Canadian Lawyer

24 J U N E 2 0 1 7 w w w . C A N A D I A N L a w y e r m a g . c o m The new phrases include — innovative services; an innovative approach to the practice of law; innovation, etc. The reason it is non-differentiating is that the concept of innovation in pricing and provision of legal services, with the general exception of those involved in firm management, is very much in a trick- le-down mode with most partners. In the absence of a firm-wide commit- ment, clients have to try and work with those few partners that have drunk the Kool-Aid. This lessens the bond between the firm and the client and increases it with the individual lawyer. Such an imbal- ance can only put the firm at greater risk of client erosion. Pricing innovation often results when the law firm applies ideas to satisfy the needs and expectations of the clients when it comes to cost containment of their legal fees. Continued focus on cost containment will drive the need for firms to be innovative in the delivery of their services. A catch-22 situation is a dilemma or difficult circumstance from which there is no escape because of mutually conflicting or dependent conditions. There are likely a variety of reasons why so many law firms only play lip ser- vice to innovation including: Lack of a risk-taking mindset — financial, reputational and perception risk is inherent to innovation, and law- yers have an intense adversity to these types of risk; Great minds think alike (consensus) — but great inventions come from mul- tiple differentiating, great minds; and Short-term focus — unfortunately, in most firms, pricing and embracing innov- ation have been left up to the individual lawyer and their individual or self-driven strategy, which tends to have a strong focus on their next compensation period. A fair question that private law firms need to answer honestly — is it reasonable to expect to be paid more money every year for the delivery of the same legal ser- vices in the same manner? While I know how I would answer this question, my perspective and $1.70 will buy you a medium Tim Hortons coffee. So I decided to canvass several general counsel types from different industries for their thoughts on innovation and pricing by law firms. My one-on-one discussions included: Emily Jelich, vice president and head of Toronto Dominion Securities Compliance and Shared Services; Karin McCaskill, senior vice president, secretary and gen- eral counsel at Sobeys Inc.; David Shapiro, senior vice president and chief legal officer of Air Canada; and Fred Headon, assistant general counsel, Labour and Employment, at Air Canada. Shapiro's response to my initial ques- tion captured the essence of the discus- sions with everyone. He said, "I absolutely subscribe to the view that we cannot con- tinue to pay higher amounts for the same services without pushing the work down and without the firm generating efficiency somewhere else." While their experiences varied with law firms, several common points arose from our conversations, including: There does seem to be an understand- ing that law firms need to invest in things such as project management, budget man- agement and all of that sort of efficiency play, but because of the way firms are structured, it is still, to some extent, vol- untary for individual firm members to decide whether or not they're actually going to participate in it. There's also no radical transformation smabey@appliedstrategies.ca L E G A L I N N O VAT I O N N O W O P I N I O N here is good news for law firm websites. There is a new series of non- differentiating phrases that can be used in conjunction with the exist- ing ones such as: • Client focused • Excellence in client service • Effective delivery of legal services • Collaborative • Cost effective • Great relationships • Teamwork • Partnering with our clients Pricing innovation Law firms say they are innovating in how they charge clients, but the rubber has yet to hit the road By Stephen Mabey T

• Cover