This week’s newspapers seem to have told the same story, over and over: “another day, another law firm layoff.”

With all the bad news, once in a while we get the opportunity to stop and remember to be grateful for the blessings in our lives (like having a job), and then we get to pay it forward.

Our friends over at Legal OnRamp, a Collaboration system for in-house counsel, have started a job networking site for law firm associates who have been laid off.

At Legal OnRamp, we’re concerned about the recent layoffs of associates in large firms, but also optimistic that this will give those lawyers an opportunity to adapt to the world that’s emerging. As such, even though Legal OnRamp is primarily for in-house lawyers, we are inviting associates who are being laid off to join. We are putting together a career center with a variety of resources; we have a number of job listings, and will support various networking and skills development activities. We have extended that offer directly to the firms and welcome individuals to contact us as well. Just indicate which firm you are being laid off from when you request an invitation at http://www.legalonramp.com./

Please share the word.

Thanks Paul

—

Paul Lippe, CEO

Another AmLaw 100 firm, this time #6 White & Case, has announced layoffs. 70 associates and 100 staff. An internal memo was posted by our friends at Above the Law:

As part of its planning for 2009, White & Case LLP is reviewing its global operations against current and anticipated market conditions and expected client needs. While the Firm anticipates a strong 2008, with significant revenue growth across our globally diverse network, we are exercising prudent business judgment and taking several steps in advance of what is likely to be a significantly weakened global economy in 2009.

Among these actions, the Firm is reducing its global legal and nonlegal headcount by about 3% from current levels, or notifying employees that they are at risk of redundancy. These reductions are being driven in large part by a decline in attrition rates. Those who have been asked to leave will receive a competitive severance package.

“We are living in a time of unique economic challenges, and well-managed, successful businesses, including White & Case, must assess their operations in light of current market realities,” said White & Case chairman Hugh Verrier. “We believe this is a necessary step to adjust to the global economic downturn and to ensure a strong, long-term future for the Firm.”

While layoffs are never pleasant, they are part of our economic reality today. Indicators point to the fact that we are just at the beginning, and other firms will use the cover of White & Case to similarly right-size their business operations.

When it comes to law firm layoffs, I believe that there are three classes of employees:

  • Those who are redundant and will quickly make the short list during a lay off.
  • Those who are valuable and will quickly be categorized as “safe.”
  • And then there are all the rest.

It’s your job. If you are lumped in the “rest” category, what are you doing to become valuable? What are you going to do today to ensure that you and your career are not redundant?

Not sure if this post was good timing, or just par for the course in today’s economic climate for our industry, but when I logged on, I saw the link to the White & Case layoff announcement. For anyone who is out there interviewing, please feel free to add me to your list of resources. – Heather

Last week on Twitter I casually threw out that when I was job interviewing last year one of my favorite questions to ask was: “So, how do you get your work? Through RFPs or referrals from current clients?” When one of the senior partners at the lunch replied, “What’s an RFP,” I knew I had found the right job for me.

I received several responses to that comment, and ended up composing an e-mail to a colleague who is interviewing. I’ve cleaned it up a bit and have posted it below for your enjoyment.

I would like us to continue the conversation. If you have a great question you like to ask when interviewing, share it to the comments section.

Be Prepared.
Law firm interviewing is hard. I found the two best “interview” books for me were The First 90 Days and 48 Rule of Power. Both books focused me on controlling the conversation and messaging. In my earlier career, I really appreciated Knock ‘em Dead and Talking 9 to 5: Women and Men at Work.

Do Your Due Diligence
Google the firms. Read the blogs. Quiz industry insiders who know not only the legal marketing departments at these firms, but the attorneys, firm culture and history. Don’t be afraid to ask the hard questions if you find something.

Don’t Ignore the Red Flags
I have paid the price for ignoring red flags, either because I wanted or needed the job. I now try and “read between the lines” and look for the non-verbal clues. Are they just telling me what I want to hear? Or are they sincere? I interviewed at a “family friendly” firm that wanted me to spend way too much time on the road. I also listen for inconsistencies between the partners, the staff and what I know to be true about the firm.

Are they rude? Keep me waiting? Is the staff haggard and angry? Are the offices run down and dirty? If multiple offices, is there a noticeable difference in the quality? What type of equipment, software do they have? What versions? Are they cheap? Or are they wasting money left and right?

Business Questions
I want to know “where do you get your business?” RFPs? Referrals? I like to be “confrontational” so I come right out and ask about where their partner dysfunctions are, and how they expect me to deal with those issues and who is going to back me up.

Does the compensation system encourage or discourage partner cross selling? What are they doing about unproductive partners? What are the annual billable requirements? What the actual averages? Are attorneys credited for marketing hours? Are they used?

