Law firms and in-house counsel are light years apart on the role of the billable hour, but the two groups still find some encouraging common ground on pricing models.
A new survey by iManage and Above the Law asked law firms and corporate law departments which arrangements would better drive alignment between the two groups.
Protégé™ In CourtLink® Explains The Whole Case Faster
Designed to reduce manual docket work by prioritizing what litigators need most: on-demand full docket summarization that explains the whole case to date, followed by on-demand document summaries for filing triage, and AI-powered natural language searching for faster search and retrieval.
Private practice lawyers were more than five times as likely as their in-house counterparts to choose hourly billing, while in-house counsel were more than twice as likely to choose value-based or outcome-driven pricing.
Other models, however, had the two groups more aligned.
“Perhaps negotiating a blended model that combines alternative fee arrangements and hourly rates is where the two groups can ultimately come together,” the report says.
LexisNexis Practical Guidance Rolls Out Dedicated Practice Area for AI & Technology
The new generation of AI-related legal issues are inherently cross-disciplinary, implicating corporate law, intellectual property, data privacy, employment, corporate governance and regulatory compliance.
GCs And Law Firm Attorneys: Perfect Together? [On-Demand Webinar]
Good Counsel: Law Firm And In-House Partners Define Their Future Strategy [iManage]
Jeremy Barker is the director of content marketing for Breaking Media. Feel free to email him with questions or comments and to connect on LinkedIn.