Category: EOLIS Perspective

At the annual cornerstone meeting of the International Women’s Forum in Morocco last week, corporate, civic and political leaders from thirty countries convened to assess the state of affairs in the Arab world.

Morocco sees itself as setting a valuable example, exempting itself from the Arab Spring.  With considerable pride, our Moroccan sisters praise their enlightened king who saw the need to modernize and adopt a process which led to elections and newly bifurcated power between the king and a newly elected prime minister.

That said, there remains in Morocco a continuing but slow evolution of respect for women.  An invitation from His Majesty King Mohammed VI of Morocco to visit his palace morphed into a grand and beautiful reception at one of his palaces outside the capitol.  His wife, Princess Lalla Salma, presided without the king at her side.  Her Serene Highness is the first wife of a Moroccan ruler to have a royal title conferred.

The esteemed women speakers from around the world were gracious in recognizing Morocco’s forward thinking accomplishments, while direct about all that is left to do in bringing true equality to women in Arab countries—Morocco included.

More than 25 percent of the firms’ New York partners (as of January 2012), have bolted from its ranks, many with hair-raising stories of a firm in all manner of disarray. This sad state of affairs is a bonanza for recruiters and trade journalists.

The firm’s misfortunes become opportunities, gossip is easily treated as gospel. For all of us who are in the legal community, it is worth noting that hundreds, if not thousands of lawyers and staff remain uncertain as to their work and/or economic future.

Maximizing one’s chances of landing a dream position requires plenty of skill and an undeniable element of good luck–for lawyers in any form of transition. Make that luck quotient higher if you are seeking a position as a business executive after 20 years as a partner with a blue-chip law firm.

The fourth quarter of every year is invariably rife with gossip as to the anticipated year-end fortunes for law firms and the fate of their lawyers–up and down in the food chain.

There is no other time during the year, in which the flow of information is as fast or as furious, and prone to unreliability.  It reminds of the critical role  and inherent hazards of  gossip, if unchecked.

Indeed, megabytes of data, more often than not, are surrounded by tidbits of gossip; the latter is the most dangerous common denominator in the chain of intelligence that defines negotiations and hiring decisions.

When it comes to the assessment of gossip, EOLIS  consultants live by 6 basic commandments:

1. Keep notes contemporaneously on the gossiper’s tidbits.
2. Determine the gossiper’s motivation in giving the information.
3. Maintain records on proven accuracy of the gossiper’s information.
4. Question the gossiper’s access points.
5. Probe the gossiper’s knowledge of his/her sources.
6. Inquire as much about the gossiper as the gossip provided.

In evaluating information for clients concerning the credentials, and experiences, and reputation of lawyers and law firms, the foundation is built on verifiable facts (law school, degree verification, Bar admission validation, confirmation of employment, clients, duration of the relationship and other concrete data), but ultimately it is the evaluation of opinions and the interpretation of information provided, that must be effectively integrated to produce well-reasoned decisions in hiring a lawyer or a law firm.  The treatment of gossip by all those in the process is as critical as the black and white data that can be instantly verified.

With the onset of the 2008 recession came increased vigilance by companies on their outside legal fees. However, over the past three years our studies of corporate legal fees spent indicates that less has been achieved in cost savings than generally anticipated. Indeed, a substantial number of our clients have noted, if not complained, that legal costs over the past three years have dramatically increased in litigation matters and have moderately increased in other legal disciplines.

This year, C-Suites are no longer taking this state of affairs in stride, according to our latest trend survey on the role of the corporate law department.  Instead, general counsels across the board particularly including those in midsize companies and startups are being pressed hard to step up their game as full-fledged members of the corporate policymaking team.

Equally significant are the efforts in large companies to make general counsels more accountable than ever before, as demonstrated by evolving compensation plans with new incentives based on the quality of strategic advise offered by the Chief Legal Officer and measurable cost savings provided by his/her legal department.

Today’s law schools and tomorrow’s lawyers are well advised to add to their curriculum enhanced business studies.  As lawyers in law firms can no longer rely strictly on their technical expertise, we are now turning the corner in the corporate law departments as well.  In the years to come, in-house lawyers will undoubtedly become more valuable in direct correlation in their business acumen.

Last April 15th, the US Department of Justice brought down the house of cards built by the three leading Internet-based poker companies serving United States customers. Suddenly, online poker operators were in a frenzy, bemoaning prior legal opinions that left them ill-prepared for the DOJ’s hammer that ended online poker bets in America summarily.

The indicted founders and some of their closest associates were knee-deep in legal troubles, resulting in hundreds of lawyers getting in on the action in all aspects of their businesses and personal lives.

As of the end of August, EOLIS has received reports from lawyers and law firms that indicate more than 40 million dollars in legal fees billed worldwide in connection with these matters. The numbers stand to rise exponentially, as the wheels churn ever so slowly through the system of justice.

Writing for the preeminent gaming newspaper, Wendeen Eolis said, “The ability to understand applicable laws that affect your business and the risks associated in interpreting them differently from the government can be critical to determining potential legal costs you may face.” In these cases, it is only lawyers who are winning.

Did our clients benefit from our advice in 2008 or are they sitting ducks for another cataclysmic event just around the corner? We warned in September 2008, and warned again today: plan on working on extra hour each day and allocate the time specifically to new client development, and then breathe a little easier!

In a series of phone calls to senior partners of national law firms around the country earlier this week, few lawyers feel comfortable without a handsome book of business these days. The world of law is a business, development of clients is a sales activity, and the art of holding them lies in the skills of a soft spoken advisor who can manipulate hot buttons.

