We had some hard facts to face. The firm had been slipping down the league tables; poor time-recording
was depressing our turnover figures, with over-partnering (for the size of billing) adversely affecting profits
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, it is the one that is adaptable to change.” Charles Darwin.
These were the words I used at a partner meeting in October 1998 to introduce the concepts behind a radical three-year plan to manage the evolution of Stephenson Harwood.
At that time, we were in an interesting position. We had considerable strengths: a reputation for quality, a good client base; good retention rates: 60% of the firm’s revenue came from long-standing clients; we were recognised for several areas of expertise; and our business had been expanding in the previous couple of years.
But we had some hard facts to face as well. The firm had been slipping down the league tables; poor time-recording was depressing our turnover figures, with over-partnering (for the size of billing) adversely affecting profits. We should have been experiencing a ratio of at least £1m revenue per equity partner, with average profits per partner above £300,000. We were way off, with average profits meandering somewhere just above £180,000. Something had to be done and I am glad to say the partnership had a strong appetite for change.
By the March 1999 partner meeting, I had worked with the Partnership Council to refine the three-year plan. We had identified clear objectives, which we presented to the partners for their agreement. These included:
