The View From the Corner Office | ALPS 411

Knowing When to Hold-um and When to Fold-um - A Dilemma for Boomer Lawyers

Robert Minto — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:00:00 +0000

As most of you know by now, I stepped aside as ALPS CEO in favor of a young superstar, David Bell, and assumed the role of Executive Board Chair of ALPS. I wasn’t ready to hang it up just yet, but with David in the wings as ALPS Chief Operating Officer, the time for the change just seemed right for ALPS, so I made the decision to move over. As Executive Chair I’ll still be in the office every day providing context and advice to ALPS' young management team and still have a finger on ALPS pulse as I work to make an already great ALPS board even more effective. My own feelings about the change proved interesting as I have wafted from regret to resolution, to joy and back. It’s given me the opportunity to reflect on an issue bigger than ALPS and certainly bigger than me.

When should older lawyers step aside and let the younger generation have their day in the sun and what will they do with their time? I remember the old saw “old lawyers never retire they just lose their appeal.” I actually thought it was funny when I was younger, but of late it has brought to mind the more serious question of what to do with the boomer bubble of lawyers that entered the practice in the early 1970s? In 1973 when I started practice I remember a number of really old lawyers that still practiced, and I remember thinking, how can we let them do this? They were great guys, but the skill set was not current and the memory just wasn’t what it used to be. Hey, it will happen to the best of us, actually all of us as we live longer. Even in the healthiest of us, cognitive capacity diminishes with age. Is practicing law like driving, at some point the state simply doesn’t renew your license? Certainly we and our families need to be looking at this, but with the demand for paid legal services declining in rural jurisdictions and self-help sites popping up all over the Internet, the issue becomes more important to society. We need the best and the brightest, most current and talented regardless of age in the legal profession. Younger doesn’t always mean better, in fact experience looms huge in defining a lawyer’s abilities. The fact is that law school admissions have fallen in the past few years because “the jobs don’t exist to support the current level of law graduates or Bar admission.” I’ve posed a lot of questions and clearly I don’t have answers for a lot of them, but I think we might look at this as an opportunity to change the world just a little.

Starting with the premise that many older lawyers (age 65 and up) probably have the economic ability to retire if they want, let’s look at what they would do if they retired. If I am any example, my family and the law have been my life. This has not left a lot of time to develop many hobbies. Sure I play golf a little (badly), I enjoy wood working, reading and, yes, even writing. Bonnie’s and my children grew up and to a degree stand on their own two feet and have become independent family units that don’t need (want ) us on a full time basis. Some day we may need them, but that’s a whole different issue for a different blog. My point—my generation of lawyers has a lot of good law left in us and we have a world of people out there who could use our skills. How do we make the connections without making it more difficult for the next generation of lawyers to survive economically? Well, the obvious answer seems simple enough—work through the local Pro Bono committee and accept assignments. The reality may be less obvious. Each of us lives and works in our communities and probably have a good sense of where the needs might be. To name a few that I see here in Missoula, returning veterans, families of deployed reserve and guard troops, homeless, agencies dealing with low income aging, and local legal aid societies. In addition, I think of the endless number of local charity boards that could benefit from a good legal mind on the board.

For example, I and several other boomer lawyers have started a discussion with our local district court judges about a project to help un-clog the motion calendars in our courthouse. We have a growing number of pro se domestic relations matters. Our self-help clinic does wonders at getting the paperwork in suitable form, but the litigants have no idea what to do in a courtroom or how to make sure that they hit all the necessary jurisdictional items. I think that a small group of lawyers working with an equal number of law students from our law school clinical program could serve in a volunteer advocate capacity to do the actual questioning in court to get all necessary testimony in without the court having to serve as inquisitor to make sure it all gets in. If it comes to pass, we hope to cut the pro se court time in half to make room for more critical contested civil matters. We don’t have a blue print yet and have a lot of work to do to put systems in place to match up “advocates” with pro se litigants, but it gives us a chance to stay involved in the law and meet a huge access to justice need. I don’t offer this example as something that all retired lawyers in all communities should run out and start, but rather to get their creative juices flowing about ways they might stay involved in the law post-retirement, and simply a way to look at the needs of their community to create opportunities and provide better access to justice.