Gone are the days when a service partner could feel secure, but a more recent change applies to rain makers: no longer can a rainmaker survive on making rain! Todays “the it” lawyer balances practice development with practice expertise, and treats nonbillable time as an extension of the day, not a part of it.

For law firms that learned these lessons in 2008, the cyclonic market of recent days is a little tamer for them than for the rest.

Since the waning months of 2008, when the law firm economy seemed to turn on its head, law firms have been debating how to assure prosperity in perpetuity like never before.

In May of each year, Eolis International Group surveys national law firms as to their lateral search priorities as part of a report to clients on the latest views in law firm strategic planning.

The May 2011 survey pulled us up short by showing a downward turn in the threshold of portable books of business required for consideration.  Wendeen Eolis, CEO of Eolis International Group, summed up a sentiment shared by at least 50% of the participating firms without regard to size.  She explained the turning tide, “Eight hundred pound gorillas frequently trigger peril to collegiality as often as they produce enviable prosperity.”

The majority of firm department heads in law firms (ranging from 75 to 200 lawyers) indicated they saw more value in an attorney’s commitment to a legal practice that combines new business development with in-depth legal expertise than in massive rainmaking efforts alone, or strictly service to a client.

In a round table discussion with six EOLIS clients, our moderator reported the sage words of a managing partner at one of the largest law firms in the world.  He said, “Show me a partner with a million dollars in client origination and a work ethic that produces 1,800 billed hours of high quality work, and I’ll show you a team player and a well balanced practitioner most of the time.”

Last month, The AmLaw Daily reported on a $1.5 million fee dispute between the legal recruiting company, Alan Miles & Associates and Bingham McCutchen, the law firm that acquired more than 100 lawyers from McKee Nelson, last summer.  In a final ruling dated May 17th, Miles was awarded nearly 1.9 million dollars including the full placement fee invoiced, interest and court costs.

In a written statement, reported by The AmLaw Daily, Bingham “remained as curious as ever in its interpretation of facts related to this case” says Wendeen H. Eolis, Chairman of Eolis International Group.

Ms. Eolis had more than casual knowledge about this case; she had been designated as plaintiff’s expert. The founder and former chairman of the Board  of The National Association of Legal Search Consultants,  and a certified employment consultant, Eolis summed up one of the fundamental business issues in the case; fuzziness as to whether or not the parties had a valid contract.

She cautions attorney search specialists who make contingency placements to be very meticulous in their dealings with law firms in their placement fee arrangements. “They will  save themselves one big headache by confirming the fee arrangements before the first appointment for every deal,” says this expert with with more than four decades of experience in the industry.

Ms. Eolis  also warns search firms of the pitfalls in  permitting the client to set up the fee/guarantee schedule for a recruiter’s services. She asks rhetorically “Would a law firm look to its client to draft the Firm’s engagement letter?”

In the instant matter, Miles took the long road to vindication, and was left to pay hefty legal fees, but David shamed Goliath, leaving Bingham to explain lamely, “Alan Miles & Associates demanded $5 million dollars and received $1.5 million.”  Ms. Eolis says her understanding of the facts was a bit different, noting that she had been advised by plaintiff and his counsel of the 1.5 million dollar invoice, and had been asked to consider, as part of her preparation as an expert, the reasonableness of a 1.5 million dollar fee and not a 5 million dollar fee.

She also commented that Bingham parsed information pertaining to the outcome of the case by saying that Alan Miles received $1.5 million based on the award published by retired US District Court Judge Lourdes Baird, the arbitrator in the dispute.  Miles not only received a ruling that provides for payment of its full placement fee for which they had invoiced the firm, but also for interest and court costs of another $380,000 plus.

Based on her lengthy experience and expertise in arbitrating search fee disputes she zeroed in on a key part of  Bingham’s strategy; a claim of no contract due to a stale  fee agreement that should not be applied.  After reviewing the matter, Eolis  concluded that the plaintiff’s  development of the case was more about industry practices well-known to the law firm and a common sense analysis of the facts.  Eolis quipped,  “The defendant did a great job in proving my position! The plaintiff  focused strictly  on the facts. And plaintiff counsel  integrated  defendants defense and plaintiff’s facts to win the day.  For Eolis, the case ended as a walk in the park  and no need for testimony on her expert report.

EOLIS said, “As plaintiff’s  consultant I put on the table the  customs and practices in the industry that the defendant had  attempted to circumvent or subvert in an effort to justify refusal to pay.  The winning strategy was the one two  punch of Miles and his counsel; together they exposed  Goliath’s bullying  tactics as a mere camouflage of simple facts that supported full payment of the fee plus interest and more.

According to Mr. Miles, he never considered backing away from a fight, if necessary, given his certitude that he was entitled to be paid the fee he had earned.  We agree.

The candidate, the candidate’s spouse, colleagues and recruiters generally agree that in this competitive market one needs the right elevator pitch with an appropriate underpinning — “a do everything resume”–to get ahead. But, being all things to all people is just plain impossible.

This leaves the job-searching lawyer with the unique conundrum of meeting the highest standard of integrity as required by his admission to the bar, balanced by the most creative thinking worthy of accolades by pre-eminent public relations houses.

The inclusion of four critical documents in the job search candidate’s  toolbox pave the way: (1) a factual (if boring) recitation of basic information  sought by every human resources executive on the planet, (2) a concisely presented work matter addendum that sets forth precisely, accurately, and inclusively the critical information a  decision maker wants to see, (3) a talking point memo for friends and recruiters to use in recommending you, and (4), a journal for interview preparation that reminds you of the major decisions made in your career and the reasons for them.

The “decisions” document is your personal primer for answering all of the hard questions that will come your way.