Department Issues
I want to know about the staff turnover. What is the tenure of their past CMOs? What about the other executive/c-level professionals? If you’re not the CMO candidate, then I’d want to know about the department turnover (ask the HR officer or a partner this question). This could be reflective of the CMOs management style.

I want to know where they expect me to focus my energies. Are they expecting me to do too much with too small a staff? Does the staff work too much overtime? If so, is it due to poor management, or the inability to say no to partner requests?

Manage Expectations
What’s on the table that hasn’t gotten done? I want to manage their expectations of what can realistically get done, and how much time and money it will take. What are their key initiatives, especially in this economy? Are they online to meet PPEP this year? Has their budget increased or decreased in the past three years? I’m looking for if the budget is going down while the revenue and PPEP are going up.

Can I clean house with vendors? Staff?

How do they measure success? Based on what I have learned in the interview, I would explain how I would measure my success. In general: Did I accomplish what I said I would accomplish? In the time frame I said I would do it? And did I manage my budget?

Speaking of budgets, how much of the budget is eaten up with vanity projects? Tables of ten that no one attends? Tickets? Who makes these decisions?

I am not the sales person, the lawyer is. I can prep them for the sale, but they have to close the deal. Do they agree, or are they expecting me to go out and find the business? I know many CMOs who do this, but I don’t.

Are they over the top with Chambers and other directories? What about the league tables? Who is managing that process? I don’t do Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers or any Who’s Who.

I want to know where the former person screwed up, or what they loved about him or her. Am I going to be able to fill their shoes?

Who do I report to? I don’t report to administration. I get a window office, on a floor with the good lawyers. Will they support my “continuing education”? Attendance or participation in LMA?

Final Thoughts
Be Honest. After my last AmLaw 100 firm I decided I wasn’t going back there. As I was taking my time looking for the right fit, I found myself extremely honest, and expressed my opinions freely, in my interviews. Some firms appreciated it. Some firms didn’t.

Make a List. I made a list of what I wanted, didn’t want, and what I could compromise on in a job. I then lived by it. I wanted to work at a boutique. I didn’t want marketing to be an afterthought or a necessary evil for the firm. While I don’t mind traveling, I didn’t want to travel “regularly” as part of my job. I could care less about downtown v. Century City.

I have to be honest and say that this was the hardest part of job hunting. There were times I found myself going down an interview path and had to stop the process. I enjoyed the firm, but they weren’t really what I was looking for, according to my list.

I’m sure I could make more money working for an AmLaw 100 or 200 firm, but I really love where I’m at. I find that I add value to my firm, and that I serve as a trusted advisor. I might not have the biggest budget, and we’re not splashy with technology, but I find my rewards every day.

In one of his most quoted moments of his career, Steve Martin, in The Jerk, shouted out in glee:

The new phone book’s here! The new phone book’s here! This is the kind of spontaneous publicity I need! My name in print! That really makes somebody! Things are going to start happening to me now.

So too will many law firms tout their standings in the National Law Journal 250.

But, what do these type of rankings actually mean? Are these types of rankings really worthy of all the print they get? What can you read between the lines?

Come on up NLJ 245, 246, 247, 248 and 249.

First of all, the NLJ 250 is based on headcount. Your rankings go up or down based on new hires, mergers, law firm layoffs and dissolutions. Heller and Thelen gave up their spots this year, making way for number 251 and 252 to move up. Mergers between another six NLJ ranked firms made room for the rest.

And while the 2008 NLJ 250 concludes that their results “indicate that law firms continued to add attorneys to meet clients’ needs, which increasingly are fanning out domestically and abroad,” I will continue to disagree. Headcounts does not necessarily translate into better client service.

For me, I like to read further down into these articles. That’s where the good stuff is. The stuff that no one likes to tout on their websites.

Partner promotions are down: While the overall number of partners remains consistent (approximately 40% of the NLJ 250), the percentage of NEW partners continues to decrease by percentage: 3.5% in 2007 vs. 4.6 in 2006 and 5.1 in 2005.

Non-equity partners continue to rise: A 9.4% increase compared to 2007 vs. 8.2% increase over 2006.

Mega-mergers are out: Only three marriages of NLJ 250s occurred in the past year. And, only one of them, K&L Gates broke the top 10.

Downward trends continue: Of the 10 “Firms That Shrank The Most,” 20% are already gone. Thelen is in the process of dissolving, while Powell Goldstein has been acquired. While the remaining eight firms performance is questionable, with a shrinking headcount ranging from 4% – 22% — for this year alone — the question becomes what can they do to stem the leakage?

There is no easy answer to that question, but it is one that we will pondered here in the coming days.

