The
new
Blickstein
Group
COO
Study
demonstrates
continued
lawyer
hubris,
arrogance,
and
independence
that
impairs
job
satisfaction
—
and
profitability.
The
July
Law
Firm
COO
Survey
gathered
responses
from
COOs
about
law
firm
operations,
AI
adoption,
compensation,
and
business
challenges.
The
Blickstein
Group
is
a
legal
industry
research
and
consulting
firm.
Two
Key
and
Related
Points
Two
points
among
many
stood
out
to
me
as
a
former
partner
in
a
large
law
firm.
Both
points
reflect
law
firm
culture
and
are
related.
Point
1:
COOs
see
law
firm
partners
as
the
biggest
obstacle
to
implementing
change.
In
other
words,
law
firm
partners
are
ignoring
change
recommendations
by
their
COOs.
Point
2:
COOs,
who
if
given
the
opportunity,
can
be
extremely
valuable
to
a
law
firm
since
they
are
business
people,
not
lawyers,
and
understand
business
issues
like
finance,
talent,
marketing,
and
operations.
But
many
firms
don’t
value
their
COOs,
don’t
include
them
in
strategic
discussions,
don’t
provide
clear
lines
of
authority,
and
undercut
them.
COOs
at
these
firms
are
often
dissatisfied
and
prone
to
leave.
Given
their
understanding
of
business
and
particularly
the
business
of
law
firms,
talented
COOs
can
bring
significant
value
to
law
firms
(translated,
help
them
make
more
money).
So,
you
would
think
law
firms
would
value
their
judgment,
compensate
them
well,
and
treat
them
as
C-suite
partners.
Indeed,
COOs
who
work
at
firms
where
they
manage
most
if
not
all
of
the
administrative
functions,
where
they
report
to
the
managing
partner,
and
have
a
meaningful
seat
at
the
executive
committee
are
the
happiest
and
most
likely
to
stay.
Firms
that
don’t
include
these
things
are
missing
out
and
are
at
an
obvious
competitive
disadvantage.
Bottom
line,
law
firms
that
resist
change
recommendations
of
their
COOs
and
who
treat
COOs
as
second-class
citizens
fail
to
capture
the
advantages
of
keen
business
insight.
And
in
today’s
competitive
legal
market,
it
stands
to
reason
that
failure
places
them
at
a
short-
and
long-term
competitive
disadvantage.
But
Why?
The
most
important
question
is
why.
Why
do
firms
not
value
the
COOs
and
resist
what
they
say?
The
easy
answer
is
that
most
law
firms
are
still
run
under
a
consensus
model
that
affords
partners,
particularly
those
with
big
books
of
business,
considerable
independence.
To
say
that
managing
lawyers
is
like
herding
cats
is
an
insult
to
the
cats.
Adoption
of
change
in
law
firms
frequently
means
not
only
convincing
the
managing
partner
or
executive
committee,
it
means
convincing
most
every
partner
to
adopt
the
change.
Many
of
these
partners
are
incredibly
busy
and
have
neither
the
time,
experience,
nor
expertise
to
correctly
evaluate
business-related
recommendations
(which
is
why
they
should
of
course
rely
on
their
COO
and
administrative
staff.)
So,
they
fall
back
and
keep
doing
what
they
have
always
done.
Change
is
hard
and
if
they
don’t
personally
believe
it’s
needed,
they
don’t
do
it.
But
There
is
More
But
there
is
something
else
which
leads
into
why
law
firms
don’t
treat
COOs
as
full
partners
in
business-related
decision
making.
Most
smart
people
(and
partners
in
law
firms
for
the
most
part
are
smart
people),
when
faced
with
decisions
for
which
they
have
neither
the
time
nor
expertise
to
make
a
valid
judgment,
rely
on
those
who
do
have
the
time
and
expertise
to
make
sound
recommendations.
We
all
do
it
every
day.
When
we
are
sick,
we
go
to
the
doctor.
Why?
Because
they
do
have
the
time
and
knowledge
to
make
a
recommendation
what
to
do.
