Chancellor Rishi Sunak is rebalancing the books, and his desire for cash is mirrored in every part of the economy. Though the profession has had a pretty good war, law firms are no exception.
We can take different routes to higher profits: win more work; cut overheads; boost productivity; increase prices. But one of the most effective is often neglected: get paid more quickly. Surveys show that the average firm’s lock-up is 150 days. When you think about it, that’s a startling figure. Try telling your hairdresser (remember them?): “Thanks, I’ll pay you in five months if that’s OK”, and see what they do with the scissors. Conveyancers seem to have little trouble applying the “no fee, no key” rule, so why not all?
Law firm leaders tearing their hair out as they scan printouts of unpaid bills and WIP, should look at two issues in particular. First, performance suffers when there is no obvious link between what partners take home and their record on cash collection. I once attended a presentation by the CEO of an American firm, who explained, glasses glinting, that in his firm it was very simple: if a minimum amount of cash had not been generated by the end of the month, no partner was paid drawings. Miraculously, it had been years since this happened. You may think his approach is too draconian, and runs counter to your firm’s culture. But you would have admired his suit. I’m aware of a Big Four accounting firm which takes a similar approach: payment of partners’ quarterly bonus depends on cash-in targets being met. Whatever balance you strike, there must be a direct link between performance and reward.
Secondly, there is no substitute for structure. Does your firm have a well-articulated policy on billing and cash collection? Is it enforced? A few simple rules go a long way.
An example: payment is due in 30 days; a letter before action must go at 45 days; and a writ at 60 days. Exceptions must be approved by the practice area head or managing partner. This is fine as far as it goes, but how do you enforce it? In one client firm, partners had been left entirely to their own devices, and so performance was uneven. We solved the problem very simply, by making it mandatory that each partner sit down with the managing partner, or practice area head every month, to account personally for the bills that were unpaid, and commit to action. It was made clear that they were on the hook to deliver payment, and the bill stayed on the list until they had, but they were also offered support and mentoring. Personal accountability, scrutiny and confidence-boosting measures had a startling effect. Within three months, lock-up had reduced by 40%. How well partners manage cash should always be a prominent appraisal measure.
Don’t fear the response
There is a widespread fear that pressing for payment destroys client goodwill. It’s a myth, popular with lawyers who lack confidence in the value of what they do. In fact, the opposite is true. Clients allowed to pay, as the song goes, this year, next year, sometime, never, think their lawyers are either fools incapable of running an efficient business, or that they have too much money to care, or both. It’s not a good look. Not unreasonably, clients ask, “Should I rely on these people to look after my affairs, when they don’t seem able to look after their own?” A clear, unambiguous policy is very helpful to partners uncomfortable having the conversation. It enables them to say, “I’m bound by the rules of the firm, and don’t have discretion to change them.”
The same applies to payments to account of fees and outlays, and interim billing. There are certain kinds of work, especially contentious matters, where large amounts of unpaid WIP are an unacceptable risk. If clients resist reasonable requests, it’s an early red light that maybe you shouldn’t be acting.
In these times especially, there may be good reasons for giving clients more time, allowing discounts, or even agreeing to write off. But these should be informed decisions, reached thoughtfully and with a keen commercial eye. They can’t be the consequence of sloppiness, or spinelessness. Partners may feel awkward at first in being more assertive, and need support, but with success comes confidence, empowerment and control, not to mention an agreeable bulge in the wallet.
You may remember there used to be establishments called “pubs”, serving what were known as “drinks”. The grittier variety were fond of displaying signs proclaiming: “In God we trust. You pay cash.” In vino veritas, indeed.
Stephen Gold was the founder and senior partner of Golds, a multi-award-winning law firm which grew from a sole practice to become a UK leader in its sectors. He is now a consultant, non-exec and trusted adviser to leading firms nationwide and internationally.
e: firstname.lastname@example.org; t: 0044 7968 484232; w: www.stephengold.co.uk; twitter: @thewordofgold
- Civil court: Nuts and bolts issues
- Corporate: The limits of reflective loss
- Intellectual property: rights in employee creations
- Agriculture: Allowing tenants to leave for value
- Family: Teaming up to Zoom in on marriage
- Data protection: EU transfers flow for a little longer
- Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal
- Property: Access by prescription: challenge of proof
- In-house: Moving in-house as an NQ
- New AML guidance: what you need to know
- Schools outreach: a virtual revolution
- The Word of Gold: The joy of cheques
- Wills and executries: learning the hard way
- OPG update
- The Eternal Optimist: No going back
- Handling police complaints: seeking fitness for purpose
- Profile: Christine O’Neill QC
- Ask Ash: Double demands