In the meantime what are some of the conclusions that can be taken away from the 2008 NLJ 250? Here’s what I see:
  • While the ability to engage your clients as a trusted advisor is expected in a boom economy, it must be paramount in a bust economy.

  • Mega-mergers do not = better client service. Mergers need to be deliberate and designed to meet CLIENT needs, not simply to boost headcount, firm revenue or partner profits. It is true that some mergers are necessary to increase attractiveness for laterals and new hires; however, this that should not be the PRIMARY motivating factor.

  • Successful law firms must continue to manage their firms like businesses. This does includes making difficult decisions, such as not raising hourly rates in 2009; lower PPEP expectations; and, unfortunately, layoffs and dissolutions.

  • Just as law firm partners profited immensely during the boom times, the same partners MUST be prepared to absorb their fair share during the bust times.

And, most importantly:

The Obama’s haven’t even had their official tour of their new home and the bad news just keeps pouring in. Jobs lost in 2008: 1.2 million. Survival Problems: General Motors (GM) and Ford Motor (F). Stocks fall sharply for 2nd day, with Dow down 443 points.

And, for us Californians, it just gets worse. Schwarzenegger calls for sales tax hike.

While the details have yet to be ironed out, a special sessions has just been called to address the state’s revenue/spending problem. A
adding a sales tax to services is on the table. The tax rate in California will then stand at 8.75%.

Broadening the Sales and Use Tax to Include Certain Services: Effective February 1, 2009, the sales and use tax rate will be applied to appliance and furniture repair, vehicle repair, golf, and veterinarian services. Effective March 1, 2009, the sales and use tax rate will be applied to amusement parks and sporting events. This is expected to generate additional General Fund sales tax revenue of $357 million in 2008-09.

In the recent past (June 2008), expanding the service tax to include legal fess has been on the table. There’s no telling right now what stand the legislature will take on taxing legal service fees.

If the proposed tax increase does goes into effect, the tax rate in Los Angeles will increase to 10.25% and San Francisco at 10%.

What client would voluntarily send work to a California law firm if they will have an additional 10% tacked onto their bills? It is more likely that the California firms will have to automatically discount their bills by 10% just to remain competitive for the work. This is on top of the discounts they are already providing to their top clients. So law firms, which are already suffering the strains of the economy, from the dissolutions of Thelen and Heller, to more law firm layoffs, will now be faced with an automatic reduction in their revenue by 10%.

To steal a line from Ross Perot, that”giant sucking sound” you’ll hear will be all the lawyers leaving California.

Like most Americans, I woke up this morning and put on my post-election quarterbacking hat. I have my opinions on what Obama did right, what he needs to do to be successful in his first 90 days, and what he must do to get reelected in 2012. Same thing goes for the Republicans, from John McCain and Sarah Palin, down to the grassroots of the GOP. I also have opinions on the California Propositions, from 2 to 4 to 8 to 11 – and I haven’t even read an exit poll.

And it turns out that all of my friends, colleagues, the residents of Twitterville, along with my husband, have their opinions as well.

But I realized something about myself in a conversation with Jayne Navarre this morning. I am a marketing generalist at work, and I am deconstructing the election from a generalist vantage point, looking at the election from a 360 degree view. As I do not have a specific niche that I am better at than others, I am not constrained by my favoring that discipline.

Some might see this lack of a specialty as a disadvantage, but I actually view it as an asset, and something that differentiates me from some of my peers.

Since I do not favor public relations over business development, I am able to weigh each equally. I find that I am more readily able to shift my focus from one to the other. I am quicker to grasp a new discipline, such as social media, realizing that letting go of traditional advertising might be the right thing to do.

As we prepare to enter uncertain times, I believe that my ability to remain flexible will be in high demand.

As a marketer, I am only one part of the law firm which houses others, from the partners and attorneys, to the administration and staff; from the finance and IT departments, to the library and office services, and so on. I believe that the ability to remain flexible within our personal departments will serve us well so that we can be responsive to the business needs of our respective firms, and the needs of our individual clients.

With a sigh of relief I voted today. FINALLY, what felt like the longest election cycle will be over in a few hours.

In what is being described as the costliest election in US history, at over $2.4 billion spent on the presidential race alone, only one thing is certain: 50% of the American electorate will either be depressed tomorrow morning, or hung over from partying all night long.

I believe that we all have the opportunity today to rise above party politics and show some grace and dignity whether our candidate wins or looses.

Whatever our opinions are about the elections, the candidates or the issues, I always like to point out that no one is sneaking over the border to get OUT of America. For all of our faults, we’re still doing something right. Our new president will be PEACEFULLY inaugurated on January 20, 2009.

So it’s time to get back to work. Grab a cup of coffee (Starbucks is giving it away for free, whether you voted or not) and enjoy some morning news & gossip that are worth the links.

