TinkerX

Howard Scher, managing partner of Buchanan Ingersoll’s Philadelphia office — one of the firms that has just bumped starting salaries from $105 to $115K — is quoted as saying:

We have clients who want first-class legal representation, so we have to compete for the best people. While I don’t think that $5,000 or $10,000 should be the basis for making a career decision, it is for people at that stage of their careers.  So we hope this shows law students that Buchanan Ingersoll is a first-class firm.

The firm, the article says, will pay for raises at all of its offices from partner profits, not by increasing associate billable hours or raising rates… There’s got to be a disclaimer in there somewhere that says, "More than we were gonna do anyways." Right? I hope so. Or somebody’s gonna sue those guys when rates go up.

The article goes on to talk about other Philadelphia firms that have followed suit and want to make sure that they remain competitive while showing their clients that they, too, offer the same first-class blah-blah-blah…

One of these days, I’m gonna slit my freakin’ throat. I’m going to go up into a bell tower somewhere with a really powerful flashlight, a six-pack of Mountain Dew, a bullhorn and a laptop with a wireless modem and post my last blog entry, called, "Will the lawyers listen to my suicide call for sanity?" That way, even when they don’t, I, at least, won’t be around to hear about it.

Why so irritated about this non-marketing issue, Andy?

Ah, that voice in my head. The imaginary senior partner that travels with me, reminding me that if ain’t related to the website, brochures or handing out shrimp at sporting events, it aint marketing.

Look at the quote above: "We have clients who want first-class legal representation." No offense to Mr. Scher and his firm, which is a very nice joint (especially since I’d love to consult for him; call me, Howard — 614.395.4134), but I have a question; is there a firm out there with clients who want second-class legal representation? Is there a general counsel out there who wakes up thinking, "You know what? My outside representation is too damned good. I’m going to fire them and hire some hacks."

Second point. Do you care what any service provider in your entire world of purchasing behavior has ever paid any of their workers? I want you to think very, very hard. Have you ever thought to yourself, "I should check and make sure that my surgeon (dentist, mechanic, kids’ teacher, banker, insurance agent) is the HIGHEST PAID PROFESSIONAL IN HIS INDUSTRY!!??

No. You never have. Ever. You care about the quality of service. Period. And in many cases, quality of service does NOT track on a 1-to-1 basis with what employees are paid. It more often equates to the level of respect they are provided, the amount of feedback they have in their organizational systems, how well they are managed, their level of personal mentoring, etc.

But, just as the billable hour is the only measure by which law firms seem capable of judging productivity, associate pay is the only measure by which they seem capable of esteeming quality, rewarding it and (this is the huge disconnect) communicating the same to both clients and associates.

This is incredibly important, people. How you search for, select, hire, train, motivate, compensate, promote and (sometimes even) let go your professionals is INTEGRAL to your marketing. So here’s the marketing lesson from today’s wonderful world of legal headlines in quick bullet points.

1. Clients don’t care what you pay your associates. They care what value they get from them. In fact, having worked in the corporate world for a long time — where salary information is generally fairly sensitive — broadcasting how much you pay a particular level of employee may, in some cases, be considered incredibly bad form.
2. Money don’t buy the best. Not out of the box, not in the long run. If you think, under any circumstances, that paying more will get you better quality work, more satisfied associates, longer tenure from them, more business developed and a stronger firm — you are dead wrong. Period. Check your own records if you don’t believe me.
3. If money is the ticket, the door is the show. If you give your associates the message that the way to reward excellence is through pay, what will it communicate when, for whatever reason, you can’t turn that crank at some point? Or if somebody else out there has a bigger crank? Or if they start comparing raises over beers? You are sending the wrong message at the very point in their careers when you should be emphasizing cultural, personal and team issues.
4. In a price war, the dumbest competitor wins. This harks back to the "hammer" metaphor. Smart marketing is often less expensive. It uses leverage, brains, moxie and heart over pure, unadulterated buying power. But guess what? If the market actually starts believing your line about associate pay being the ticket to "first class legal service," anybody with a sack o’ dough can compete with you to be the best. What happens when a law firm with some partners who don’t mind taking significantly lower profits for 3 years… or 5 years… or 10 years… decides to buy market share and jack starting salaries by 50%?

   You laugh… But AT&T and MCI laughed at Sprint for 10-cent-a-minute long distance. Until Sprint had 25% of their business. Not so funny then.

If I thought it would help, I’d beg. Hiring associates it the first step on the "journey of one-thousand miles." These are the people who will be marketing (or not) for you for, maybe, thirty years.

You are sending them a bad, wrong, unhealthy and, ultimately, self-defeating message. If the only way you can get "the best" students to come to your firm is to pay them $10k more a year… Let them go to other firms. Take the "Tier-2" kids who want to work somewhere with heart, guts, moxie, brains and staying power. I guarantee that in a few years your clients will love those kids way, way more than they ever would any shiny, greedy "A-Team" gold-diggers.