67. 67. V. Next Steps: Your Law Firm Business Plan
  68. 68. Big Law Firms A Target Market? <ul><li>Firms may become project aggregators, not providers of all law staff/other project providers </li></ul>
  69. 69. Law Practice vs Business Data Management <ul><li>Law: one-off documents, FTF/telephone information intake </li></ul><ul><li>Insurance, government, other major data aggregators: online forms; barcoding to track files and documents, document assembly, and financials inputs on data systems; records portability and transparency across institutional walls </li></ul>
  70. 70. Financial Realities <ul><li>Insolvent customers don’t pay bills: look carefully at foreclosure clients, commercial real estate, state of Illinois, localities (?) as a/p credit risks </li></ul><ul><li>Payroll: you pay people whether or not they bring in any money </li></ul><ul><li>Real estate is expensive for a firm: client site or home offices/presence is not </li></ul>
  71. 71. Data Systems Efficiencies <ul><li>One lawyer in Boston plus her paralegal produce all forms for MacDonald’s franchisee loans: banks fill in the data </li></ul><ul><li>Prepaid Legal, Inc., has one law firm per state, with automated document production and paraprofessionals/secretaries for intake </li></ul>
  72. 72. Associations as Market Makers <ul><li>Florida Bar sections highlight members, laud them as best in their specialties </li></ul><ul><li>Kane County Bar makes all member fields of practice, websites visible on Web search – not through an additional referral service expense not transparent to web browsers </li></ul>
  73. 73. Associations as market makers <ul><li>CBA referral service: peer review on intake, higher volume/referred attorneys by subject area than ISBA or DCBA </li></ul><ul><li>Naperville Chamber organized around noncompeting referral assistance peer groups </li></ul><ul><li>Corporate counsel could network with local counsel to outsource work </li></ul>
  74. 74. General Business Plan Questions <ul><li>What can I/we do faster/better/cheaper (or more profitably) than anyone else? </li></ul><ul><li>Who around the world could use my/our services? </li></ul><ul><li>Who are my high profit client types, and how can I/we communicate with them? </li></ul><ul><li>What technologies will change how I/we need to practice or can give me/us an edge? </li></ul>
  75. 75. A classic Gahan Wilson cartoon shows Brontosaurus at podium Caption reads: “ Gentlemen, I have some bad news: The Ice Age is coming, the mammals are taking over, and we all have brains the size of walnuts.”