Found via my Twitter community:

And to put it all into perspective:


Do you remember the 1988 fantasy-comedy film “Big” about a boy who makes a wish “to be big”? After being humiliated while trying to impress an older teenage girl at a carnival, Josh Baskin goes to a wish/fortune-telling machine (called Zoltar Speaks) and wishes that he were “big.” The next morning, he sees a face in the mirror he does not recognize. Overnight, he has become a 30-year-old man.

I can’t help thinking about the past string of law firms who made a wish “to be big” and overnight they were aged into – well I’m not quite sure yet? I know there are good reasons to be big, but what do you give up in order to be big? Let’s look at a story about banks.

I banked with a modest, no-nonsense, reliable, and trustworthy community bank for many years. It was never too much trouble for them to pick up the phone to speak with me about my accounts. But when I moved to a new city it was just too impractical to keep my money there. I hesitated to move my money to bank with a national presence because they always felt “too big” for me. But, Wachovia was #1 in customer satisfaction and that appealed to me. I’ve come to realize the standards for large banks are set so low that being #1 is pretty meaningless. So far my customer experience includes– the death spin of automated phone trees, surly tellers, unresponsive technical assistance, bogus fees, branches that can’t open accounts, lost paper work, and that’s just a few. Who is Wachovia and what did they do to #1?

Wachovia was an old regional bank that traced its roots to 1879. It was a successful local bank for almost 100 years. They purchased Atlanta National Bank in 1986 to modestly expand into a multi-state bank. Fifteen years later they went to Zoltar and made “the wish.”

In 2001 they merged with First Union/CoreStates. (According to some, it was actually an acquisition but they kept the Wachovia identity in order to get a fresh start following the botched up merger with CoreStates). And in 6 short years they “got big” acquiring Prudential Securities, Metropolitan West Securities, SouthTrust, Westcorp, Golden West Financial and A.G. Edwards. In 2008, Wachovia, looked in the mirror and saw things-not going so well. Yet in denial, had a deal to sell it’s banking operations to Citigroup, then they switched to a different deal with Wells Fargo and now things look like they’re headed for litigation. Be careful what you wish for, eh? Oh, and what about the Customers? Quite a distraction, I’m sure. My small business banker couldn’t take my call because he was too busy signing up new people for the special CD offers last month.

It seems they have become “so big” they can afford to not-care about customers; one or two at a time, perhaps. What happens when that snowballs into hundreds and thousands of customers who are not so happy? Furthermore, they abuse customers in increments of $6 for this and that, and will gladly put overdraft services on your account direct to a Wachovia credit card with cash interest rates. Pretty short sighted, in my mind. I think they got so big, so fast they spend more time trying to grow than looking after their customers, the ones who gave them a chance to grow. I’ve talked to a few employees who say they try to put things right, implement rules that work well, but combined with existing rules (and future rules) you get a big mess. The industry needs ….an extreme makeover. Sound familiar?

Do we really need to ask ourselves why big law firms dissolving? Is it really the economy? Who is the economy? Who’s minding the clients when the partners are focused on the next acquisition to leverage their profits; the over-paid, not-ready-for-prime-time associates? Have they grown so big in order to impress that they sacrificed the basic things that make a childhood so wonderful? What are they seeing in the mirror? Can Zoltar grant the extreme makeover that is needed? If only Zoltar were real.

My kids keep asking what I’m going to be for Halloween. After reading today’s Above the Law round up, I’m thinking “depressed legal marketer.”

But, once again, the Pollyanna in me is coming out. I’m listening to an NPR program, Out of Practice – Law Firms and the Financial Crisis, and realizing that we’re at what could be a historic turning point for law firm management.

The program confirmed to me what I’ve been hearing from my consultant friends: Those running the law firms – administrative partners, managing partners, executive board members – are taking a good hard look at their business models, and are open to change.

Law firms today, for the most part, are managed the same way they have for the past hundred years. Partners annually underwrite law firm operations from the real estate leases, to the books on the shelves, and everything in between. At the end of the year, the partners cash out the profits, and begin the year on a credit line. If the bank cancels your credit line, as they did with Thelen, the firm has no choice but to shut its doors, immediately. Profits from one year will not be used to carry the firm through the next.

But does it have to be so bleak? I find that it really comes down to attitude and choices. We can go with the doom and gloom driven by so many of the consultancies, or look forward to 2009 as an opportunity for growth and change.

  • Now might be the time to review your partnership agreements.
  • Now might be the time to upgrade to or hire a CEO.
  • Now might be the time to initiate, and follow, a strategic plan.
  • Now might be the time to explore growth opportunities.

Rather than look back and get depressed, I choose to look forward and be inspired.