Is the Legal Marketplace at a Tipping Point?

Is the Legal Marketplace at a Tipping Point?

GCs know that if they want to elevate their standing within the organisation and become trusted strategic advisors to the business, they need to play by the same rules as the rest of the C-Suite (or do they ???).?

That means an end to murky billable hour arrangements and legal procurement sitting in a black box.?

Against that backdrop, in-house teams are under increasing pressure to “do more with less” (42% of CLOs say they’ve received a cost-cutting mandate in the past year), while at the same time under the barrage of undeterred firm rate increases.

Something’s got to give.?

But even as I hit "publish," there are undoubtedly countless firm leaders and corporate lawyers shrugging their shoulders thinking:?

“Yup, just more of the hype cycle on why the billable hour system is broken. It hasn’t changed yet and it won’t change anytime soon.”

Here’s why I think they’re wrong and why we’re moving closer to a true tipping point for a market shift.

1. We’ve underestimated firms’ influence in the marketplace for legal services

Corporate legal teams wield the vast majority of purchasing power in the marketplace for legal services. So I’ve said it before many times, the power to change the marketplace for legal services rests with these in-house teams.

I don’t think I’m altogether wrong here. But now I wonder if we’ve been underestimating firms’ power in effecting this change???

After all, they are the ones who have managed to hoodwink corporate legal teams into double-digit rate increases year over year for over a decade (and I readily admit I used to be one of them).?

They also continue to find countless creative ways to game billing guidelines to protect their margins at all costs (shocker that top firms are again reporting double-digit revenue growth despite lagging demand and hours worked, as well as associate layoffs).??

And if what firms think about AFAs and value-based pricing schemes (or at least corporate teams’ perceptions of what they think) weren’t driving at least some of corporates’ decision-making on outside counsel management, our PERSUIT? team would happily cross this common objection to using our platform off the list:

We’re worried it will ruin our firm relationships.”

?2. Transparency and predictability in legal sourcing are critically important to firms if they want to stay profitable?

The truth is that even before AI prompted predictions of widespread associate layoffs, firms have long realized there is tremendous profitability in a business model that rewards value provided rather than time spent on a matter.

While most firms are still heavy in the R&D and piloting process with AI, in another 12-24 months AI will begin to hugely impact the efficiencies in how firms deliver their services and vastly increase the margins of profitability for those who can crack that code (pun intended ??).??

If you’re using your resources more effectively to do something in 20 hours that would take most other firms (or your own firm two years ago) 100, well you’ve just won.

But that requires in-house teams to take firms at their word and look to them to deliver outcomes, rather than continuing to micro-manage the relationship with overly burdensome billing guidelines and shadow billing arrangements.

Should firms be allowed to bill for work done by AI?

Absolutely!?

But no client is going to be OK being billed hourly for work done by a robot ??? — just like they aren’t OK being billed at partner rates for work that’s really being done by junior associates.

That means that for firms to reap the benefit of these new AI-enabled efficiencies, they have to move beyond the billable hour and embrace AFAs and value-based pricing.?

In short, firms’ profitability in the near future largely hinges on the market’s acceptance of AFAs and value-based pricing as the status quo, rather than the “alternative” when it comes to sourcing outside counsel.

But what do you think??

Are we really at a tipping point for how the business of legal is done??

Or will the marketplace for legal services walk away from this current hype cycle unscathed?

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Hit reply and tell me.?


I'm Jim Delkousis. Founder & CEO of PERSUIT | Recovered BigLaw Partner | Helping Transform How Enterprise Buys Legal

Follow me here on LinkedIn or subscribe to The PERSUIT newsletter here.

Jan Klouda

Board Member | CE Legal & Corporate Security Director

8 个月

Both supply and demand side in the market with legal services contribute to the problems you discribe. In my view, the three most significant are (i) extreme competitiveness on the supply side, (ii) believing in the brand value of big law firms, (iii) internal procurement guidelines on the demand side of the market. Honestly, I always prefer individual attorneys to brand of firms they work for. If that attorney moves, I follow them most of the time. Brand of a law firm does not equal quality or added value. There are othe factors contributing to ill effects on the market with legal services. A space limited comment field is just not the right place ??

回复
Rüdiger Albert

Head of Sales JUVE Veranstaltungen, JUVE Abonnements

9 个月

At least a tipping point without consequences for the climate.... The discussions about billable hours/fixed rates etc started (even) in Germany years ago. The legal hour here is not that pricy as in the US, but the wind of change is blowing. PERSUIT? will present its solution for value-based pricing on the legal operations conference in Cologne, starting tommorow www.legal-ops.de . Thanks for taking part in our confernce and let's see, if you guys will even start a storm of change.

Conni Gibson

Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary at Interac Corp.

9 个月

Very interesting thoughts. Many of which echo my own. The real levers of change are indeed fixed fee value based pricing demanded by clients and insourcing, especially with the advent of gen AI.

Derek Persuit

FAA Aircraft Dispatcher at American Airlines

9 个月

Would love that shirt

回复
Jeremiah Kincannon, PMP

Operational Strategy | Consulting | Program Development & Management | Financial Acumen | Project Management | Senior Manager | CLOC Talk Podcast Host | Trails & Blazers Podcast Host

9 个月

Thanks for sparking the discussion, Jim. I think there is a shift that's happening in the industry and I agree 100% with you that AFAs and value-based pricing are the future. The one thing I think we all need to be extra thoughtful about, is assuming that the advent of AI will reduce costs drastically over the next 12-24 months. Although there is a possibility of that, we're also only at the beginning of the AI revolution and price points for AI products aren't cheap, nor are their implementation. I think it's wise to consider the price tags associated with these new AI products and features, with some of them commanding million dollar price tags for firms per annum and how those additional firm costs will need to be considered in AFAs going forward as well; and that they'll continue to increase over time. I think we need to be very thoughtful about the situation for business in general, but ultimately, I think there will be some level of efficiency realized. I just think the benefits and realization might be a little further than 12-24 months out, in my humble opinion. I think the key is to remain agile with our business strategies and take it one step at a time. ?? Anyone else have other thoughts?

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Jim Delkousis的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了