This article describes how a mid-size law firm applied the results of a client survey to:

(1) Improve performance and productivity; (2) Enhance its competitive position by increasing client satisfaction; (3) Heighten the firm's ability to retain existing clients and attract potential clients; and (4) Increase revenue and net profit.

     John, Mary and James founded their AV-rated 54 attorney law firm 26 years ago. From its founding, the firm had a business and insurance defense litigation practice. To satisfy client needs, the partners broadened this focus to include real estate, general corporate, and tax work.

     Over the last few years the firm's client base has remained relatively stable. However, the volume of new corporate, litigation, and real estate matters has declined. As a result of these trends, the firm's marketing committee surveyed executives of a representative number of clients to determine their satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) with the attorneys and staff who served them.

Client Survey

     The committee was especially interested in obtaining their clients' perceptions about the quality and timeliness of services provided, the value received for fees paid, the professional and personal manner of individual members of the firm with whom executives had contact, the extent to which members of the firm communicated with clients about the progress of their matters, whether the firm's attorneys have a comprehensive understanding of the clinet needs and objectives, and if the client would recommend the firm or specific attorneys to others when asked. The clients surveyed were identified by the amount of revenue received by area of practice, their potential to grow significantly, changes in their current or future operations as the result of expansion, and by reduction in size or other significant changes in the nature of the services required.

Survey Responses

     The firm received a high response from clients surveyed. Several clients were impressed that the firm cared about their opinions and were pleased to cooperate. All the clients praised the firm for the quality of substantive legal work. Some expressed concern about the time required to produce certain types of work. Many reported fees and costs were frequently higher than expected. A few emphasized the importance of initiating more frequent communications with clients about the status of active matters and involving client contacts to a greater extent in developing strategies and making business decisions about their cases. It was suggested that improved communications between the executives and attorneys may reduce legal fees, as attorneys will better understand the clients' needs and objectives. Members of the marketing committee analyzed and grouped the client responses into three broad categories. The first category contained comments about those factors which clients considered to be important to continue to refer work to the firm. Examples of these included: an assessment of the attorney's expertise, trust, and judgment of a legal and business nature; pricing of legal services; reputation of the attorney(s) performing the work; and the attorneys' ability to help clients achieve their objectives and respond to their needs.

     The second category of survey responses included comments about those factors which cause clients to no longer continue to refer work to a firm. Examples of these included: the inability of attorneys to provide quality legal services in a timely manner at a price clients are willing and able to pay; attorney inaccessibility and/or unresponsiveness; attorneys' failure to keep clients informed about the progress of matters; whether attorneys or the firm have let the client down; and whether attorneys understand the nuances and trends in the client's business and industry.

     The third category of survey responses included those factors clients consider especially important in continuing their relationship with a law firm. Examples of these included: the personal style of the attorneys and their communications skills; the effort displayed to satisfy clients; attorneys' intelligence; and their willingness and ability to be innovative in applying their knowledge of the law to satisfy client needs and objectives.

Responding to Client Concerns

     The marketing committee prepared a report for the firm's executive committee which contained a composite of the clients' responses and specific recommendations for improving the delivery of legal services and attorney-client relationships. Survey results highlighted for the marketing committee the need to reinforce among all personnel an awareness about the competitive pressures within the firm's marketplace and the need to deliver high quality legal services at competitive prices.

     The challenge to the marketing committee was how to deliver these messages to the attorneys and administrative staff. Several committee members recommended conducting a series of meetings to review the findings and recommendations with attorneys and staff in each practice area. A few were apprehensive to involve associates and administrative personnel in these discussions. Two partners believed the firm should continue to serve clients as previously since the clients are not capable of evaluating the quality of legal work.

     The report was presented to the partners at their next meeting. By a significant majority, the partners voted to authorize the marketing committee to retain the author's management consulting firm to recommend and eventually a plan about how the survey results may be implemented, consistent with the firm's immediate and long-term objectives, keeping in mind those values which guided the firm's development and the "culture" which enabled the firm to attract and retain high quality partners, associates and administrative staff.

     During a preliminary meeting, the consultants and the marketing committee defined the objectives of the study to include: (1) planning and facilitating a discussion with attorneys and selective administrative personnel within the corporate and litigation departments to review the survey results and (2) to make certain the professional and administrative staffs understood their roles and obligations while serving the firm's clients.

Study Groups

     The consultants recommended two quality assurance studies be conducted. A client relations group was appointed to monitor the process, to respond to questions, and to provide logistical support for the projects to be pursued by each departmental group of attorneys and administrative personnel. This committee consisted of three partners, two senior partners from the corporate and litigation departments, a mid-level partner from the corporate department, two senior associates, and two lead secretaries from the corporate and litigation departments.

     Initially, the client relations committee and the consultants met with the members of the corporate and litigation departments to introduce the program and to identify the objectives. The clinet survey findings were presented and the methodology to be followed to implement the process were described in detail. Each department group was encouraged to identify specific objectives about how to improve client service and to develop a working plan about how to accomplish their respective goals. Meetings were conducted to involve other members of the department to commit to the process and to "buy into" the program.

