Best Practice Tips

Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. Our firm used to have weekly firm meetings to discuss management and operational issues. We discontinued them due to the excessive time being spent and questionable results and value. Now we are finding that we are totally unfocused and having problems with poor accountability and things falling through the cracks.  We are now considering starting up weekly meetings again but want to insure that we do a better job of managing meetings than we did in the past. What are your thoughts? A. Before scheduling a meeting consider the purpose of the meeting. In general there are the following four types of meetings: 1. Strategy Meetings are rich group discussions involving strategy and planning sessions, brainstorming, group budgeting, marketing, or financial planning. These meetings are effective when everyone understands the purpose and the ground rules. 2. Reporting Meetings consist of one person informing the others in the room and sharing of information. These meetings are valuable only if the news is meaningful to most of the attendees. There may be Q&A and discussion, and different people may report out during the same meeting. These meetings should be structured. 3. Status Meetings are often low in value and you should keep them sort. Attorneys and other team members need to share information and brief sessions are effective at keeping the team on the same page. Consider stand-up meetings - where literally, everyone is standing. It keeps the meetings short. Require agendas. 4. Dilemma or Issue Meetings where just a few of the participants engage in detailed problem solving, are inefficient. Don't drag the whole group into dilemma or issue meetings. If your meeting is headed this direction deflect it for one-on-one time. Meetings work best when they have:

Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. At a recent managing partner forum several of the attendees at the seminar discussed recent experiences with embezzlement by employees. What can we do to protect our firms? A. During the past 25 years that I have been working with law firms I have been amazed at the number of embezzlements caused by unscrupulous attorneys, bookkeepers, office managers and other staff members. And yes – even partners. One out of five law firms in my client sample has actually lost funds due to some form of embezzlement and caught the offenders.  While some of the firms have prosecuted and taken other actions against the offenders the process was very painful, time consuming, and typically the funds are never recovered in entirety. Of course, this is if you catch the offenders. Many small firms’ internal control procedures are so lax that funds could be lost through embezzlement and the firm would not even know it. Only through effective internal accounting and financial controls can law firms protect their offices from theft. The goal is not to catch offenders – but to have a system in place that discourages and prevents the theft from occurring in the first place. The process involves implementing internal accounting and financial controls. In essence – segregation of duties. Here is an overview of such a system: Internal Control is the plan of organization and all of the coordinate methods and measures adopted within a business organization to safeguard its assets, check the accuracy and reliability of its accounting data, promote operational efficiency, and encourage adherence to prescribed managerial policies. The four basic elements considered essential in a satisfactory system of internal control are: 1. A plan of organization that provides appropriate segregation of functional responsibility and duties. 2. A system of authorization and record procedures adequate to provide reasonable accounting control over assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses. 3. Sound practices to be followed in performance of duties and functions of each of the organizational areas. 4. A degree of quality of personnel (competency) commensurate with responsibilities. SUGGESTIONS: RECEIPTS 1. Have someone other than the bookkeeper open the mail. (i.e. receptionist) 2. Have the person who opens the mail prepare a list of all checks/cash received in duplicate. 3. Have person responsible for mail route one copy of the check/cash list to the office manager or managing partner and the other copy along with checks/cash to person responsible for making the bank deposit. 4. Assign someone responsibility for preparing the deposit and taking it to the bank. This person should verify the check/cash list against checks and cash, prepare deposit slip and make the bank deposit. 5. Upon return from the bank the deposit clerk should provide the bookkeeper with the deposit slip, receipt from the bank, and the check/cash list. 6. Bookkeeper enters the deposit into the computer system. 7. Office manager runs and mails monthly statements - not invoice fee bills - to clients. DISBURSEMENTS 1. Don't give bookkeeper check signing authority.

Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. I am the firm administrator in our firm. We have 24 attorneys and are just transitioning to the 2nd generation of partners. I have been charged with obtaining information on strategic/business planning. Currently the firm does not have a strategic or business plan. What is the difference between a strategic plan vs. a business plan? Do you have a recommendation as to whether we should consider implementing a business plan or a strategic plan? A. Often the term strategic plan and business plan are used to mean the same thing. The general planning process is similar. However, I believe there is a difference. I consider a business plan to be the primary tool of choice when starting a new business or venture. Typically the audience is external - bankers, investors, prospective partners, etc. Due to the external nature of the audience the business plan document needs to be detailed with supporting narrative, company history, market analysis, marketing strategies, personnel plan, management biographies, and pro-forma financial statements. A strategic plan is typically the tool of choice for a going concern business or firm - such as an existing law firm such as yours. The intended audience is internal and its primary purpose is to focus the efforts of firm members and employees. Much less narrative and supporting detail is required. A strategic plan uses more of an outline format with bullet points and much less narrative and supporting detail.

Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. I am the Executive Director of a 75 attorney firm in Miami. We are meeting in a few months to revise our strategic plan. Some of our partners have suggested that as a result of the current business and economic climate that we start with a clean sheet of paper. Where should we start? What do you see as the key questions that we should be addressing? A. Strategic planning is essentially a five-step process. The first step begins be asking questions. Start by asking the following questions: 1.      What substantive issues does the firm face today? 2.      What issues will the firm face tomorrow? 3.      How has technology impacted (or will impact) how the firm conducts business and delivers services to clients? 4.      What are we doing and doing well? 5.      What are we not doing well? 6.      What do we need to improve or enhance? 7.      What metrics will tell us how we are doing? 8.      What should be eliminated? 9.      What are we not doing that we should be doing? 10.  What kind of training will we need to plan for?