‘Don’t invite me golfing’: Tips from in-house counsel

Listen to this article

By Jeff Coburn
Dolan Media Newswires

What’s the best way for outside lawyers to solicit work from in-house counsel?

The answers might surprise you.

At a recent panel discussion with five in-house counsel in the Boston area, feedback ranged from “don’t invite me golfing” to “provide us with something meaty, like a webinar or training.”

Panelists included Alan Glass, vice president and general counsel, Circor International; Jamie Katz, general counsel, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center; Robert Ruxin, general counsel, Kazmaier Associates; Margaret Shurkur, general counsel, Lionbridge Technologies; and Lisa Sinclair, deputy general counsel, Northeastern University.

Their suggestions included:

• “Outside firms seeking my business need to connect with me and with my style.”
• “Business prospecting with our company often takes time, and patience can pay off. Recently I just started using two new law firms three years after they began courting us.”
• “You need to convince me that you can offer practical, businesslike, real-world advice — and not just knowledge of the law.”
• “Referrals are important. Who else have you worked with? Will they recommend you?”
• “Provide us with something meaty, like a webinar or training or briefing session on a substantive topic. Don’t give me just marketing teasers.”
• “Don’t invite me to golfing or other entertainment outings.”
• “We look primarily for depth of knowledge and experience.”
• “Get to be known for something, like sports law or franchising. Build a reputation for knowledge in a certain specialty areas.”

The panel was also asked what factors in-house counsel seek most in a prospective outside firm. Comments included:

• “I need to make sure the prospective attorneys and I are on the same page.”
• “You need to understand my company and my business.”
• “You need to bring relevant and credible industry experience.”
• “I need to trust that you understand my view of the cost-benefit relationship.”
• “I look for the likelihood that outside and in-house counsel will work smoothly together.”

The attorneys then enumerated the most common challenges they experience in working with outside law firms:

• “Failure to listen.”
• “Inability to reflect our company’s goals and intentions.”
• “Lack of understanding of the life and work of in-house counsel.”
• “Having to go through gatekeepers to get to the principal attorney.”
• “A practice approach that tends to stifle our business plans vs. helping us move forward.”
• “Endless, aimless marketing.”
• “Unsolicited emails.”
• “Attorneys doing work that we didn’t ask for or don’t need.”
• “Being billed for late-night cabs and dinner.”
• “Poorly written work.”
• “Equivocal advice.”

When it comes to soliciting feedback from their clients, all five panelists stressed the importance and value of feedback, both by the law firm soliciting it and by in-house counsel volunteering it.

Most felt the best way to obtain feedback was open and honest communication on a regular, ongoing basis. “Just pick up the phone every so often and talk about it,” counseled one panelist. Another observed: “If the only way a law firm obtains meaningful feedback is by sending out a formal survey, then there’s probably something wrong with the relationship.”

The panelists offered the following comments regarding their use of alternative billing arrangements:

• “We have tried various alternative pricing approaches but we usually go back to the billable hour.”
• “To me, the term ‘blended rate’ means having to deal with lawyers we don’t want to work with.”
• “Have discussions and reach agreement beforehand about billing-related issues. How many meetings? How many depositions? Reports in bullet-point or prose format? How much use of associates and paralegals? Divide the case into discrete phases?”
• “Don’t surprise me. If I get a $10,000 bill for the preparation of a memo without advance warning, I’m going to pick up the phone.”
• “We use a fixed price retainer in ‘use it or lose it’ arrangements, like preventive counseling and training for employment groups.”
• “The key is making realistic budgets and sticking to them. We have to work with budgets — why shouldn’t they?”
• “We sometimes place a cap on fees with an upside for successful results.”
• “Alternative billing arrangements are not high on my agenda.”
• “The type of billing arrangement you use is a function of the degree of trust that exists in the relationship.”
• “If ‘alternative’ means ‘discount’, then I’m all in favor!”

Lastly, the panelists were asked to what extent in-house legal departments use boutique as opposed to full-service firms, and do they have a list of “preferred” outside firms? None of the panelists had a formalized list of preferred firms, and most admitted to not knowing how many outside law firms they use or have on call.

Most of the panelists seem to be trying to reduce rather than expand the number of outside firms they use. Some said they use certain firms for certain kinds of work or in certain specialty areas. Conflicts often require a company to turn to outside firms other than the one they usually use. One panelist admitted to always being “on the lookout for good new law firms.” Added another: “Occasionally we ask three or four outside firms to compete for a piece of work.”

As to the use of boutique firms, panelists agreed that while most of their outside firms are full-service, they do use a growing number of specialty firms for certain types of work, such as IP, employment, high-level SEC work and commercial litigation.

Jeff Coburn is the managing director of Coburn Consulting in Boston.