     A partner was designated to head each departmental group. Every partner, associate, and selected members of the administrative staff of each department was assigned to working teams. The corporate study group agreed to focus on methods for reducing the time to prepare and deliver closing documents. The litigation study group decided to review and develop a system to improve the efficiency and effectiveness by which the litigation support group served the litigation attorneys and to improve communications with clients about the status of their active matters.

     With the assistance of the consultants, each study group developed a mission statement for the project to be accomplished. The mission statement for the corporate group was, "To reduce by one third the average time required to prepare and deliver corporate closing documents to clients." The mission statement for the litigation group was twofold, "To improve the support to the litigation attorneys by the litigation support group and to function more cost-effectively by improving communications with clients in the expectation of reducing legal fees."

     Meetings of the various teams within each departmental group revealed, interestingly, common concerns and dissatisfaction with some of the methods of processing and controlling work.

Quantifying Objectives

     A key element of the process included quantifying objectives to be achieved in order to measure results. For the corporate project, attorneys and staff determined the average time to prepare various types of documents from their inception to their final disposition. Starting and concluding dates for each deal were obtained from information contained in the corporate "bible" for each transaction. The number of drafts and redrafts and copies of related documents were counted. Records of telephone calls and faxes were maintained. Wherever possible, the reasons for "re-doing" the documents were determined. Also the reasons for last-minute crises and delays in preparing documents were analyzed. The generic elements that distinguished certain documents from others were noted to assess differences in various closings.

     Once the salient concerns and suggestions for improvement raised by the members of each team within the two departmental groups were reviewed and compared, plans for streamlining existing procedures became readily apparent. At meetings of each departmental group members reviewed their respective findings and recommendations for improvement. Procedures adhered to by attorneys and staff were evaluated along with the lines of communication, information flow, timetables for performance, and management of the process. Recommendations about the reassignment of tasks and the rearrangement of personnel were considered.

     Consensus was reached within each group about actions to be implemented to improve the existing organization. Accountability for the timely and accurate performance of work was determined. Forms were reviewed, timetables for performance were established for various types of closings, and software was developed to enable responsible administrative and professional personnel to keep track of the status of closings. Administrative personnel were assigned responsibility to insure that documentation requests were sent and received within certain times. Procedures and controls were designed to inform responsible attorneys about delays or the absence of information, as needed. Systems were implemented to minimize closing delays because of the oversight of details by attorneys and staff. The designated partner within each group was responsible for overseeing the recommended procedures.

     Much of the work involved was in the preparatory stage. The marketing committee, the client relations committee, and the corporate and litigation departmental groups, together with the consultants, planned meetings, identified objectives, communicated with members of each group, and insured that members of the departments were involved.

     Partners, associates and administrative personnel demonstrated their commitment to improve the quality and timeliness of services by identifying communications snags and reasons for delays in the production of work. Individual styles that encumbered the effective and efficient utilization of professional and administrative personnel were examined, and suggestions for improvement were offered. Members of each departmental group were requested to set aside their varied work habits, to address mutual problems which affected the efficient and effective performance of each group.

     The client relations committee met with members of the corporate and litigation departmental groups to determine what, if any, information should be communicated to clients who were affected by these changes as well as those whose comments during the survey process were instrumental in bringing about recommended changes.

     The pilot studies and the particular attorneys and administrative personnel responsible for planning and coordinating both the corporate and the litigation projects were carefully selected. Knowing their partners, the marketing committee recognized that the program had to succeed the first time because it would not be given another opportunity, at least not in the immediate future.

Making the Program Succeed

     To make certain each of these project would succeed, members of the marketing committee, the client relations committee, and the consultant did the following:

1. Made every effort to involve the administrative personnel in the corporate and litigation departments in the project. This was accomplished by obtaining from members of the firm's executive committee their endorsement of the project and by involving the heads of the corporate and litigation departments in the planning stages. All those who would participate in these projects received a detailed orientation about the program, its methodology, operation and desired results. The members of these departmental groups recommended projects which were critical to the success of their activities.
   
   
2. Selected individuals to lead the focus groups who were amendable to the process and willing to assess their personal and professional work habits. They maintained an open mind about methods for implementing new ideas about their practices.
   
   
3. Involved the participants in the design of the objectives to be achieved and in the methods for evaluating the results.
   
   
4. Made certain of all the participants were kept apprised of the progress of their performance through quantitative and qualitative benchmarks to measure their work.
   
   
5. Ensured that other practice areas within the firm were made aware of the objectives of each group and the methodology employed.
   
   
6. Effectively used the "grapevine" form of communication within the firm to acquaint the other professional and administrative personnel about the program and how the professional and administrative staffs were working together and the benefits to be derived from this joint effort.
   
   
7. Identified other projects within the corporate and litigation departments that needed attention to provide opportunities for further improvement.