Former Orrick CEO: 'Everybody Wins' If Law Firms Invest, Adapt
Ralph Baxter sees a future for Big Law that isn't bleak. But it requires change.
October 15, 2018 at 04:50 PM
5 minute read
Ralph Baxter spent nearly 25 years as the leader of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe before stepping away from the firm about five years ago. He's since been involved to varying degrees with a host of emerging legal tech companies, including Lex Machina, Ravel Law and Intapp.
Baxter also launched a failed bid for a West Virginia seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, which ended in a primary defeat in May. Now he's back to doing consulting work for law firms and other legal service providers.
Considering his own recent loss and some of the fears now gripping the legal industry, Baxter's message is pretty upbeat. Law firms, he insists, can adopt new technologies and processes to create a future legal services market that creates a win-win-win for law firms, clients and lawyers. The key, he said, is developing new billing models that capture the efficiency from technology and move away from the billable hour.
“As you start down that path, everybody wins. The client will win. The law firm will win,” Baxter said. “There is a day ahead when you progress down all these paths where the law firms remain very profitable; the associates and partners are happier and more rewarded; the clients pay less; and they are happier with their law firms. Everyone benefits, but you do need to make some changes to get to that better day.”
Baxter spoke with ALM following the release of a survey Monday by Intapp, where he serves as a board member, that said law firms are broadly underinvesting in technology.
The survey of more than 300 firms in Australia, the U.S. and Europe showed that while the vast majority recognize the importance of using “intelligent automation,” a term Intapp uses to refer to data analytics and legal process management, very few have made investments in that area. For instance, 86 percent of law firms said automation is important to deliver insights and analytics to clients, while only 18 percent had made investments to embed that capability into their service delivery models.
Baxter said the survey was an indication that law firms need to take a longer-term view of the money they spend on technology. It should be seen as an investment in the same way firms invest in hiring associates, he said. A simple first step, he added, would be to develop ways to measure the return on investment for new technologies.
“Of course, you can measure the return of investment on technology. Every business in the world does it,” Baxter said. “I don't know of any other business that measures itself on how much it pays its senior people. When the largest companies in the world provide updates on how they're progressing, they do it through sales and profits. They don't do it on how much they pay their senior executives. That's what profits per partner are: How much you pay the most senior people in your organization. So, that's part of the problem.”
Baxter said he believes that the demand for legal services is actually growing “significantly.” However, the demand for Big Law hours, which most industry reports use as a measure, is stagnant. He said that is because clients are turning to New Law service providers and in-house teams for more cost-effective solutions.
“That phenomenon that demand is being met by these alternatives to the providers that traditionally would have provided these services is a pretty glaring warning sign that the market of clients is restless,” Baxter said. “It is looking for a better overall solution to its need for legal service. And they will proceed at their own peril if they don't modernize to meet that demand for legal services in a better way.”
Baxter cited UnitedLex's recent expansion efforts, EY's purchase of Riverview Law, and the growth of companies, including Casetext and NeotaLogic, as proof that newer ways to deliver legal services to clients are catching on. The upshot for law firms is that they need to be delivering more cost-effective and accurate solutions to clients.
“The answer to the question, 'Who wins?' as we proceed along is: Everyone,” Baxter said. “The only people who will not win are those who insist on holding onto models that are unnecessarily expensive, unnecessarily slow, unnecessarily opaque. Those who insist on holding onto elements of the traditional model that are not appealing to clients will lose. And everyone else will win.”
➤➤ Want more reporting on the evolving legal industry? Sign up here for The Law Firm Disrupted by Roy Strom.
More Reading:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: The Recorder and Law.com's California Legal Awards 2025
- 2The Week in Data Dec. 13: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
- 3Antitrust Class Actions Against CVS, Other Pharmacy Benefit Managers Are Piling Up
- 4Judge Grinds NY's Cannabis Licensing Regime to a Halt Again
- 5On the Move and After Hours: Barclay Damon; VLJ; Barnes & Thornburg
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250