First, here’s an article on the movie Michael Clayton and its criticisms of law-firm life. The thing is, pointing out that large law firms make their employees miserable and sometimes have to turn a blind eye to their clients’ ethical excesses is such a cliche that I’m almost embarrassed by my urge to blog about it. But it’s true, in my experience. Which is why I wish I had written this article. (And why I am sometimes glad I am not a lawyer.) Mad props to the guy who did write it.
Here’s a blog post in a similar vein from another member of the legal media who I could envy — Jordan Furlong, editor-in-chief of National magazine, which is put out by the Canadian Bar Association. (Despite his nationality, or maybe because his country and mine are so similar, he seems to blog frequently about issues at large U.S. law firms.) In this post and others, he takes law firms to task for focusing more on money and numbers than on client satisfaction, using the $2 billion revenues at Certain New York And LA Firms as a springboard. (Rees Morrison makes the same criticism in passing.) Something he either didn’t mention or didn’t see is that law firms and legal publications both really love lists. They’re profitable for the publications (AFAICT), they allow competitive lawyers to compete, and they’re easier for editors with resources to put together than a set of well-thought-out feature articles. Not that I disagree with Furlong. The law is unique among large business sectors in that the culture doesn’t necessarily prioritize client satisfaction. Clients are where the money is coming from, guys!
By the way, this blog is migrating to my Web site, most likely this weekend because that’s when I’ll have the time. Watch this space if you care.
2 Comments
February 20, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Lorelei, those lists are definitely profitable — the periodicals rank the top X firms in a given area (corporate finance, litigation, whatever), guaranteeing that every lawyer at those firms will pick up the article to see where they ranked. And of course, they also contact the firm to suggest an ad to complement their appearance. We don’t do these sorts of lists in our magazine, largely because we’re a member publication, and it’s a tad impolitic to be telling a member law firm that it ranks a sterling 11th in its favourite practice area.
But even if that weren’t the case, I still wouldn’t want to do these sorts of lists. As you point out, they’re lazy journalism, mostly an exercise in ego feeding. Clients can form their own opinions about lawyers and sure don’t need legal trade pubs to help them.
As far as the big firms here go, the Canadian versions aren’t much different from their US counterparts — smaller, of course, and if possible even less innovative, but the structures, issues and challenges are largely the same. I write about Canadian firms when they do something interesting or illustrative of trends; unfortunately, that’s not very often.
Thanks for the shout-out and kind words, though I feel compelled to mention that the post doesn’t actually link to the article in question, which is at http://law21.ca/2008/02/15/if-i-had-two-billion-dollars/. Keep up the good work — we need more non-lawyers talking about us.
February 20, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Yes, I just noticed that I forgot the link! I’m very sorry. I quite enjoy your blog so far, and would like to be able to tell people where it is. And thanks for dropping by to expand on all of this.