The
same
is
true
for
virtually
any
field.
Lawyers?
Particularly
when
it
comes
to
business-related
decisions,
many
aren’t
so
ready
to
adopt
and
rely
on
the
business
acumen
of
their
COOs.
Why?
Three
words:
hubris,
arrogance,
and
independence.
Lawyers
think
they
know
everything
to
begin
with.
And
when
it
comes
to
their
business,
their
law
firms
in
which
they
are
owners,
they
believe
that
only
they
can
make
valid
financial
decisions.
Those
“non-lawyers”
who
aren’t
owners
should
butt
out,
as
I
have
previously
discussed.
As
one
of
my
partners
used
to
say
to
the
administrative
staff:
“You
work
for
me.
Don’t
tell
me
what
to
do.”
And
as
I
said
before,
the
ability
of
partners
to
retain
their
independence
enhances
this
hubris
and
arrogance.
One
More
Thing…
There
may
be
another
factor
at
play
as
well:
the
innate
stubborness
and
resistance
to
change
many
lawyers
have.
Brad
Blickstein,
CEO
the
Blickstein
Group,
calls
this
dread.
Blickstein
says,
“I
believe
a
lot
of
time
it’s
not
so
much
that
the
partners
don’t
respect
what
their
COOs
bring
to
the
table,
but
rather
that
they
don’t
want
to
adopt
the
practices
they
suggest.
For
many
partners,
the
way
they
deliver
legal
services
and
the
way
they
bill
for
them
is
deeply
embedded,
and
while
they
may
agree
with
their
experts
on
an
intellectual
level,
they
don’t
have
it
in
them
to
make
the
changes.”
As
a
result,
COOs
feel
like
second-class
citizens
and
get
tired
of
beating
their
heads
against
the
wall.
Blickstein
offers
a
doctor
analogy:
“I
don’t
ignore
my
doctor’s
advice
to
eat
better because I
don’t
respect
her.
It’s
not
that
I
think
I
know
better,
I
just
don’t
bring
myself
to
act
on
her
advice.”
Blickstein
does
agree
about
lawyer
arrogance,
though.
There
are
certainly
a
lot
of
“arrogant
partners
who
think
only
they
know
how
to
run
a
firm.”
The
Result?
This
lack
of
respect
for
COOs
shows
up
in
those
firms
who
do
not
bring
COOs
into
the
internal
management
circle.
The
firms
who
don’t
even
bother
to
conduct
regular
performance
reviews
or
realign
the
position
based
on
evolving
and
competitive
needs.
The
Blickstein
conclusion
that
these
firms
don’t
change
until
the
COO
leaves
may
be
correct,
although
I
tend
to
think
that
these
kinds
of
firms
aren’t
prone
to
change
how
they
treat
those
in
the
firm
who
aren’t
lawyers.
And
for
the
firms
who
do
change,
the
disruption
of
making
the
change
and
finding
a
new
COO
is
significant.
As
I
have
mentioned
before,
it’s
much
better
to
work
to
retain
present
staff
and
embrace
change
in
their
role
than
to
bring
in
somebody
new
who
has
no
understanding
of
the
firm
and
the
firm
culture.
In
short,
the
reasons
partners
don’t
embrace
changes
suggested
by
their
COOs
and
their
minimization
of
the
COO
role
are
related.
It’s
the
same
old
lack
of
respect
for
those
who
aren’t
lawyers
that
we
have
seen
over
and
over.
Hubris,
arrogance,
independence,
and
a
reluctance
to
change.
It’s
a
perfect
storm
for
poor
business
decisions.
Firms
that
tolerate
and
encourage
these
things
will
be
left
behind
in
today’s
legal
world
where
change,
being
nimble,
and
adapting
to
new
trends
are
critical.
Law
firms
can’t
ignore
this
reality.
Stephen
Embry
is
a
lawyer,
speaker,
blogger,
and
writer.
He
publishes TechLaw
Crossroads,
a
blog
devoted
to
the
examination
of
the
tension
between
technology,
the
law,
and
the
practice
of
law.