[Mick]

I share your sentiments GR (with the whole field of wills and estates law as a prime example of unnecessary complexity), but I'm sure you know that a primary cause of legal complexity is that one of the main functions of lawyers is to generate work for other lawyers, and vice versa.

When I was about to take the MPRE (multiple choice legal ethics exam required to join the bar), I was told I should just apply the following test to each question: choose the answer that produces the most income for the legal profession as a whole. Turns out it worked every time it was possible to apply it, and it applied to nearly every question on the 50-question test (for the 1 or 2 remaining questions it did not produce any answer so I was on my own). I concluded from this experience that to be an ethical lawyer, all one had to do was generate the most income possible for the legal profession. (fortunately for the public, I never did practice law)

I know the test.  I had a conversation with a lawyer who said something similar; in order to pass the test, just come up with the most inefficient means to handle a legal issue, which amounts to generating more fees, so basically the same thing. I'm waiting for someone to do a Ted talk on how and why the legal profession is set up mainly to wring revenue from clients.

When my wife got cancer, I left a full-time position with a law firm to help care for her (it took four years, but she fully recovered.  Now, during COVID, she's on Round Two.  Different kind of cancer, but treatable and beatable).  At the time, I needed the flexibility, so I started working as a legal procurement consultant to clients.  What became immediately apparent was that inhouse legal counsel were terrific lawyers, who typically came from traditional law firms, and they were operationally, uh...challenged, and tended to consider fees of secondary performance to result and relationship.  And, while I had been through several thousand new engagement processes by that time, most inhouse counsel had only been through a few.

Which leads us to the three most interesting developments in the legal profession since 2009:

1. The Rise of ALSPs (Alternative Legal Service Providers).  Alternatives to costly traditional law firms have been around forever, but as barriers to entry start to fall, some of the ALSPs are really accelerating.  What's happening in the legal profession now happened in the accounting profession (albeit slightly differently) in the 1970s and 1980s.  42 of the top 50 accounting firms in 1972 were gone by 1988, including half of the Big Eight.  Those firms became hyper-efficient and hyper-client focused.  As the Big Four take on more and more legal services, they're edging out traditional law firms.  The next two decades are going to be very interesting for traditional law firms.  Because of COVID-19, tradlaw firms are seeking to eliminate as many costs as possible to maintain profits, since demand is slightly down.

2.  The Rise of Procurement/Purchasing.  The first RFP I received in 2009 from one of the largest technology companies in the world didn't originate with the general counsel, or the head of legal ops.  It came from an individual with the title "Commodities Manager" (no kidding).  At the same time, the head of our corporate practice told me that a large publicly traded client approached him for a discount.  Our CorpHead floated a 5% discount.  The client said 50% was the minimum acceptable discount.  Why?  Because when the financial world started melting down, the CFO, CEO and COO became inordinately concerned about costs -- everywhere.  Legal was a rich target, and it will be richer still in the next two decades.  My prediction is that we are not too far from reverse auctions for discrete legal services becoming the norm.

3.  Focus on Legal Operations.  Most legal departments are run by lawyers rather than professional managers.  But since 2009, there has been a laser focus on generating efficiency within the department, so they have been ramping up their game.  End result for traditional law firms is that inefficiencies are being beaten back.  A side result is that companies with large legal departments (10+) are placing a closer focus on their management skills.

[Mick]

I share your sentiments GR (with the whole field of wills and estates law as a prime example of unnecessary complexity), but I'm sure you know that a primary cause of legal complexity is that one of the main functions of lawyers is to generate work for other lawyers, and vice versa.

When I was about to take the MPRE (multiple choice legal ethics exam required to join the bar), I was told I should just apply the following test to each question: choose the answer that produces the most income for the legal profession as a whole. Turns out it worked every time it was possible to apply it, and it applied to nearly every question on the 50-question test (for the 1 or 2 remaining questions it did not produce any answer so I was on my own). I concluded from this experience that to be an ethical lawyer, all one had to do was generate the most income possible for the legal profession. (fortunately for the public, I never did practice law)

I know the test.  I had a conversation with a lawyer who said something similar; in order to pass the test, just come up with the most inefficient means to handle a legal issue, which amounts to generating more fees, so basically the same thing. I'm waiting for someone to do a Ted talk on how and why the legal profession is set up mainly to wring revenue from clients.

When my wife got cancer, I left a full-time position with a law firm to help care for her (it took four years, but she fully recovered.  Now, during COVID, she's on Round Two.  Different kind of cancer, but treatable and beatable).  At the time, I needed the flexibility, so I started working as a legal procurement consultant to clients.  What became immediately apparent was that inhouse legal counsel were terrific lawyers, who typically came from traditional law firms, and they were operationally, uh...challenged, and tended to consider fees of secondary performance to result and relationship.  And, while I had been through several thousand new engagement processes by that time, most inhouse counsel had only been through a few.

Which leads us to the three most interesting developments in the legal profession since 2009:

1. The Rise of ALSPs (Alternative Legal Service Providers).  Alternatives to costly traditional law firms have been around forever, but as barriers to entry start to fall, some of the ALSPs are really accelerating.  What's happening in the legal profession now happened in the accounting profession (albeit slightly differently) in the 1970s and 1980s.  42 of the top 50 accounting firms in 1972 were gone by 1988, including half of the Big Eight.  Those firms became hyper-efficient and hyper-client focused.  As the Big Four take on more and more legal services, they're edging out traditional law firms.  The next two decades are going to be very interesting for traditional law firms.  Because of COVID-19, tradlaw firms are seeking to eliminate as many costs as possible to maintain profits, since demand is slightly down.

2.  The Rise of Procurement/Purchasing.  The first RFP I received in 2009 from one of the largest technology companies in the world didn't originate with the general counsel, or the head of legal ops.  It came from an individual with the title "Commodities Manager" (no kidding).  At the same time, the head of our corporate practice told me that a large publicly traded client approached him for a discount.  Our CorpHead floated a 5% discount.  The client said 50% was the minimum acceptable discount.  Why?  Because when the financial world started melting down, the CFO, CEO and COO became inordinately concerned about costs -- everywhere.  Legal was a rich target, and it will be richer still in the next two decades.  My prediction is that we are not too far from reverse auctions for discrete legal services becoming the norm.

3.  Focus on Legal Operations.  Most legal departments are run by lawyers rather than professional managers.  But since 2009, there has been a laser focus on generating efficiency within the department, so they have been ramping up their game.  End result for traditional law firms is that inefficiencies are being beaten back.  A side result is that companies with large legal departments (10+) are placing a closer focus on their management skills.