There she gained invaluable knowledge about in-sourcing attorneys, a core component of DLN legal services, also known as “secondments.” Her experiences informed her perspective into both sides of the billable hours model, the prevailing charging method for legal services. “T e billable hours model is on its last legs, as everyone knows. It’s on life support,” said Myers, who characterized the model as the bane of attorney existence. “T ere are two very good rea- sons for the value-based billing. First of all, it’s predictable. You know what the cost will be. T ere won’t be ballooning and skyrocketing… no surprises… and there will be more incentive for the lawyers to work effi ciently.” While the billable hours regime remains largely intact,
pressure to off er alternate billing structures is mounting due to abuse of the system. Myers envisions value-based billing to entail determining, in collaboration with a client, a fl at rate for work. She admits that occasionally specifi c project work will exceed the original projection, in which case rates will be adjusted. But, she says, in the end it will bring greater transparency to the fi eld. Law fi rm consultant Ed Wesseman says the alternate billing hours, combined with the virtual framework, give DLN an advantageous distinction. “I deal often with enhancing competitiveness among law
fi rms. Whenever you can provide a source of diff erentiation, that makes you more competitive. It seems Dalhi’s eco- nomic model will make a lot of sense for corporate America and large law fi rms,” said Edge International’s Wesseman, also an author on law fi rm management strategy. “In today’s world, legal work doesn’t come in often on a nice, steady fl ow. T ere are ebbs and tides. If you can be prepared to provide legal services, and not have to pay overhead to have someone at the offi ce waiting for work to come in, that’s a huge fi nancial advantage.” T e estimated DLN cost structure is one-half to
one-third of traditional fi rms. Among other reasons, that fi nancial incentive has fueled growth in virtual law fi rm numbers since the fi rst such fi rm started serving clients in the mid-1990s. T e fi rms are gradually attracting the attention of Fortune 500 Companies and Big Law attor-
MCCA.COM
neys. In the eyes of some prominent clients, however, a stigma remains tied to the virtual law fi rm concept. According to Wesseman, it is based in a reluctance to meddle with tradition. “T ere will be pushback.
It may take some time for virtual law fi rms to be fully
competitive,” said Wesseman. “It may take a generation. But at the speed at which things are going, it may not.” Fortune 500 companies have increasingly sought diverse
talent. And progress is being made. Minorities constituted 12.7 percent of U.S. employed lawyers in 2012, compared to 9.7 percent in 2000, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data published in an Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession study. But the fi gure still falls far short of nationwide minority population statistics. T e Diverse Lawyers Network is no feel-good project.
Aside from the advantages it provides clients, the fi rm off ers a number of perks to qualifi ed, diverse attorneys. “As people advance they want more control and
fl exibility over their careers… whether it’s because they are getting married, having kids or taking care of ailing parents,” says principal and director of attorney recruit- ment at DLN Kandance Weems Norris, also a partner at Cumby and Weems LLP in Raleigh, N.C. “T is model serves that. You don’t have to put in face time. You just have to serve your client.” And in DLN, Myers strives to entice attorneys across
the spectrum of race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. T at open environment, Myers says, will benefi t fi rms by generating unique problem-solving approaches. It will also, according to Myers, provide attorneys with an inclu- sionary, welcoming model and atmosphere, albeit virtual. “I think diverse lawyers like working with diverse
people,” says Myers. “Diverse lawyers often fi nd themselves isolated in law fi rms as the only diverse lawyer—the unique island of diversity in that law fi rm. And most diverse law- yers don’t like that.” D&B
Brian Dabbs is a freelance writer and editor based in Washington, D.C.
SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013 DIVERSITY & THE BAR®
43
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52