Many Biglaw Firms Are Horrible At Managing Workflow

Biglaw firms could probably make even more money if they more efficiently managed their workflow.

(Image via Getty)

Many prior articles on Above the Law have discussed how overworked Biglaw associates are, and how Biglaw firms typically expect their associates to bill an insane number of hours.  And it is true that in exchange for making huge sums of money, Biglaw associates usually need to work their tails off to generate revenue for their firms.  However, many Biglaw firms are not efficient in how they manage their workflow, and this could impact how efficient these shops are at making money.

As many attorneys both inside and outside of Biglaw know, work is often informally distributed at Biglaw shops.  Indeed, there is typically no centralized system for doling out work at many Biglaw firms, and since Biglaw associates do not usually have ownership over cases, they typically serve at the whims of partners who have work to hand out.  This system can lead to a variety of perverse and inefficient ends.

For one, associates looking for work typically need to ask partners for additional projects, which can sometimes be a humiliating experience.  Indeed, I remember one time, I hit a dry spell of work to complete as a Biglaw associate.  I literally had to go door to door like a beggar asking for people to give me assignments.  Since I had to meet billable-hour targets, as more time passed, I definitely got more desperate when asking for work.  I also felt that the people I asked for work were wondering why I was so slow, and considered that it might be because of poor work product.  This in turn made me hesitant to ask for more work, since I didn’t want to have the perception that no one wanted to work with me.

In addition, the process of doling out work at many Biglaw shops can increase the “brown-nose” culture of those firms.  Of course, Biglaw associates ordinarily need to “kiss the ring” quite a deal, since they owe their big paychecks and their quality of life to the partners.  However, when work is informally doled out, associates are encouraged to further ingratiate themselves to the partners so that they can be considered if there is the chance to complete work.  This can create an enormous amount of pressure at firm social events, since associates are not focusing on having a good time, but on joining conversation circles with leading partners and currying favor with the “brass.”

Informally doling out work can also create tension among associates themselves.  Since associates are competing for assignments, they might view each other with hostility rather than cordiality.  Indeed, while working at a Biglaw shop, I heard about an associate lying about another associate’s workload so the other lawyer could get the chance to work on a given assignment.  Furthermore, informally doling out work might mean that some associates are slammed with assignments and others have little to do.  This is not only inefficient, but might create tension among associates, since no one wants to be overworked when a colleague doesn’t have enough to do.

Of course, Biglaw firms can adopt systems that more efficiently handle their workflow.  Perhaps the most efficient workflow system I ever saw was when I was a summer associate in Biglaw.  For the summer program, my firm allowed partners to upload assignments for summer associates onto an online platform.  Once the project was submitted, the next available summer associate would get an email with details about the project, and they would complete the assignment.  After the project was finished, the referring attorney would get an email to complete an evaluation of the summer associate’s work, and, the summer associate would get an additional project.  This system ensured that everyone had projects to complete, and even offered the benefit of real-time evaluations.

Sponsored

At other firms at which I worked, attorneys were assigned a set number of cases (usually 25-40) and the associates were primarily responsible for these matters.  The responsible attorney handled everything regarding those cases, including depositions, motions, and discovery.  If that attorney ever needed work, they would just take out a file and complete tasks related to their cases.  Of course, this system made it difficult to pawn off assignments on other people if an attorney was overloaded with work, but this process ensured that attorneys rarely had little to do.

I understand why many Biglaw firms will never institute a more efficient workflow system.  Many Biglaw firms like informal distributions of work, since partners often have a preference for associates they like to handle certain types of projects.  In addition, part of the Biglaw system involves well-liked associates receiving tons of work and meeting expectations while underperforming associates get less work and move closer to the door.  In addition, Biglaw firms are usually loathe to give associates any real responsibilities, and would rather force-feed projects to their underlings as a way of retaining control over cases.

However, begging for work can have a huge emotional toll on associates and can create perverse incentives for attorneys.  Perhaps more importantly for partners, Biglaw firms could probably make even more money if they more efficiently managed their workflow.


Jordan Rothman is the Managing Attorney of The Rothman Law Firm, a New Jersey and New York litigation boutique. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jrothman@rothmanlawyer.com.

Sponsored