Glengarry Glen Ross, LLP?

My brother Bill Shepherd is a world-class salesperson. Literally. He has sold many millions of dollars of services and products all over the world. (Fans of our sister blog, Gruntled Employees, will remember Bill from "Of sticker shock and empathy," which describes his near-death experience — my wedding).

Bill and I often talk about business — at least when we're not talking about the Red Sox. He often has terrific ideas on how I can further grow my law firm's business. Many of them are about running the firm more like a business than like a law firm — which is something I've consistently tried to do over the past eleven years.

One of his suggestions was to do what most businesses do to stimulate sales: hire salespeople. That's an idea that makes a lot of sense. But there's a major problem. Salespeople are generally paid on a commission basis. Rule 5.4 ("Professional Independence of a Lawyer") of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct (which govern the conduct of lawyers in almost every state) mandates that

A lawyer or law firm shall not share legal fees with a nonlawyer ….

(There are four exceptions, which aren't relevant to our discussion; they have to do with dead lawyers and things — call Haley Joel Osment). Bottom line: you can't pay commissions to nonlawyer salespeople. So that idea's a bust.

Or is it?

If you can't pay commissions to nonlawyer salespeople, what about paying commissions to lawyer salespeople? Saleslawyers, if you will. (You would never call them that, of course. They would be business-development attorneys, or something.)

As our friends over at the incredibly well-written, popular, and snarky blawg Above the Law have chronicled, it has been a tough year for associates at large law firms. (See their joint project with Law Shucks: the Layoff Tracker.) There have been more than 5,000 associates laid off by major US law firms since the beginning of last year.

What percentage of the 5,000 laid-off associates would have the aptitude and desire to be commissioned saleslawyers? They would still be lawyers, of course. But their focus would be on selling their firms' services to prospective clients. They would get valuable experience interacting with clients and learning about their firms' practices, but they wouldn't have to worry about billable-hour requirements and office memoranda. And if they were good at their jobs, they could make a bunch of money.

What do you think? Too Willie Loman? Too Alec Baldwin in Glengarry Glen Ross — "Always Be Closing"? (Warning: Alec Baldwin had a NSFW vocabulary even back then.) Too unlawyerly?

I particularly want to hear from associates, especially laid-off ones. Could you see yourself working as a business-development attorney? Put your thoughts in the comments below, or reach out to me with an @reply or DM on twitter at @jayshep.

• • •

By the way, just how popular is Above the Law? Well, last Thursday, ATL ran a seven-word blurb in its daily "Non sequiturs" post that included a link to this blog. Those seven words plus a link caused Client Revolution traffic over the next two days to increase by 2,300 percent. Yowza. Thanks, guys!

Comments

[Young Associate]

I could easily see myself being a business development lawyer. I am a young associate, but already find myself offering ideas (many of which are well-received) for opportunities to further my group's practice and reach out to clients and potential clients.

A lot of time and effort goes into such initiatives. Accordingly, practicing attorneys that focus on billables either find themselves doing a quasi-complete job of business development because they are focused on hours or doing a great business develop job and falling behind in hours.

[TracyTC]

I think the idea is inspired, but I can tell you that most attorneys are clueless when it comes to biz dev. How do I know? I'm a long-time litigator who took a detour into online marketing for realtors for a number of years and recently rolled my legal background and sales/marketing background together and joined the legal recruiting ranks. I talk to highly credentialed associates all day long who don't have the first clue that biz dev even matters. It definitely isn't something that is taught in law school. Everything I know I taught myself.

I for one would like to see more conversation around this topic. You'd be doing young attorneys a huge service to get them even thinking about biz dev. In fact, I'll jump on that soapbox with you. It pains me greatly to see so many smart attorneys out there without the first clue how to support the business of law. You can be the sharpest attorney going, and you are still becoming less and less relevant to firms these days, if you can't generate business. You definitely won't be surviving under your own shingle.

[Business Development Attorney]

I am an attorney that had worked in business development for four years. Personally, I find it more fun that the traditional practice. And it is possible to make a decent living do what I do. Mind you, the used car salesman approach would definitely not fly with any clients I know. I came into the field because I was fed up with the long hours and volatilty of the typical legal job, and I am quite happy to have done so.

[Non-box Thinker]

So don't pay a direct commission. Set a sliding scale that pays a bonus on the basis of "x" amount of client revenue.

Between a to d - the bonus is $
Between e to h - the bonus is $$
Between i to l - the bonus is $$$

See what I mean Verne?

[Hey Man]

Such people clearly exist in the very large firms. Biglaw firms speak of finders (the people who develop business for the firm), minders (experienced lawyers who can oversee matters as the work is done), and grinders (the people in the trenches doing the research, due diligence, and other work). I am familiar with some "finders" who achieved that status simply by knowing the law but also some who are just "connected" and have good personalities. Some finders aren't detail-oriented people and either could not or would prefer not to do the minding and grinding. Anyway, for the vast majority of smaller law firms, a person with a finder personality and skill set would be very valuable.

[Jody Nathan]

I do not see how you could use the most inexperienced lawyers to be rainmakers for a firm.

[no-longer-an-ass]

You really need to follow this through ten years. Are you setting up competition between saleslawyers and associates? What associate would want to have the burdens of doing legal work and needing to keep apace with the mutant freaks of nature?

[Visitor]

I've been in many different contexts as a practicing lawyer -- government, biglaw, in-house and small-law. For me, client development is about competence, trust and relationships, not sales per se. I think you need some grey hairs to present or build the three things, but it really depends on your market and practice area. There is no fix-all. But thinking strategically about what you are selling (and it probably isn't just legal services) is important. If a younger person can do it, they will open their own shop early.