here - Basman Smith

February 26 , 2016 •
THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
Business & Careers
Finding efficiencies
to put firm ahead
Going lean means lawyers can better focus their energy
SIMON HALLY
R
unning a law practice may not have much in common with making cars, but law firms can use a
business methodology originally developed in the
automobile industry to improve the efficiency of their
operations and deliver better value to clients.
The lean philosophy of continuous, incremental process
improvement traces its roots back to Henry Ford’s Model
T assembly line, but is now most often associated with
Toyota, whose relentless focus on eliminating waste
throughout its operations helped it become the world’s
largest car manufacturer.
It’s tempting to say Toyota perfected lean, but that
would contradict one of the main principles of lean thinking: there’s always room for improvement. Therefore,
while perfection is the goal, it can never be achieved.
As applied in manufacturing, lean is a highly rigorous
system for managing production and logistics, with its
own terminology, much of it Japanese. But when lean
ideas and methods are adapted in other industries, such
as services, including law, they are often implemented
more loosely, while staying true to the core ideas of the
lean philosophy: delivering value to the customer, focusing on quality, continuously improving processes and
workflow, and engaging people.
Most well-run law firms already do all that to some
extent.
“There are many pressures on us to be lean and efficient,” says Kevin Fisher, a litigation partner with Basman
Smith LLP. “We’re constantly trying to move things along
as efficiently as possible to reduce costs to clients.”
Nevertheless, the effort can be impeded by unrecognized barriers. Part of the lean approach is to identify and
address such hidden obstacles.
One of them is “a lack of innovative thinking about
the practice of law,” says Jennifer Hunter, a partner at
Lerners LLP. “Lawyers think about legal innovation all
the time — what we do is very creative — but when it
comes to practice, we have a much harder time implementing change.
“The fax machine is a case in point. Under the rules, we
can serve parties by fax but not by email without prearranged consent. This doesn’t make a lot of sense in the
modern context. It certainly doesn’t make a lot of sense to
our business clients.”
Another limiting factor is the traditional revenue model,
Hunter notes. “Lawyers are generally not compensated
for spending time away from billable files to think about
process improvements. When they do think of one or
come across something that’s inefficient, it’s likely they’re
involved in something urgent at the time.
“We always hope to return to the problem to try and
address it, but that rarely happens given the everyday
pressures of practice.”
Not all impediments to efficiency are unseen. Perhaps
the most obvious source of waste is the sheer volume of
paper that lawyers still handle. “Many firms are moving to
electronic files, but it’s hard and the transition is slow,”
Hunter says.
Technology can be a powerful tool for process improvement. An example is the use of document management
software during the discovery and review process, says
Jennifer Johnson, vice president at Commonwealth Legal.
“Law firms can essentially collapse the traditional hierarchy that was in place in reviewing documents,” she says.
In the past, an army of reviewers would look at every
document and then send them up the ranks to more
senior lawyers or subject matter experts (SMEs) for
further examination. Now, using analytics, electronic
documents can be sorted quickly to identify those that
are most pertinent, avoiding a time-consuming and
manual review of irrelevant material and producing a
far more efficient workflow. The SMEs can gain
immediate insight into the case and drive the case
Puddister, Page 24
erhui1979 / iStockphoto.com
23
24
• February 26 , 2016
THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
Business & Careers
Puddister: Some initiatives are client-driven
Continued from page 23
strategy from the outset,
resulting in significant cost savings for clients.
Johnson admits this can be “a
massive change management
exercise, and lawyers are often
resistant to change.”
Technology offers another efficiency advantage for small firms
in particular, says Doug MacLeod, principal of MacLeod
Law Firm.
He says it allows them to eliminate rent — the second-largest
expense for most legal practices,
after people costs — through the
use of virtual offices.
In general, however, small
firms may have fewer opportunities for process improvement
than large ones, simply because
they have fewer internal processes to manage.
“I’m lean. Everyone I have can
bill,” says MacLeod, who spe-
The goal is to free up lawyers’ and staff’s time
so that they can spend more on the tasks that
require their creative and analytical thinking and
less on the tasks that are more repetitive.
Shannon Puddister
Lerners
cializes in employment and
labour law and describes his
firm as a semi-startup with a
total staff of three lawyers and
one articling student.
“But now we need to take on
overhead, add an infrastructure,
because we’re growing. We’re at
a point where we need a professional manager to run the business side, handle marketing,
business development and so on.
“Having lawyers manage law
firms is extraordinarily ineffi-
JUDICIAL VACANCY
ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
THUNDER BAY
BILINGUAL POSITION
The Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee advises the Attorney General of
Ontario on the appointment of Judges to the Ontario Court of Justice, and invites
applications for a bilingual judicial position in Thunder Bay.
This appointment involves presiding over criminal and family law matters
(approximately 50% criminal and 50% family) and also involves travel within
the regional boundaries as assigned by the Regional Senior Justice and/or the
Chief Justice.
The minimum requirement to apply to be a Judge in the Ontario Court of Justice is
ten years completed membership as a barrister and solicitor at the Bar of one of the
Provinces or Territories of Canada.
cient. They typically have little
background or expertise in
administration so they aren’t
good at it. That means their time
would be better spent doing law.
It’s a balancing act. The leaner
you are, the more time you’re not
being a lawyer. You have to find
the right trade-off.”
A key aspect of the lean philosophy is engaging and respecting people. At Toyota, for
example,
many
process
improvements have been suggested by workers on the shop
floor. In law firms, some lean
initiatives are client-driven,
says Shannon Puddister, an
associate with Lerners.
“Sophisticated clients are
expecting that their firms have
legal process management, as
they already understand that it
helps to manage both cost and
expectations when running a
file. Many clients have also gone
almost entirely paperless,” she
says.
Puddister explains how a law
firm can put lean principles into
action: “By gathering together a
group of key people to discuss
and brainstorm about a particular task, including administrative tasks such as file opening or
file-specific tasks such as document production and file management, we are mapping the
current process, and identifying
unnecessary steps or ‘logjams’
to streamline our processes as
more efficient, while ensuring
maximum quality.
“It’s important to note that
none of this should affect a lawyer’s substantive work. The goal
is to free up lawyers’ and staff ’s
time so that they can spend
more on the tasks that require
their creative and analytical
thinking and less on the tasks
that are more repetitive.”
POSTE À POURVOIR AU SEIN DE LA MAGISTRATURE
COUR DE JUSTICE DE L’ONTARIO
THUNDER BAY
POSTE BILINGUE
Le Comité consultatif sur les nominations à la magistrature conseille le Procureur général
de l’Ontario sur les nominations de juges à la Cour de justice de l’Ontario et invite les
personnes intéressées à présenter leur demande au poste de juge bilingue à
Thunder Bay.
Cette nomination comprend la présidence d’affaires de droit criminel et de droit de
la famille (environ 50 % droit criminel et 50 % droit de la famille) et nécessite
également des déplacements à l’intérieur des limites régionales, selon les
assignations du juge principal régional ou du juge en chef.
Pour pouvoir poser sa candidature à un poste de juge à la Cour de justice de l’Ontario, il
faut, comme condition minimale, avoir été inscrit comme avocat-plaidant et procureur au
barreau de l’une des provinces ou de l’un des territoires du Canada pendant au moins
dix ans.
All candidates must apply either by submitting 14 copies of the current (February
2016) completed Judicial Candidate Information Form in the first instance or by a
short letter (14 copies) if the current form has been submitted within the previous 12
months. Should you wish to change any information in your application, you
must send in 14 copies of a fully revised Judicial Candidate Information Form.
Tous les candidats et candidates doivent poser leur candidature soit, dans le premier cas,
en présentant le Formulaire de renseignements sur le candidat/la candidate à la
magistrature courant (février 2016), soit en envoyant une courte lettre (en 14
exemplaires) si le formulaire courant a été présenté au cours des 12 mois précédents. En
cas de changements à apporter à un formulaire déjà envoyé, le candidat ou la
candidate doit envoyer à nouveau 14 exemplaires du formulaire de renseignements
corrigé.
If you wish to apply and need a current Judicial Candidate Information Form, or if you
would like further information, please contact:
Si vous voulez poser votre candidature et que vous avez besoin d’un Formulaire de
renseignements sur le candidat/la candidate à la magistrature courant, ou encore si vous
souhaitez obtenir de plus amples renseignements, veuillez communiquer avec :
Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee
Tel: (416) 326-4060 Fax: (416) 212-7316
Website: www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/jaac/
All applications, either sent by courier, mail or hand delivery, must be sent to:
Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee
c/o Ministry of Government Services Mail Delivery
77 Wellesley Street West, Room M2B-88
Macdonald Block, Queen’s Park
Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1N3
Applications must be on the current prescribed form and must be
TYPEWRITTEN or COMPUTER GENERATED and RECEIVED BY 4:30 p.m. on
Friday, March 18, 2016. CANDIDATES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 14
COPIES OF THEIR APPLICATION FORM OR LETTER. A Fax copy will be
accepted only if 14 copies of the application or letter are sent concurrently by
overnight courier.
Applications received after this date WILL NOT be
considered.
The Judiciary of the Ontario Court of Justice should reasonably reflect the
diversity of the population it serves. Applications from members of equalityseeking groups are encouraged.
Comité consultatif sur les nominations à la magistrature
Téléphone : (416) 326-4060 Télécopieur : (416) 212-7316
Site Web : www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/fr/jaac/
Toutes les demandes envoyées par service de messagerie, par la poste ou en main propre
doivent être soumises à l’adresse suivante :
Comité consultatif sur les nominations à la magistrature
a/s Ministère des Services gouvernementaux - Services de
distribution du courrier
77, rue Wellesley Ouest, salle M2B-88
Édifice Macdonald, Queen’s Park
Toronto (Ontario) M7A 1N3
Les demandes de candidature doivent être déposées par l’entremise du formulaire
prescrit courant et DACTYLOGRAPHIÉES ou CRÉÉES PAR ORDINATEUR et reçues
au plus tard à 16 h 30 le vendredi 18 mars 2016. LES CANDIDATS ET CANDIDATES
DOIVENT FOURNIR 14 EXEMPLAIRES DE LEUR FORMULAIRE OU DE LEUR
LETTRE DE CANDIDATURE. Une télécopie ne sera acceptée que si 14 exemplaires
du formulaire ou de la lettre de candidature sont également envoyés par service de
messagerie de 24 heures. On n’accordera AUCUNE considération aux candidatures
reçues après cette date.
La magistrature provinciale doit refléter raisonnablement la diversité de la
population qu’elle sert. Nous encourageons les membres de groupes de promotion
de l’égalité à présenter une demande.