header-logo header-logo

04 December 2008 / Chris Parr
Issue: 7348 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Client care

Should keeping clients happy be a  law firm’s highest priority? Without a  doubt, says Chris Parr

How much of a law firm’s activity  is actually dedicated to, or  orientated primarily around, its  clients?

If partners are honest about the  answer to that question, they may find  that they are in the 40–50% range.  Consider that. Essentially, all of a firm’s  income comes from its clients; so why  would a firm not have those clients in  mind in everything it does?

The CEO of one organisation for  which I used to work (not a law firm)  once made a statement: “Do not hold  any meeting unless the primary purpose of that meeting is to add value to a  client or to the clients in general.” Th e  organisation met this with incredulity.  What about all the “administration”  meetings that are required in the life  of a company? What about budget  meetings and meetings to discuss HR  and location issues? There seem to be  many reasons to meet which do not  relate to the clients of the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll