f/k/a . . .

Just as Prof. Yabut decried the abuse of ellipses, f/k/a’s editor emeritus ethicalEsq

is getting a little annoyed by the ”ethics aside” approach of the gurus and evangelists

of law firm branding, marketing and alternative or value pricing.  They offer the easily-

tempted lawyer a paradise of premium clients and fees, with increased profits, while

never probing the ethical and fiduciary duties of the lawyer to insure that the client is

fully informed, treated fairly (and without manipulation) and, in the end, charged a fee

that is reasonable for competent and diligent services.

 

Yesterday, AdamSmith Esq’s Bruce MacEwan reminded his readers, in a post

about marketing (pointed to by Lisa Stone), that

 ”a core conviction of mine is that — cultural considerations aside,

admittedly a large “aside” — the business of law firms is not fundamentally

different from the business of corporations.” (emphasis added)

Yes, law firms do have a different “culture” than business corporations, and

much of that difference has to do with professional ethics. But, there appears to be

little chance that Bruce will ever get to this “aside”.  Earlier this year, he made it clear: 

“this blog, I will remind you again, is not about ethics, it’s about economics.”  [As

Church Lady used to say, "Isn't that special?" -- and convenient.]

 

turning over in bed–
move aside!
katydid

               Issa

 

“Aside” means “Out of one’s thoughts or mind” and “Set out of the way; dispensed with.”

(Am. Heritage Dictionary, 2000)  I don’t think our ethical and fiduciary duties should

be set aside when dealing with how we attract clients or set fees.   See the Intro to the

ABA Statement on Principles in Billing for Legal Services (1996) for some straight-

talk and pointers on the issues.  We covered some of the relevant issues earlier this week 

in LexThink about higher fees (er, value billing).   Those who are advocates of “modern”

marketing and pricing methods for attorneys have a duty to put the ethical issues front and

center.  If they, and those who are so eager to follow them to higher profits, need a place

to start, they might take a look at some of our prior posts — or read them again with our

ethical duties in mind.  For example:

- brand Lex (branding to permit premium pricing and reduce price elasticity)

- chronomentrophobia (hourly billing is not the problem)

- value billing or venal bilking? (what is value billing? what should it be?)

- fees and the lawyer-fiduciary

- jackal sequel (image-making rather than quality as the basis for higher fees)

- fee fie foe and fum (change values first)

It’s worth repeating what I said two days ago, after LexThink:  “I am all for modernizing the law

firm and the lawyer-client relationship — so long as it is a tool for better serving the client’s

 interests, rather than one that merely uses modern selling techniques and technology to

articificially increase lawyer fees and profits and to stave off the democratizing effects in the

legal services marketplace of the digital revolution.”

 

move aside
cloud and fog!
lotuses are blooming

 

 

baby sparrow
move aside!
Mr. Horse passes

 

 

 

-  from The Haiku of Kobayashi ISSA, 

translated by David G. Lanoue