In the end, we all need to find our own exit strategies, but I learned long ago as a young lawyer, don’t craft documents out of whole cloth if you can lay your hands on a tried and tested form. Thinking about how and when to end a practice or an active legal career, doesn’t come up on the top ten things a lawyer wants to contemplate, but, like death and taxes, it will eventually stare us in the face. Think about it before the reality smacks you in the face. Think about your options: (1) play and work; (2) all play; (3) work until you drop; or (4) a more transitional option. Do it your way, not the way it might be forced on you and make sure that you at least have a say in the decision. I for one like my exit plan (a few years off) but one that suits me and my wife’s future leisure time and keeps my hands in the legal mix as long as I can be of use to our legal system and my community.

As always if you want any information about ALPS or have a comment on this blog post, please use the comment section below or email me at: rminto@alpsnet.com or call 1-800-327-2577. ALPS policyholders can also call or e-mail their Account Manager (you know how to reach them) and the rest of the world can call 1-800-367-2577 or email Julie Patterson (jpatterson@alpsnet.com), Chris Blackstun (cblackstun@alpsnet.com), Larry Vaculik (lvaculik@alpsnet.com), Kurt Whitmire (kwhitmire@alpsnet.com), or Keith Fichtner (kfichtner@alpsnet.com).

In addition, if you are a LinkedIn participant you should join us in “ALPS Talk,” our very active discussion forum on trending legal topics.

Retirement and the Solo Practice – A Gold Mine for a Young Lawyer

To Retire or Not to Retire, that is the question

Robert Minto — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:00:00 +0000

When I first started practice I never doubted that by the time I reached age sixty-five, I’d be retired and playing golf, traveling and generally enjoying life far, far away from the practice of law and my daily routines. Fast forward forty years and I am sixty-six and still in the office with no real plans to change that situation any time soon. What changed? Simply my perspective of retirement and enjoying life changed and I realized that I am still good at what I do and enjoy doing it. Frankly, the thought of being on the golf course four or five days a week doesn’t interest me as much as I thought it would, and traveling, having booked well over four million miles in the air, has lost a bit of its luster.

I’ve concluded that life is one long transition and that retirement can have many different meanings to different people. Practicing law for a living will always be a young person’s game. The long hours ebb a bit when you make partner or take in an associate in a solo practice. You gain greater control over your life and get better at balancing office, home and self. At some point in the process you realize you have been doing the same thing a long time and look for options. It may be a career change, a practice change or simply a revised work schedule to allow you to do what you want pretty much when you want. This of course requires that you have factored litigation or court appearance demands from your life so you actually have that freedom. In my case, I did it twice—once in the late 1980s when I started working on developing ALPS and again this May when I became ALPS Executive Chair and turned the CEO position over to David Bell, a seasoned insurance executive and professional liability expert who has forgotten more insurance than I ever knew. I see both as simply direction changes in my career that have kept my work exciting and presented me with new and different challenges. Honestly, I don’t know that I’ll ever be ready to fully retire, but I’ve positioned myself and ALPS so that whatever I decide, it doesn’t disrupt the flow of ALPS business or cause any hardship.

As practitioners look at retiring from an active practice, some of my life lessons might provide guidance. First make sure you do it for the right reasons—you really want to retire—and start planning it early enough so that you can do it your way and cover all your bases for the eventuality:

1. Develop a time table for all the steps.

2. Make sure all your cases get transitioned and you have transitioned the clients and given up control.

3. Plan your post retirement involvement in your firm and make sure it is agreed before you go.

4. Plan to be available for consultation for a reasonable time after the transition before you actually leave.

5. Make sure that you and your firm are on the same page as to what the economics of retirement really means.

6. Plan your exit your way—big send off or quiet exit. It’s your life and you should get to decide this.

Some of my friends tell me that I’ve left the most important consideration off the list. Is your spouse or significant other ready to have you around on a full time basis? Seriously though this does raise an important issue especially in today’s world with two income families—how will your plan and timing impact your family. I am not saying that this needs to be the controlling factor, but prior consultation and discussion will certainly make the transition easier and avoid a lot of speed bumps.

This brings me to the toughest part of this discussion—solo practice. How does a solo lawyer ever retire? It’s a real question and the solutions are not always as easy as those retiring from a firm. The three simplest answers:

1. Find someone to take over your practice whether it’s a buy out or just a transition without compensation.

2. Transition your active cases to other lawyers and notify your clients that your practice will close on a certain date and that they should pick up their files before that time. On D-Day make sure you have no client original documents (wills, deeds, etc.) left. If you do, mail them back to the individual certified mail, return receipt requested. Then find another lawyer who will keep your remaining files in safekeeping for a reasonable period of time (differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction), buy tail coverage from your LPLI carrier for at least three years and close the doors; or

3. Simply stop taking on new work and work out your existing cases and at some point in time when all the active cases are done revert back to option #2.

