Practice Management

Does client service mean "being nice" to all clients?

By Dan Hull

No. "Being nice" to clients is not the goal or point of client service. We didn't launch WAC? because yours truly is loved by all, and wanted to show you his Alan Alda and Mr. Rogers-esque skills. We started it because we think lawyers are mainly "lawyer-centric", haven't a clue about what good clients think about, and treat even to-die for clients like troublesome peasants. Marrying substantive skills with the Art of Client Service is way to get and keep good clients. We know what that is: it's thinking about and acting on the obvious client service aspects presented by of everything you do (but no one else thinks about), and disciplining everyone around you to do it with you. You build a service culture from which all else flows, right down to that last opinion letter or Rule 12(b)(6) motion your firm wrote. Everyone around you must buy into it--or leave.

Unsophisticated clients are legion, evil and will hold you back. Most clients are not worth it. A "good client" to my law firm and to this blog is a business, preferably a publicly-traded one, or at least large and experienced enough to be a sophisticated user of legal services. If the client does not have a General Counsel, that's usually a bad sign, and we are not as interested. GCs are of much higher quality than when I began practice in the 1980s; they are smarter, more confident, better paid. They give you interesting work, they know the value of good legal services. They know how hard good lawyers work. They have resources, and great ideas. Sticking with them for our firm has been a good rule.

Don't get the wrong idea. Any would-be client who calls your firm--even flakey ones who you don't want to even talk to--should be treated with respect and routed to someone who can help him, her or it. Don't make them think lawyers really are heartless schmucks. But, for my firm, with exceptions, (and not many) a good general rule is: no individuals, and no start-ups. Individuals (even rich ones) and start-ups are a pathetic pain the ass 95% of the time. Reason: they don't get good lawyers and/or they don't get business. They never will. They will just frustrate you. Unfortunately, they account for about 95% of all clients everywhere. I was one of these creatures two years ago to the guys who painted my house in California. I don't know anything about house painting (neither price nor quality), and therefore don't know how to evaluate it. I was admittedly ignorant, suspicious, and probably a world class jerk. I asked questions, most of them rudimentary. Your corporate law firm can shoot higher than unsophisticated "punters"--just like the house painter could get better clients than me.

Client Service is Putting Good Clients First--and never putting up with clients who don't "get it". The biggest mistake (#1) I've made practicing law as a lawyer has been taking on projects for unsophisticated clients who really need help; my heart triumphed over my head. Second biggest mistake? Not firing the client faster. A "bad" client is a miserable tortuous hell for you and yours. Bad for morale, bad for business, no fun to represent. Life, folks, is short--and with the right people, even a firm with 5 to 25 lawyers can do 90% of the type of work done by mega-firms (the quality of which seems to keep declining do as they grow by diluting their gene-pools), and do it better.

But bad clients still call. They deserve respect but they are stone nightmares. I'll refer them to you. Have fun.

*Getting yourself out of the Yellow Pages and off similar lists is a good way to cut down on "bad" clients.

Full post as published by What About Clients? on July 06, 2008 (boomark / email).