No one wants to do it.

It’s not like most firms enjoy evaluating and vetting legal software solutions for their firm. So it’s common for firms to simply ignore the problem.

Anything to minimize the amount of upfront work they do.

Maybe they do half the amount of research and vetting required to evaluate their legal software. Or none of it. It’s just software after all.

What could go wrong?

Legal software often comes with unexpected downsides

Purchasing the wrong software increases transitional pain and user onboarding. It also magnifies the potential downsides you experience at your firm. Here’s an example of legal software gone wrong.

This review speaks volumes doesn’t it?

It’s a devastating account from an active customer. This concise review tells us a lot about the downsides that come with poorly vetted software.

• This software is incredibly difficult to use. Translation? Associates spend more of their time on non-billable work than they should.  
• This customer gave their software zero stars. He states: “this product has no redeeming features” stating the product is: unusable, the worst and doesn’t work.
• Associates are forced to use unsecure web browsers, risking client confidentiality and increasing their firm’s risk of legal liability.
• This reviewer’s word choice suggests that  morale has declined at this firm
• It’s an eBilling product that struggles to handle… billing.

This looks pretty bad doesn’t it?

This firm continues to use a system that (a.) costs more money and makes everyone miserable (b.) doesn’t perform as expected (or at all) and (c.) leaves the firm exposed to potential lawsuits.

This isn’t the worst part.

This law firm is still using this product! They’re trapped in an unpleasant situation with an eBilling product that takes money from their business.

How do you avoid making their mistake?

Choosing the right software solution begins with self evaluation

You’ll need to take stock of your current situation as a firm.

You should have a clear idea of (a.) who you are as a firm (b.) where you’d like to go as a firm and (c.) whether the software providers you’re considering are workable, a fit, or simply wrong for you. Think about approaching this from the standpoint of “what does the firm need?“

Here’s a few broad categories you can start with.

1. List habits (good and bad). Do you use hourly rates, value pricing or contingency billing? Does the legal software you’re considering do this natively or is this simply something they tacked on to their feature set? Do you have a specific set of policies and procedures you follow or does your firm follow a process that’s more fluid?
2. Outline goals and outcomes. It’s a common mistake for firms to look at features first. Begin your research by focusing first on the specific goals you have. Planning on adding remote staff in the future? Your needs are very different from the large firm with lots of in-house staff. What about solo firms looking to grow quickly vs. firms that are looking to stay small? You’ll need to outline the goals and outcomes you’re looking for first. Features should be dictated by goals.
3. Determine future needs. If you’re running an estate planning firm with lots of paperwork, you’ll need document management/backups in place to protect against fires or floods. What if you defend lots of high-risk, celebrity or controversial clients? You’ll need software with an emphasis on data encryption and communication privacy. Think about the needs you’ll have both now and in the future.
4. Assess risk and safety. What are the group policy and security requirements for your firm (e.g. 256K-bit SSL encryption and SSAE 16 Type II certification)? Do you need software solutions to accommodate specific requirements  (e.g. user permissions/roles)?

Next you’ll want to use the MoSCoW method (e.g. Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won’t have) to identify your deal breakers and non-negotiables.

Take this legal software provider for example.

It takes 45 days to get up and running. They provide onboarding / training but a support manager is only available for the first 90 days. After that you’re on your own.

Is this a deal breaker for your firm?

A self-evaluation means you know whether their offer will work for your firm or not.

Look for…

• Product wants. What are the specific product wants and needs of your firm? Are you looking for a SaaS, on-premise or hybrid software? Small, medium or enterprise class software?
• Feature sets. What features or lack of features are acceptable versus deal breakers? Are these requirements static and unchanging or will they evolve as your research gains clarity?
• Warranties and agreements. Will you need any assurances? Does your firm require an SLA? If you need one it’s probably a good idea to determine whether your providers are willing to provide that.
• Budget requirements. Product features aren’t created equal. For example, document management at the SME level isn’t the same as it is at the enterprise level.

This is the upfront research that matters most.

The data you accumulate at this stage acts as a compass. The data you accumulate from your self-evaluation gives you the criteria you need to qualify and disqualify potentials.

Identified a list of potentials?

Excellent, you’re ready for the next phase in your due diligence.

Step #1: Search for credibility

Credibility is a gift, an important part of the sales process.

It’s an especially important component of an effective value proposition. Researchers at Stanford University’s Persuasive Tech Lab, identified four types of credibility you can (and should) use to vet legal software providers.

Reputed credibility

Positive feedback and recommendations from an objective, 3rd party source. Unbiased reviewers, ideally attorneys and firms who have worked with the companies/software solutions you’re considering. This could be a testimonial on your site, reviews on Trust Radius, Capterra or G2, or recommendations via Google search.

and

Software solutions with reputed credibility…

• Rely on 3rd party reviews and testimonials
• Have case studies and professional product reviews
• Trust seals and badges from providers like G2, Capterra, BBB, etc.
• Positive or negative press/media coverage
• Client lists, connections to influencers and (to a lesser degree) awards

Use reputed credibility to flush out pain points, mistakes, objections and experiences.

Presumed credibility

Presumed credibility is all about the mere-exposure effect.  A psychological phenomenon where we develop a preference for things – simply because we’re familiar with them. I saw your ads on Above the Law, I read your LexisNexis guest post, I listened to your interview on Attorney Talk, etc.

Presumed credibility uses the mere-exposure effect to…

• Creates comfort, likeability and familiarity
• Improves processing fluency and increases receptivity
• Increase trust by default (helpful if the providers you’re evaluating deserve that trust)

Earned credibility

As a prospective customer, you’ve had a positive experience with the legal software firms you’re evaluating. Their website is easy to navigate, sales calls were productive and helpful, their content was clear and concise, etc.

Legal software providers with earned credibility…

• Have a consistent track record.
• Don’t ask for the unnecessary upfront.
• Answer your objections.
• Are candid and helpful.

Surface credibility

Your subjective opinion of the legal software solutions you’re evaluating (e.g. This is easy to use, I like how this looks, looks trustworthy). Examples of surface credibility include:

• Good product branding
• Professional website design
• No errors, bugs or technical problems
• Demo availability
• A site/product that’s easy-to-use
• Staff photos, bios and company contact info
• High quality imagery

Legal software with good surface credibility are…

• Invested in their product and service.
• Have the right credentials, values and ideals
• Use legal software conventions and your pre-existing expectations to build trust

Step #2: Vet providers legal software solutions

Experienced firms know it can be tough to determine whether a legal software solution is a proper fit. What looks good on paper may be a disaster in reality. It’s a common practice for software providers to offer a demo or free trial of their product.

Take advantage of it.

• Request demos. You’ll need time to verify that the software solutions you’re considering will work with the tools and resources you’re already using. Requesting a demo + sales call gives you the details you need to gauge your provider’s familiarity with their own product.
• Verify product development. Look for continued investment/development into the product. Ask about their product road maps, implementation and future plans; you’ll want to verify that the product you’re buying isn’t simply a cash grab to prop up a struggling company.
• Make sales calls. How are sales people trained? Are they knowledgeable and focused on serving your needs or are they pushy and aggressive closers who are only focused on the sale? Remember the saying: How they sell is how they’ll serve.
• Ask for clear upfront pricing. Verify the total cost of ownership (e.g. initial, training and future costs). Get clear details on any incidentals or extras not listed.
• Share your objections. Share your concerns and objections with each vendor. Ask for a solution to your core objections. Look for SLAs, guarantees and warranties. Take note of vendors who are unwilling to commit fully to their own product.
• Look for support.  Your team will most likely need onboarding, training and support. Is this comprehensive? One-on-one? Self serve?  Ask software providers if they’re willing to extend the support you need to get buy-in from your team.

Make a real effort to use the legal software in a day-to-day setting. Notice any red flags, run into any problems? Ask about it. Have questions or concerns? Raise them. Behave as if you were already their best, most profitable customer.

Outline your deal breakers ahead of time. Then watch how legal software providers respond.

Pay attention to their content, style, tone and approach. Are their support reps irritable and difficult? Do they give you incomplete answers? Does the software fail to perform as expected (or simply fail)?

The cost of failure is high. Too high for you to ignore

No one wants to research and vet legal software.

Which is why it’s ignored so often. Partners and associates at law firms, they’re already exhausted and overworked. For many, it’s about finding “good enough” rather than identifying “great.”

Don’t let it happen to your firm.

This isn’t just a case of low priority work. It’s about the tools you need to grow and maintain your firm. Researching and vetting your legal software takes time, but the rewards are there. Legal software often comes with unexpected downsides.

This doesn’t have to be the case for your firm.

Choosing the right legal software begins with self-evaluation, asks the right questions, and ends with complete answers. Keep downsides to a minimum. With the right amount of research and vetting you’ll find the perfect legal software solution for your firm.

Because the stakes are high, too high for you to ignore.

“How can you get out of paying your attorney fees?”

An anonymous user on Quora submitted this question; at first glance, they seem to be interested in accepting their attorney’s hard work on their behalf. They just don’t want to pay for it. Maybe this is an overreaction; perhaps this client has simply run out of money?

Here’s another question.

“What’s the best way to fire an attorney and recoup fees?” The intent of this question is abundantly clear. The client is dissatisfied, more than that, they don’t want their attorney to be paid for their work.

This is unethical.

Delinquent clients are part of attorney billing

Or are they?

Is there a way to change this for the better? Can you increase the likelihood that your clients will pay your invoice completely and on time? Here are five principles you can use to ensure you’re paid well for your hard work.

Principle #1: Choose the right clients

This isn’t something you’re taught in law school. Rainmaking is an important part of a successful legal practice, yet it’s something many attorneys struggle to do well. Many attorneys focus their attention on clients who need their services and agree to pay for said services.

This line of thinking is backward.

Instead, it’s more profitable to focus on the clients that meet two important criteria. They must be willing and able to spend the resources needed to retain your services.

Isn’t this the same thing?

Not at all.

• Clients who are willing to spend: These clients understand the value behind your services; they also see value in your firm specifically. They’re eager to retain you, and they have a respectful tone, and in some cases, a kind of reverence in their tone when they speak to or about your firm.
• Clients who are able to spend: These clients can invest the resources needed to retain your services over the long term. They have the time to work with you on their matter, the money needed to solve their problems, and the necessary information to ensure you provide them with a reasonable to ideal outcome.

Your clients should meet both criteria.

• Clients who are unwilling to invest tend to become vampires. They believe they’re the special ones in the relationship, so they require you to bend over backward to keep their business. As their demands increase, the amount of revenue you receive decreases.
• Clients who are unable to invest string you along with promises; they use tactics like guilt and shame to tug at your heartstrings. They plead for understanding, for second chances, for more support. These clients drain your time and your bank account.

Focusing on clients who meet both criteria addresses:

• Clients who refuse to pay on time or at all
• Fee disputes from unhappy clients who refuse to pay a cent more than they have to
• Clients who spend less time and money with the firm
• The perception that invoices + follow up is sleazy, rude or offensive
• Losing billables to shrink
• Clients threatening to file a bar complaint

Research from Hee‐Woong Kim et al. shows that there are two kinds of relationships clients have with their service providers.

1. Constrained relationships.I have to stay with my law firm to get what I want.
2. Dedicated relationships.I want to stay with my law firm.

Choosing clients who have both the willingness and the ability to pay creates both dedicated and constrained relationships. If your clients want to stay, they’re far more likely to do what it takes to remain a client (i.e., pay your invoice).

Principle #2: Set and enforce firm-wide policies

With firm-wide policies, your firm operates as a single unit. Attorneys are expected to turn in their timesheets at the same time, LEDEs is standard operating procedure, and everyone uses the same minimum billing increments when adding their time to their timesheets.

If this sounds obvious, it’s not.

But it’s an important step as this helps firms track their hourly billings, improve utilization and realization rates, and create more accurate revenue projections.

Just one problem.