The only certainty in shutting down a solo practice is that it never happens exactly as you plan, so be flexible and make allowances for the odd situation where you need to go back in and find something, or explain something. It will happen, trust me.

I wish I could make the decisions about retirement and the formula for doing it simple, but I can’t. The variables simply make that impossible, but I can share these thoughts and hopefully it makes the process easier for those facing the retirement dilemma.

The good thing about my current situation as the Executive Chair of ALPS—I get to stay involved day to day with the company and will be able to write blog posts more frequently and will have the time to get more creative on the topics.

In addition, if you are a LinkedIn participant you should join us in “ALPS Talk,” our very active discussion forum on trending legal topics.

Knowing When to Hold-um and when to Fold-um - A Dilemma for Boomer Lawyers

The Unbundling of Legal Services; Will Lawyers do it or Leave it to Consumers?

Robert Minto — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 16:14:00 +0000

I just returned from the 2013 Western States Bar Conference where I participated in some of the very best CLE I’ve attended in a long time. The speakers engaged the audience’s minds, and the topics tied nicely to the theme of practicing law today and tomorrow (my description, not the program title). We discussed lawyers’ roles in the environmental debate, the future of the profession as we know it, the impact of Internet self-help sites, the potential role of legal technicians in the delivery of legal services, the future of legal education, mandated clinical programs before law graduates can be licensed to practice, programs connecting under-employed lawyers with an underserved citizenry of modest means, and lastly, programs to connect new lawyers with cost-effective rural legal opportunities. That’s one long sentence but we covered a lot of material in a very short time. All in all, I left the conference excited about the opportunities for people with legal training and a reinvigorated enthusiasm for the challenges the organized Bar and legal educators face as they try to transition from the needs of less techno aging membership to a totally connected younger membership and their respective consumer demographics.

One of the big “takeaways” from the conference came in the form of a realization that one way or another legal services as we know them will unbundle around us if we don’t engage in the process and at least attempt to provide some direction. Several Bars, Washington State taking the lead, have actually begun the process of authorizing it by establishing rules to define, restrict and regulate how lawyers can unbundle, provide for appropriate confidentiality, and deliver legal services for a piece, but not all, of a transaction.

This issue ties nicely into delivering legal services to those of modest means. Take for example a pro se litigant faced with a mandatory mediation. A lawyer might be asked to just advise the client (a couple of consultations) on the ins and outs of the mediation process, or even to a limited representation (attend the mediation only), but have no further involvement in the process. I agree that this is not the ideal situation and that the client will get much better service and likely results by hiring the lawyer to do the whole thing. Reality has already proven that a certain segment of the population, especially younger people, will utilize Internet resources and attempt the process themselves. They feel that they are able and that full legal representation will cost more than they can afford.

To a degree lawyers have been unbundling legal services for years by associating outside lawyers to initially prepare briefs and pleadings. Heck, there are now Internet sites that for $10.00 anybody, not just a lawyer, can upload a brief or legal memorandum and it will cite check the document and provide a list of all the cases that have followed, overruled, or distinguish the cases cited in the document. I remember the time I spent with Shepherd’s® cite checking and looking for subsequent materials. For $10.00 I can’t even get to the local law library. So now I can get someone else to do my writing, get a computer to check it for accuracy and spend a whole lot less time getting a quality product for my client for a lot less cost. Now the dilemma, do I charge full price and make a bigger profit or do I pass the savings on to the client. Option one helps me pay the bills and option two makes my services more affordable and potentially will help me generate more clients. Right now we have no rules but disclosure and general ethics rules to guide us. With the actual authorization of unbundled legal services, hopefully we will have the additional guidance that makes it clear that these items are costs not subcontracted fees subject to unreasonable markups.

