Knowing me, knowing you

Lawyers have one commodity to sell to their clients, and that is their legal knowledge. This means that in a competitive environment, with an increasing number of 'new kids on the block' in the form of ABSs, and a new breed of clients who have learned to shop around with a TripAdvisor mentality and little of the traditional loyalty of previous generations, knowing how to please your clients and retain their custom is a tool of survival.

Inception process

Most compliance experts, both within firms and externally, understand the benefits of a thorough client inception process. In an outcomes-focused world, an in-depth analysis of the client at the beginning of a retainer ticks a number of boxes should the SRA, or others, ask for evidence of compliance and standards. A good inception process will flush out the very obvious deal-breakers in a solicitor-client relationship: such obvious problems as not being able to satisfy anti-money laundering legislation, acting in conflict situations, or not being able to reconcile the thorny conduct issues created by the opposing duties of confidentiality and disclosure. However, an inception process can do so much more than this; an excellent process will allow you to identify, capture and use information which will enable the firm to show its best side to the particular client and retain that client's loyalty beyond a one-off instruction. It can also provide data which will help the firm in its relationships with other clients.

Having the time and the resources to drill down a level does pay dividends, whatever the cynics may choose to argue. To have a process which enables you to understand exactly why a client has instructed you is time and money well spent. The basic question which should be asked is just this: why has the client approached your business? Was it a particular lawyer's or the firm's reputation which led them to your door? What does the client want to happen? Is this realistic, achievable, even legal? What does the client expect in terms of service delivery? What does the client expect to be told and by what means?

This type of scrutiny requires a process which facilitates a consistent method of capturing the information. So, a decision about how the information is collected and stored, and who will be performing the process, is essential. It also requires an investment in training. Who will be expected to initiate the inception conversation, and do they have a good understanding of the firm's ethos and the commitments they can make in the firm's name? Do they have the knowledge, maybe even the seniority, which is required to deliver, when necessary, difficult messages regarding what the firm won't or can't do for a client?

'File autopsy'

Gaining knowledge about the client does not end at the beginning of the matter, or even at the end of the matter. To steal a phrase used by American attorneys, the 'file autopsy' is a key source of information about the client. Information can be gleaned at the end of a matter which can provide useful data to feed into a continuous improvement cycle, which is often mooted by the SRA as something it would like to see in firms.

At the end of the matter, the question to ask is simply this: how was it for you? Complaints data is of course an obvious source of information, but there are other means of dissecting the solicitor-client relationship. Taking time to reflect on the paper chain of evidence that the file produces can be a rewarding eye-opener about the solicitor-client relationship. Did the client need to chase their solicitor for progress reports? Was information communicated in an appropriate way? Were instructions taken properly? Did the fee earner delegate too many of the niceties of the client relationship to others, and was that acceptable? Did the firm do what it said it could at the beginning of the relationship, and if it didn't, was the client kept in the loop about why this was so? Finally, and very importantly, does the client realise that the retainer is at an end and what that means in terms of an ongoing relationship?

Consider also the information which can gathered through an 'exit interview' with the client. Again, this is a commitment in terms of time and resources, but it will pay dividends in the information gathered about the commodity you are selling. Most clients do not have the time or inclination to raise what we would consider to be formal complaints, but what if there were little niggles or misunderstandings? These may be the basis for a decision not to reinstruct the firm, and the firm would never know. Far better to ask, find out, and decide whether anything about the service delivery should be altered.

It has often been said that the Legal Services Act 2007 created a quiet revolution in terms of the provision of legal services. We have seen this in the way we have had to adapt to changing regulatory requirements. Our client base has also adapted the way in which it chooses service providers. We need to capture as much information as we can about clients in order to ensure that we remain on their radars and that we continue to tick the right boxes for them. 

Tracey Calvert is a regulatory compliance specialist and the director of Oakalls Consultancy. She is the author of Conflicts and Confidentiality for Law Firms and Ethics in Law Firms: A Practical Guide, and co-author of OFR: Compliance in Practice and COLP & COFA: Compliance in Practice, all published by Ark Group.

tcalvert@oakallsconsultancy.co.uk

www.oakallsconsultancy.co.uk