Beyond Biglaw: 3 Insights About Boutique-Firm Practice
Aided by technology, smaller firms can compete for the most sophisticated legal work.
For the second year in a row, I have had the good fortune to participate in Above the Law’s Academy for Private Practice (APP), which was held this year in Philadelphia. Even though these appearances have generally coincided with quite busy work periods, I have found the experience worthwhile both times, due to the top-notch quality of the presentations. While the event is geared to solo and boutique firm lawyers (and vendors looking to service that market), I actually think that Biglaw firms looking for some true competitive intelligence should consider sending representatives as well. Based on what was discussed and displayed at APP, there is no doubt that Biglaw firms have a big bullseye on their collective backs from small-firm lawyers with the capability to service Biglaw’s clients without a drop in legal quality. The conference further made clear that there is a veritable army of technology providers and other vendors ready and able to outfit intrepid Biglaw-slayers with the tools they need to succeed at that mission.
In fact, the panel I was on focused on how smaller firms can compete with Biglaw firms for sophisticated and lucrative work. The panelists included myself, Carolyn Elefant (representing the solo practitioner and ultra-niche legal practice world), and Andrew Dick, a former Biglaw corporate attorney turned legal practice disrupter and small-firm network creator. In short, three practicing lawyers of very different backgrounds and legal areas of focus. A recipe for interesting conversation, especially since we were in the able hands of Bob Ambrogi, who moderated with aplomb and kept the panel humming along.
While you can see some of our comments from the panel on Twitter, or listen to our post-panel podcast on the Legal Talk Network, now that this year’s experience is over, I wanted to share a few insights from our panel that I think warrant additional thought and consideration over time.
Luxury, Lies, And A $10 Million Embezzlement
First, I found it very interesting that even though we were three lawyers with very different practices, we have all been involved, since launching our own firms, in developing “side businesses” to support our practices. On our panel, we discussed how Andrew and Carolyn have built platforms for building referral networks in their areas of law and beyond, and how I have been involved with my partners in creating tools like Litigation Alpha to help support our consulting efforts on behalf of investors interested in the outcome of certain litigation events. The common thread between these efforts is that all of us recognized in the course of our legal practices that certain things could be improved. So each of us went out and did something about it.
At the same time, and judging by some comments from the audience at our panel, there is still a sense that lawyers need to focus only on their practices, and leave the innovation to others. While that may be true for some, it is also true that it is easier than ever today for lawyers who identify a product or service that can fill a gap in the market to just go ahead and find a way to build it. Doing so is a no-brainer, especially if that new product or would be of interest to clients or help support a lawyer’s own practice. Perhaps we are entering an age where lawyers, at firms of all sizes, decide that innovation can come from all corners, including from oneself.
The second insight that I believe worthy of additional consideration has to do with one of Biglaw’s favorite aspirations — cross-selling. What both my co-panelists have recognized, and have built platforms to improve, is the importance of cross-selling for any lawyer, irrespective of the size of their firm. As a former Biglaw partner, I personally know how difficult it can be to get lawyers within the same firm to cross-sell each other’s services — and it can be even more difficult when trying to do so outside of one’s own firm.
But as we see from the rise of virtual law firms, or looser referral networks among smaller firms and solos, Biglaw is not alone in its pursuit of cross-selling as a way to generate additional revenue. One big advantage that Biglaw has when cross-selling is that the client has already bought into the firm brand, and trusts the firm with at least some of that legal work. Smaller firms, especially if they are trying to convince their clients to work with a trusted outside firm within a referral network, have to bridge that trust gap somehow. There is plenty more to consider on this issue, but our APP panel made it clear that there are smart lawyers looking to bring cross-selling to smaller firms, and once again try and co-opt Biglaw at its own game.
Sponsored
Ranking The Law Firms Lawyers Love
Luxury, Lies, And A $10 Million Embezzlement
AI Presents Both Opportunities And Risks For Lawyers. Are You Prepared?
Ranking The Law Firms Lawyers Love
Third, the panel discussion focused on Biglaw as the target, in terms of poaching work, but maybe we all need to think more on how to convince in-house teams to farm out work in the first place. One of the less-discussed developments in the legal industry is the increasing tendency of corporations with robust in-house legal teams to keep more work in-house. The assumption is that most if not all of that work would have gone to Biglaw firms. The open question is whether smaller firms, particularly those with a compelling value proposition, can identify opportunities to peel some of that work away from corporations. Sure, they will be competing with Biglaw firms for that work, but maybe the fact that the corporations have already pulled the work from Biglaw means that they would be more likely to consider smaller firms if they later decide to hand off that work to outside counsel again. We will see how this develops over the next few years.
Ultimately, the APP conference highlighted what we already know about the legal market for smaller firms — that it is at once both challenging and dynamic. Aided by technology, it is an exciting time for smaller firms looking to compete for the most sophisticated legal work. At the same time, displacing the incumbents, or trying to identify new marketing opportunities, is as challenging as ever. While the best path forward may be subject to debate, I for one am glad to participate in the conversation.
Please feel free to send comments or questions to me at [email protected] or via Twitter: @gkroub. Any topic suggestions or thoughts are most welcome.
Earlier: 5 Tips For Running Your In-House Legal Department Like A Business
Sponsored
Law Firm Business Development Is More Than Relationship Building
Curbing Client And Talent Loss With Productivity Tech
Gaston Kroub lives in Brooklyn and is a founding partner of Kroub, Silbersher & Kolmykov PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique. The firm’s practice focuses on intellectual property litigation and related counseling, with a strong focus on patent matters. You can reach him at [email protected] or follow him on Twitter: @gkroub.
