A Note from Shireen Hilal
When it comes to winning more work, I tell law firm leaders to spend less time watching their competitors and more time understanding their clients. The firms that stand out are usually the ones that understand what their clients are under pressure to solve, the pushback they’re getting internally, and the type of support that would make their lives easier.
That’s why I went directly to in-house counsel and compliance executives in my own network for this article. I wanted to understand what law firms could do better from the people buying, managing, and defending the spend.
Their answers were candid, practical, and pretty consistent: stop making clients work so hard to get useful advice, manage budgets, and explain the value of outside counsel internally.
A few of their practical takeaways:
- Read the room: Rate increases and generic legal updates land differently when your client has a smaller team, a tighter budget, and more work sitting in-house. Show that you understand their business reality before asking for more attention or money.
- Customize the advice: Not every issue requires the same level of lawyering. Understand your client’s risk appetite, don’t over-redline points they’ll never send over, and know when they need a quick call or practical email instead of a formal memo.
- Help stretch their budget: Look for practical ways to share the work and pass on savings instead of assuming your team should do all of it or pad every pass-along cost.
- Act like a true partner: Tailored training, practical tools, and visibility opportunities can make the relationship feel like a real partnership instead of another vendor.
I’m grateful to the in-house leaders who shared their perspective so candidly for this piece. Their feedback is exactly why I like this work: better growth and client retention strategies start with empathy. If you’re trying to better understand what in-house teams need now and how your firm can respond, I’m happy to be a sounding board. Meanwhile, the full Law360 article is below.
As Published in Law360
The Issue: Client Budgets Have Tightened, and Law Firms are Feeling the Pinch
As many clients have reduced their budgets across the board,[1] legal spending is no exception. Law firms are experiencing lower productivity at all seniority levels, longer payment cycles and increased write-offs as clients push back on bills.[2] The overall pie seems to be getting smaller, so how do you maintain — or even better, increase — your firm's slice?
Law is a relationship business, and winning more work starts with better understanding your clients' needs. So I went straight to the source and asked my network of general counsel and chief compliance officers in a variety of industries — from finance to tech and everything in between — for their perspective, and share what I've learned below.
The In-House Perspective
Let's start with the numbers for context. Layoffs were mentioned on the latest round of public company earnings calls at the highest rate since the start of the pandemic as companies assured investors that they will continue to find more ways to push earnings to the bottom line.[3]
The Association of Corporate Counsel's 2024 survey reported that 52% of in-house leader respondents have been ordered to cut costs, 59% of respondents are seeing increased workloads, and 58% are overseeing at least three additional business functions beyond legal, with 27% overseeing five or more functions.[4] Further, 1 in 4 in-house professionals plan to outright cut the number of law firms with which they work in the next year, with 79% of them identifying cost-effectiveness as the reason.[5]
Many of your senior in-house contacts are doing more with less and stretched thin. They have been through multiple rounds of layoffs, have hiring freezes or strict one-in, one-out mandates, and are operating with smaller outside counsel budgets — meaning, they are personally absorbing more work with fewer team members.
These executives are stepping up as career coaches while reaching down to manage more junior tasks, taking on additional titles without commensurate pay increases, and are the "last point of resistance" (as one aptly put it) in businesses that are innovating fast — read: taking on more risk — given the pressure for their companies to produce.
What I also heard is in-house executives overwhelmingly feel that outside counsel could support them better and aren't pivoting to their current needs — a dangerous sentiment in any relationship business. Rates have relentlessly increased, partners appear more interested in saving themselves time than giving their clients shortcuts, and many firms are not acting as true partners, i.e., putting skin in the game, looking for creative ways to stretch budgets, etc.
Some quotes from my correspondences that capture their sentiment:
- Chief compliance officer: "At least two-thirds of the thought leadership I get from Am Law 100 firms don't apply to our business .... It's infuriating to finally get to these emails after hours and realize halfway through that they don't cover asset management types in which we invest even though the partners sending the updates are on retainer."
- Lead product counsel: "This is so obvious that I'm reluctant to say it — pushing 7%- 9% fee increases to us two years in a row because you're keeping up with other firms on associate salaries when we've been through multiple rounds of layoffs means you're not reading the room."
- Corporate secretary and head of legal: "Many of us came from firms, so we are aware that firms make money off billing more - essentially, inefficiency. But Wall Street expects operating income leverage. Our rate of growth in spend can't go up, and we are incentivized accordingly given our stock-heavy executive compensation. Shareholders leave if we don't grow operating income at the same rate or higher than topline revenue, and we need incentive alignment from our outside partners."
- Chief corporate counsel: "Stop getting 'cute' with the bills. We know you aren't writing off questionable time anymore because we've sharpened our pencils, so now we get bills that are even more padded and laughable - creating more work for my team in reviewing them."
- Chief legal officer: "In response to fee increases, I'm not only moving downstream for services; I'm also getting more creative about how to manage the work internally long-term because this isn't sustainable."
- Head of legal and chief compliance officer: "Given high rates and my limited time to manage counsel, I want to speak with just one real expert. I generally won't pay for associate time and I certainly won't pay for multiple subject matter experts."
- Chief compliance officer: "I don't have time to hunt for a diamond in the rough - if you already work with me and can't take five minutes to point out the sections in a marketing memo that apply to me, don't bother sending it."
Yikes. Thankfully, they were also eager to share advice on how law firms can partner with clients better and differentiate themselves in the sea of sameness. There's an opportunity to show your current clients you are empathetic and responsive to their current needs, and to take clients from the firms that are too slow or set in their ways to shift.
Advice From Inside Counsel
The guidance shared below coalesce around a unifying theme: Firms should be providing legal advice that is customized to match a company's specific risk profile and in-house counsel's preferences, consisting of actionable and practical insights, with associated costs that are supported by undeniable value.
Strategic Investment: Driving Client Loyalty Through Value-Added Services
Consider how you can add value beyond the billable hour by identifying the areas in which your law firm already has sunk technology costs and libraries of templates for commoditized work, and make the switch from upcharging clients to investing in them.
For many corporate clients smaller than the Fortune 500, technology licenses on document review platforms and contract readers are prohibitively expensive to purchase in-house, but you can offer access at pass-through rates or a modest upcharge.
The upside: Once your firm is familiar with a client's standard practices (e.g., checking for consistent data privacy provisions), you're in a prime position to propose more advanced services (e.g., higher-end privacy work), benefiting from both a deeper understanding of the client's needs and the goodwill you've cultivated by initially investing in their cost concerns.
Similarly, during the course of litigation, opportunities may arise to enhance a client's risk- related policies — such as information governance. Offering a better template for such policies as a courtesy reinforces the image of your firm as a partner invested in their long- term success, rather than a service provider.
While it's tempting to seek out ways to add to billable charges each month, your firm can instead decide where it's willing to invest in long-term client loyalty, which is particularly critical when clients are looking to consolidate law firms.
Adaptive Advocacy: Customizing Counsel to Fit the Client
Understanding the unique business context and communication preferences of in-house counsel is not optional — it's essential. They expect legal advice that aligns with their preferred modes of communication and their company's risk appetite.
One pet peeve that came up was overly cautious advice that burdens clients with unnecessary details or changes. It's not just a waste of in-house counsel's time and money, it signals the law firm's need to check a box instead of the client's need for relevant advice. Instead, stick to changes you know your clients care about, be upfront about what you did not address — e.g., in a cover email — and avoid charging for extraneous work.
In the same vein, when in-house counsel reach out with a quick query, they're looking for concise, actionable advice, not 10-page memoranda. The ability to determine when to provide succinct, practical guidance not only meets their immediate needs but also demonstrates your firm's understanding of their business pace and decision-making processes.
Lastly, communication style is equally critical. Inquire directly about their preferred mode - calls, emails or texts — and adapt accordingly. This simple step shows respect for their time and working style, and fosters more efficient interactions.
Streamlined Updates: Curated Advice for Busy Clients
Busy in-house executives need legal updates that are not only timely but also trimmed of excess. If your firm sends update emails, personalize them for current clients and spare them the frustration of sifting through the irrelevant. For example, consider including notes such as, "definitely read these sections," or "note that the second half of this memo is wholly inapplicable to your business."
Even better, offer a 10-minute update call. Retainer clients in particular expect targeted insights rather than broad overviews and crave an application of the law that reflects their landscape with specific examples of what's commercially reasonable and not. This doesn't just benefit them — it puts you in the trusted-adviser seat and differentiates your firm from others lobbing over the same generic email.
Also important, when the buzz of headline-grabbing legal news - such as news about sanctions — fades, don't let your updates dwindle with it. Clients expect you to close the information loop with ongoing, relevant communication. This consistent engagement not only informs, but reassures them that when you reach out it is to give them relevant advice and not clickbait headlines.
Value-Driven Advocacy: Cutting Costs Without Cutting Corners
Clients are seeking legal partnerships with firms that inherently grasp the difference between indispensable expertise and superfluous billing, and that implement cost-saving opportunities without client intervention. This means minimizing charges for routine tasks that don't require high-level legal input, and offering bespoke solutions that lower both time and expense.
Some examples I heard from in-house counsel of what they believe should never be on a bill include charges for senior associates' note taking during calls and charges for research databases on top of associate time for conducting the research. They expect law firms to cover such operational costs as part of the basic service offering.
In terms of creative ways to cut costs, clients are looking for thoughtful allocation of tasks both within a firm's structure and between the firm and client to get the most out of their legal budget.
For instance, while your rates may have increased, you can shift routine tasks, such as public filings review, from higher-priced associates to more cost-effective paralegals to give clients more juice for the squeeze.
Further, offer to partner with cost-conscious clients to share the work if they are willing to do it. Some noted that they will pay for a partner's strategic advice but would rather memorialize it themselves, saving them from costly memo drafting; similarly, for small document productions, some would rather conduct their own email searches using firm- provided keywords.
And for clients handing over document reviews to outside counsel, they expect firms to more frequently suggest creative slicing and dicing of keywords to save on both money and time, without being prompted - something they feel they do too often.
These examples spotlight the need for law firms to adapt billing practices and also emphasize the broader trend: Today's legal services must be sculpted around efficiency and client-centered value.
True Partnership: Aligning With Client Success and Fostering Visibility
The value of a law firm is increasingly measured not just in legal outcomes, but in how well it integrates into the strategic framework of its clients' businesses. To be more than providers — to truly be partners — firms must embed themselves within the client's vision for growth and success.
Central to this embedded partnership are innovative billing strategies like flat fees or caps, which signal a law firm's commitment to shared financial stewardship and risk. Rather than a mere gesture, it's a shift toward prioritizing the client's bottom line alongside their own. Firms that succeed in delivering exceptional value within these structures foster a deeper level of trust and alignment with their clients, demonstrating an investment in the relationship that goes beyond traditional expectations.
The synergy doesn't end with the bills; it extends into cultivating the capabilities of in-house teams. For example, by offering tailored training sessions, law firms empower lean client teams, deepening their legal understanding and enabling them to navigate complex challenges more independently while providing firms with a deeper understanding of their clients' specific challenges, leading to services that resonate more profoundly.
Similarly, supporting in-house counsel in professional development opportunities - such as collaborating on speaking and writing engagements - positions them and, by extension, your firm as thought leaders in your respective spaces while supporting their career growth.
The ultimate objective is to create relationships anchored in mutual trust and respect. Law firms that proactively support the visibility and success of their in-house counterparts not only cultivate long-term loyalty but also position themselves as advisers attuned to navigating legal practice in the modern corporate environment.
Conclusion
Adopting a client-centric model will require a proactive shift from the norm, from challenging usual law firm monthly reporting to considering whether current reward systems emphasize the right behaviors, and means creating partnerships with strategic pricing, meaningful savings and enhanced client tools.
Reflecting on the beginning of the industrywide transformation post-2008 financial crisis, we've seen clients increasingly ask for budget caps and outside counsel guidelines while shifting down-market toward firms offering better value. But the response from most firms was sluggish, and several years of strong transactional activity staved off the full impact of this shift.
Today, there's little cushion - firms must adapt to these evolved client expectations or risk being left behind.
As one head of legal put it:
The firms that get our work know our business and are willing to be creative about fees — it's not a race to the bottom, but it is about overall value, and that means a team with diversity of thought so we get unique solutions, fee caps or other ways to get aligned on budget, and rates that are justified by high-value activities.
If the promise of better client relationships — and their revenue — isn't enough to convince you, consider the bonus of internal benefits. Law firm partners, currently navigating the tightrope between firm targets and the dread of client pushback on invoices, will find relief in this shift. By minimizing the adversarial aspect of fees for services and emphasizing value, the alignment between client needs and firm incentives means partners can rest easier, secure in the value they deliver.
I'd be remiss not to end with a "thank you" to the in-house leaders who shared their thoughtful advice. To my law firm readers, if you have feedback or are identifying trends or challenges you'd like to see addressed next quarter, I'd love to hear from you.
Shireen Hilal is the chief executive officer at Maior Strategic Consulting.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of their employer, its clients, or Portfolio Media Inc., or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/finance-chiefs-chip-away-at-expenses-despite-sunnier-economic-outlook-46e14040.
[2] Firms have also been shedding associates and staff in response to the slower market, and for transactional work in particular. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/fenwick-west-laying-off-nearly-10-of-attorneys-staff.
[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-02/meta-s-stock-bounce-shows-how-big-ticket-job-cuts-can-pay-off.
[4] https://www.globallegalpost.com/news/majority-of-global-clos-see-in-house-budgets-shrink-workloads-increase-acc-survey-shows-511754400.
[5] https://www.everlaw.com/resources/acc-report/.
