It's not about invoices. It's about risk

When people talk about hourly billing and (gak!) alternative billing (I loathe that term), they often think that the subject is "different methods of invoicing." And really, when it gets right down to it, who cares about invoices? I mean, it's not a fundamentally interesting topic. Most people think that lawyers and law firms exist to rip them off. A client worrying about a firm's accounting method is like a nonswimmer on a sinking ship worrying about whether the water is cold.

But it's not about invoicing at all.

It's about risk.

Clients hire lawyers and law firms to help them deal with risk. They hire a trusts-and-estates lawyer to reduce the risk of their assets not going where they want after they die. They hire a securities lawyer to reduce the risk of getting in a jam with the SEC. They hire an employment lawyer to reduce the risk of an expensive employee lawsuit disrupting their workplace.

A client hires a good lawyer to reduce risk.

But most lawyers actually create more risk for their clients by billing hourly. Billing by the hour means that the client has no control over how much the job is going to cost. No control, and no certainty. In other words, more risk for the client (and no risk for the law firm).

But fixed pricing lowers the client's risk, by giving the client certainty in the cost. And the law firm can lower the client's risk even more by sharing it with the client, using a holdback (where part of the fee is held back unless the law firm succeeds) or a success bonus.

The bottom line is that clients want you to reduce their risk, not increase it. That's what they care about.

Not invoicing methods.