We looked at the website for LegalZoom® during the conference. It’s quite a site that can substantially reduce the cost of preparing all sorts of simple common legal documents. To the non-lawyer it represents a really inexpensive way to prepare a bill of sale or a simple will. However, it adds no value to the process because it doesn’t provide any expertise to help the lay user understand which of the ten or twelve forms best fits his or her needs. I see LegalZoom® as a great opportunity for lawyers in solo and small firm practices. We all know that it is much easier to edit an existing form than to create one from whole cloth. We also know that lawyers can look at a block of forms and select the best one with more ease than a lay person. With the cost being $7.95 per month for unlimited access to their forms, it’s a real steal. In addition it is really simple for an attorney to become a LegalZoom® affiliate and receive referrals from consumers living in your jurisdiction that go to LegalZoom® directly. Accordingly, by using a resource like LegalZoom® to help get cost effective document to clients, a lawyer will add a significant intellectual value to a cost-effective form that creates real consumer value. In the process lawyer utilization of these resources goes a long way to protecting the rule of law and the integrity of our civil legal system.

While many other websites exist (and I make no editorial comment about the quality of any of them), I have chosen LegalZoom® as an example of one that recognizes the value lawyers add and makes every effort to get them involved in the process of document preparation.

I am going to take a little space to demonstrate the simplicity of the process. Go to their website: www.legalzoom.com; at the top click on My Account (don’t worry it costs you nothing and is quite unobtrusive); provide your email and create a password then click Sign In.

In the Get Started box select Legal Forms at the very bottom and click Go.

Here you can play but for an example click on “Amendment of Agreement” under the Nondisclosure section and it takes you to pricing. You can get the single document for $14.95, unlimited forms access for $7.99 per month, or get attorney consultation for $29.99 per month.

If you want to be part of that referral pool you simply need to go to the banner at the bottom of the page and click on Affiliate and this will take you to a page about the program. If you click on the Sign up today button at the bottom it takes you to the beginning of the process. Or a more direct way is to click here. They have two classes of lawyers. Members of the pool who take direct calls and referral attorneys who have more specialized skills and get called for more complicated issues. They use the same application process for both and if you choose to become part of their program the sign-up process lets you elect which way you want to go.

I offer the tour of LegalZoom® not as an endorsement, but as an example of how lawyers can utilize some of what appears as Internet competition to their advantage and potentially help build a practice. The Internet presents ways that ordinary folks can help themselves with their legal issues and will not go away anytime soon if at all, so the challenge becomes how does a practicing lawyer use them to their advantage. LegalZoom ® offers a single example. If you spend some time searching the Internet you will find many more creative ways to enhance your practice and do it to the highest ethical standards by using outside (Internet or otherwise) resources that enable you to become more cost-effective and valuable to your clients.

In addition if you are a LinkedIn participant you should join us in “ALPS Talk,” our very active discussion forum on trending legal topics. You will even find comments about various topics from the View From The Corner Office sprinkled about as you browse through the discussions.

Redefining worth, value and productivity

Robert Minto — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:56:00 +0000

You all know that I am a social media junky and I mine many sources for inspiration, information and guidance as to how best to do my job as the CEO of ALPS. Today I struck the mother lode on a website I stumbled on through LinkedIn. The essence of my discovery comes from the following quote on that website attributed to Scott Belsky:

“In a knowledge economy it doesn’t make sense to use time as a measurement for a job well done. Knowledge work requires a different set of assumptions about productivity. It requires fluidity (ideas can happen at any time), concentration (being rested and engaged is more important than being on the clock), and creativity (regardless of the hour).”

The quote hit me like a ton of bricks, not because it said anything I didn’t know or already believe, but rather because as stated it gave me a very different way to think about the billable hour. I have long believed that a lawyer’s value is not defined by time, but by knowledge and skill and that the billable hour patently distorts the value proposition of legal work. I understand the quote and I agree with the quote, but what do I do with it? How will it help articulate a better way, a way that recognizes a lawyer’s true value? Okay, so I’ve found the mother lode, but I don’t know how to get to it. How can we use it to provide solid answers to the lawyer’s billing dilemma.

Peter Drucker appears to be the first person to describe a “knowledge worker” in his seminal work, “The Landmarks of Tomorrow” (1959), and again he provided some clarity in his subsequent work, “Management Challenges in the 21st Century” (1999 Oxford Press), when he describes his six major factors in defining knowledge worker productivity:

1. Knowledge worker productivity demands that we ask the question: "What is the task?"

2. It demands that we impose the responsibility for their productivity on the individual knowledge workers themselves. Knowledge workers have to manage themselves. They have to have autonomy.

3. Continuing innovation has to be part of the work, the task and the responsibility of knowledge workers.

4. Knowledge work requires continuous learning on the part of the knowledge worker, but equally continuous teaching on the part of the knowledge worker.

5. Productivity of the knowledge worker is not - at least not primarily - a matter of the quantity of output. Quality is at least as important.

6. Finally, knowledge worker productivity requires that the knowledge worker is both seen and treated as an 'asset' rather than a 'cost'. It requires that knowledge workers want to work for the organization in preference to all other opportunities." (1999 p 142).

Admittedly, he applied these principles in an industrial, manufacturing context which I recognize as quite different from the unique circumstances of the practice of law. That said, it provided me with some wonderful context to begin my search for a path to a 21st century solution to the billable hour dilemma in the current knowledge economy of today’s law practice. Sadly at this point, I have not yet found where the path ends, but I have some thoughts to share about the direction its heading.

I’ve said for years that a lawyer’s time is worth minimum wage, because the government says it is. Productivity, results and the application of technology and knowledge on a case by case basis really define value or worth in a law practice. Since the advent of the PC and perhaps before, time has not been a good measure of value in the practice of law. Today we see a world where wealth of the average consumer of legal services has declined measurably, and the demand and need for a lawyer’s talents has increased even more. What will our practices be worth if nobody can afford to hire us? How will we as a profession meet the public need for our services? Will the public find other lower cost providers (independent Paralegals or web-based form banks and providers) to meet their needs?

Maybe part of the answer lies in redefining expectations, not just for clients, but for new lawyers as well. I believe that the days of “a job for every new law graduate” have passed. Law schools continue to turn out more members of the profession than Bars can absorb at pay scales that student loans require and new graduates expect. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that society may not need them, just that society can’t afford them the way we determine fees and the worth of our services. I am also not saying that new graduates don’t need to be paid well or that they shouldn’t go to school on student loans. I only point out the disconnect between expectations and the economic reality of a profession that prices itself out of the market by billing by the hour when the time we spend no longer reflects the economic value of our services or the worth of those services to legal consumers.

In the context of the typical ALPS lawyer (small practices in small towns in pretty rural communities), I don’t know many lawyers that made their fortunes practicing law. They provide legal services in their communities and any wealth they amass over a lifetime probably comes from other economic activities. Sure some do contingency fee work and may get a “big fee” from time to time but it’s more the exception than the rule. In looking at the needs of those lawyers, frankly the old “fee schedules” made and make better sense than billing by the hour for most of what they do. Unfortunately, the United States Supreme Court did away with mandatory fee schedules and let the element of competition creep into the process. In my view, fee schedules for non-litigation legal activities ought to be revisited as a way to assure some correlation between value and worth in the equation between lawyers and clients. Litigation services pose an entirely different problem but hourly billing still doesn’t address the value/worth conundrum lawyers and clients face in the currently tech-driven litigation practice. Frankly, I don’t even know where to begin offering suggested solutions. That said with all the great business/legal minds we have in this country, we should be able to create a value-based model that provides fair compensation for lawyers and a fair (value) fee for their clients.

I apologize for not providing any great answers, especially if this post doesn’t generate a vigorous discussion. I hope it does. I really believe we have an opportunity to develop real solutions to these problems, but it will require significant dialogue, knowledge and information sharing.

As always I will read and respond to your e-mails addressed to me at the address found on the “View from the Corner Office” home page or your calls at 1-800-327-2577. ALPS policyholders can also call or e-mail their Account Manager (you know how to reach them) and the rest of the world can call (1-800-367-2577) or email Julie Patterson (jpatterson@alpsnet.com), Chris Blackstun (cblackstun@alpsnet.com), Larry Vaculik (lvaculik@alpsnet.com), Kurt Whitmire (kwhitmire@alpsnet.com), or Keith Fichtner (kfichtner@alpsnet.com).

“The Holidays” – A time for giving, sharing and rejoicing

Robert Minto — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 15:30:00 +0000

Every year about Holiday time (being a Christian it is Christmas for me), I become very contemplative about a lot of things: the meaning of the season, commercialization, poverty, homelessness, the aging population, apathy, world unrest, and greed. Somehow that doesn’t tee up a very uplifting blog post about lawyers and how they play into the seasonal festivities. I’ll tie all that in later (I hope) but first I want to talk about history.

