Joining the Billable Hour Melee
I would be remiss to jump on the anti-billable hour campaign by only stating the obvious facts and observations as noted above. I say that because it is one thing to criticize when a viable alternative is available and quite another to criticize just because something isn't perfect. I am not convinced that this situation falls in the former, since I haven't heard a convincing argument for a solution that would disband the billable hour in all types of cases. The most glaring example is in the area of litigation, but I would expand that to include cases or matters that depend on either the court or other third-parties. It is difficult if not impossible to estimate legal fees in cases such as those. However, the flaw with my defense of the billable hour is that I have not allowed myself to fully escape the hours times rate mindset. I am still expecting legal fees to loosely reflect that simple equation. Otherwise I wouldn't say things like "it is difficult if not impossible to estimate legal fees," since the estimation idea is linked to what one would expect to receive had the billable hour been used. Any alternative to the billable hour is going to have to sever all ties with the hours times rate equation. One such alternative can be found in areas of practice such as estate planning. Most practitioners in this area bill on either a flat-fee or value-bases billing approach. Sometimes this flat-fee approach is very much linked to the billable hour. For instance, let's just say that a typical husband and wife estate plan would consist of an hour initial meeting, a couple hours of document drafting, an hour for a signing meeting and an hour for follow-up. Also assume an hourly rate of $50 (hourly rate number used in this example is not in any way representative of a typical hourly rate used by any practicing attorney in any part of the country. I picked it out of thin air for illustration purposes only). This traditional estate plan may then carry a flat-fee of $250. As this example illustrates this method is straightforward and workable.
But is that really an alternative to the billable hour? All I see in this approach is the elimination of daily time records and the passage of the risk baton from the client to the attorney, since inefficiency is no longer rewarding. I'm not complaining about either result to be honest. I was never a fan of the daily time record and I think that some of the risk should lie with the lawyer.
Admittedly, I need to spend more time researching the various non-traditional or alternative billing methods. I think there is room for improvement in this area and I am certainly looking forward to developing an approach that is acceptable to both the attorney and the client. I'm not sure that a reasonable comparison exists in today's marketplace but that will be where I start my research. How do hospitals, dentists, therapists, developers, or businesses in general, service or product-based, set their prices? Do the economic principles of supply and demand control? Can and do law firms bill based on the value delivered and at a rate up to what the market will bear? If the same work has a value of X to Client #1 for a fee of Y and 3X to Client #2 is a fee of 3Y for Client #2 justified? I will get back to you with my answers to these and more questions in the coming weeks. That is, of course, assuming that I can find the answers out there somewhere.











Recent Comments