Three ways to revive difficult strategic projects

Many law firms will have conducted some form of strategy review within the past five to ten years, with limited success. As a result, their partners and leaders may be resistant to further reviews, arguing ‘we tried this before and it didn’t work’. Failure to implement can become a vicious cycle: if the firm has a history of uncompleted projects, partners will tend to keep their heads down when a new project is introduced and bide their time until yet another initiative bites the dust.

There are a number of ways to revive or kickstart stalled projects. Persistence is certainly necessary, and law firm leaders have often told me that they had to be just like a dog with a bone to see through some of their initiatives. As well as dogged persistence in the face of opposition or indifference, there are three methods which leaders can use to gain or regain impetus.

1. Repaint the vision

Visions do not always have to focus on nirvana. Sometimes, a doom-and-gloom vision is a necessary wake-up call;
bad news can help to kickstart action.
The loss of an important client, the defection of a key partner or the
prospect of poor financial results have
all been effectively used by leaders
to start or reinvigorate projects.

There may have been resistance in good times to revising the firm’s performance management system or taking action to resolve a consistently underperforming team or office, but
these may be easier to address against
a pessimistic backdrop. Conversely, changes to partner profit sharing are always more tricky when profits are
going down and not up.

Equally, a more positive vision may be needed to introduce the possibility of merger or an acquisition. Here, scenario planning may enable leaders to present
the alternative possible future states that the firm may face.

2. Remodel the strategic project

If a project has stalled or remains uncompleted, it sometimes helps to
modify the initiative or make substantial changes to it – though just a change of name is not enough.

Clearly, duplication of effort should be avoided by utilising the good work that has been done before. But fresh research, updated financial analysis and further insights into possible downsides can all help to give a project a makeover. Work can also be done to resolve previous obstacles and sticking points.

It can sometimes help to reduce the scope of the project. Some firms have needed more than one attempt to successfully implement a client relationship management system. This has often been achieved by limiting the scheme initially to a pilot programme affecting only a few
key clients.

3. Change the project team
or leader

Getting busy practising lawyers to take on non-billable projects has never been easy. When fee earners do agree to head up a project or initiative, they often promise much and deliver little, blaming work overload for their inactivity or lack of success. Whilst continuity is good, sometimes a complete change of team is necessary to form one with fresh ideas and no preconceptions or historical baggage. Other times, changing the project leader is enough.

By way of example, several firms have made numerous unsuccessful attempts to build or strengthen one of their departments. The building of a successful corporate department, for instance, often falls into the pile of projects that seem too difficult to achieve. It is not easy for regional or mid-sized firms to build thriving commercial departments, and all too easy for partners using the ‘we have tried this before’ argument to resist renewed attempts to bolster up groups that lack critical mass, a decent client base or quality partners.

Establishing a successful corporate department should never be treated as a Holy Grail initiative for a mid-sized law firm. Deep research is always needed to determine if such a move is strategically necessary, practicably viable or even likely to be welcomed by the firm’s core client base. There has to be a compelling answer to the question of why a capable corporate partner or group of partners should ever be willing to join your firm. Buoyed up by favourable research, however, an enthusiastic new team or project leader may be able to create the success that
has previously eluded the firm.

Overcoming resistance

The tendency of partners to resist change on the grounds that ‘we tried this before and it didn’t work’ remains a strong disincentive for a leadership team to consider new ideas, introduce new plans or refresh uncompleted projects – even where plans and projects seem to be critical to success. People often prefer the certain imperfect rather than the risk and uncertainty of change in pursuit of something better.

There are, however, only three types of law firms in the change management game: those that make things happen; those that watch things happening; and those that say ‘what happened?’ It is better to be in the first category than in
the last.

Nick Jarrett-Kerr advises law firms worldwide on strategy, governance
and leadership development
(www.jarrett-kerr.com)

Copyright & permissions