Setting policies is one thing; enforcing them is another. According to an Altman Weil survey, law firm partners were the number one impediment to change in the vast majority of law firms.

“In 69 percent of firms, partners’ resistance to change is an embedded drag on progress, and recent economic successes may obscure any clouds on the horizon – at least for the short-sighted.”

Law firm leadership is most likely unwilling to change. If you’d like their cooperation, there needs to be a sufficient amount of pain involved.

• 69 percentof law firm partners resisted most change efforts (up from 44 percent in 2015)
• 66 percentof law firms experienced insufficient economic pain to motivate change
• 60 percentof partners were unaware of what they might do differently

If these firm-wide policy changes will be successful, change needs to be driven from the top-down, firm leaders need to lead by example.

How does this help attorneys get paid?

It’s easier to follow client billing guidelines. It’s easier to make changes or campaign for client support if everyone is on the same page. Timekeeping is easier and more streamlined, billing, and invoicing more fluid. It’s easier to send clients the information they need to make good on their promise to pay.

Principle #3: Follow billing guidelines

Successful client billing begins with communication.

Communication ensures that you’re paid completely and on time. If you’d like to avoid a billing dispute, you’ll need to identify the billing guidelines that govern the relationship. You’ll want to flush out:

• What’s required or permissible
• Billing details or steps that require approval by the client
• Actions that are forbidden or unacceptable
• Stop words or hidden rules that immediately flag your invoices for review

The vast majority of billing issues can be narrowed down to communication. Address these issues at the beginning of your relationship with clients. Then, respect any boundaries you and your clients have set to avoid any potential deal-breakers or issues with nonpayment.

Principle #4: Make it easy for clients to pay you

According to LawPay, law firms that accept online payments get paid 39 percent faster. If you offered your clients Net 30 terms, this means you’d be paid 11.7 days faster. This would have a drastic effect on your cash flow if you received payment for every invoice faster.

The easier it is for clients to pay you for services rendered, the more likely they are to do it.

Accepting online payments can and will increase your revenue.  Research by Richard Feinberg demonstrated that consumers with credit cards were willing to spend 50 — 200 percent more, above and beyond cash or check expenditures.

Principle #5: Use alternative fee arrangements

A Legal Trends report found 44 percent of law firms list client’s inability to pay all at once as the most common reason for nonpayment. Firms also state that 31 percent of clients pay late even when they have the funds. This is, of course, the problem; neither party actually wants to communicate.

The majority of your client relationship concerns revolve around money and communication. This is good news because it gives savvy firms a chance to use this knowledge for their benefit.

How do you fix this?

You have a discussion about alternative fee arrangements with clients at the beginning of your relationship. You bring this up as part of your client intake process, presenting the options that work best for you and your client.  Research shows 22 of the 650 law firms serving the Fortune 1,000 rely on AFAs. AFA usage is at an all-time high, but it hasn’t gone fully mainstream yet.

But flat fee work isn’t as profitable!

That’s the real reason why so many firms refuse to integrate alternative fee arrangements in their practice. Is this actually true? Here’s what an Altman Weil survey found:

“When asked to compare the profitability of non-hourly work and hourly work, 84% of proactive firms find their non-hourly projects to be at least as profitable as their hourly projects. This is the case in only 51% of reactive firms. Narrowing the focus, 40% of proactive firms report their non-hourly projects are more profitable than their hourly projects, compared to only 10% of reactive firms. The lesson is that firms that make a rigorous effort to understand and manage a new or evolving market tactic like alternative fees generally succeed in doing so, and enjoy increasing benefits over time.”

Alternative fee arrangements are worth testing, especially if it produces more revenue for your firm. It’s an excellent way to combat the downward pressure on fees, sluggish realization rates, and poor financial performance.

Attorney billing is successful when you get paid

Use these five principles, and you’ll increase the likelihood that your clients will pay your invoice completely and on time. Choose the right clients, create the right environments, follow billing guidelines, and you’ll find your realization rates continue to improve.

With consistent effort, you’ll find you’ve created dedicated relationships with clients who are eager, willing, and able to spend, no defaults necessary.