I don’t remember when I started thinking about all the world’s ills at the holidays, but it was sometime in the late 1970s. I remember visiting with a life insurance agent (Catholic by faith) and lamenting that I really hated this time of year because of its gross commercialization. We talked a while and I don’t even remember so it couldn’t be all that important. Real point of the story came two days later when I got a Christmas card from him. Again, I don’t remember the sentiment, but I do remember what he wrote—a few simple words—“remember the reason for the season.” I remember it for two reasons, first it got me thinking about why we celebrate the season and second, he won’t let me forget—he writes the same thing in a card he sends me every year at Holiday time, including this year. This message must be important to him because he is getting very old and has very advanced macular degeneration. It has become my most important remembrance of the season as he reminds me what giving really means. After all these years it is still important for him to remember a young man who seemed rather grinchy some forty years ago. I think it’s his way of making sure that each year I focus on the important things of the season.

I still contemplate all the world's troubles, but my friend shifted my focus from “bah humbug” to “my what a world of opportunities we have to make a difference.” After all, regardless of your faith, the season is one of renewal and celebration and while the commercialization remains at an all-time high, it does give us the opportunity to share with our loved ones and more importantly with people we don’t even know. Everywhere we turn we see a “giving tree,” a Salvation Army Bell Ringer, or a “toys for tots” drop box. The chance to give of ourselves without recognition abounds. Beyond the commercial giving I see a different need, the need for lawyers to take a little time to contemplate what part they play or can play in the process of renewal and helping the less fortunate.

From my perspective lawyers don’t like each other very much. Okay, so that is a gross over generalization, but it makes the point that we don’t take the time we used to when we would have lunch together sitting around a big table with a judge once in a while and a group of lawyers that would change from day to day. When we attend local Bar meetings, attendance is relatively low unless the program produces a CLE credit and even then we sit with folks we don't know. We used to talk more on the phone or in person about legal matters; today we either email or text. It’s much easier to be tough on a point if you don’t have to look someone in the eye or hear the tone of their voice. Have you ever noticed how terse an email sounds when we don’t take the time to add a salutation or a “Sincerely” at the end? It’s the little stuff that has changed the way we interact and it’s the little stuff that can change it again. As you think about your own interaction with other lawyers, even the ones you don’t like very much, try to change the tone of the dialogue, even if it only goes one way. You may just find that you will enjoy the practice a little more. You might even find that the stress reduction and attitude change may even allow you to be a little nicer to yourself along the way.

Lawyers give back to their communities, and the opportunities abound, but we wind up on not-for-profit boards, civic boards and in service clubs. We don’t see the opportunities to make a difference one person at a time. Today we have organized and staffed legal services entities, we have poorly staffed public defenders offices and even organized aging services entities. A lawyer in most jurisdictions will need to go out of his or her way to get appointed to an indigent criminal case, or a pro bono domestic matter. I know; why would anybody in their right mind want to get such an appointment? I’ll tell you why, it feels good and it make us all better lawyers when we do. Let us not forget that as officers of the court we owe a duty to the efficient and expedient administration of both civil and criminal justice. As the court appointments slipped away a number of years ago, I like most of us tended to “buy my salvation” by making donations to the Montana Justice Foundation (I still do support MJF). A few years ago the public defender system in our county took a nose dive and I found myself with a court appointment for a young man (barely 18) who found himself charged with a Misdemeanor and a Felony for a matter that should have been a civil matter related to damage to a vehicle. The long and the short of it, I found myself really enjoying making this matter lessen to a deferred imposition of sentence and ultimately (two years later) getting a complete dismissal. I spent more time than a PD could have and worked angles that a PD couldn’t because of case loads. In the end the young man graduated from college and is gainfully employed. I don’t tell this story because I did anything particularly great or unusual, but rather to point out that lawyers today miss an opportunity to really make a difference in some people’s lives that can really bring a lot of joy to both the lawyer and the client. What we do often seems ministerial, repetitious and unfulfilling because sometimes it is.

On the civil side of giving you have a greater opportunity simply because of volume. I attended a court motion calendar the other day and could not believe the number of people appearing pro se. It seems we have a legal self-help clinic that helps with forms for those that can’t afford an attorney. Attorneys even volunteer every day to assist with the preparation of the forms so the court can, at least, have the right documentation in front of them when the person appears. The problem; the judge has to be both the inquisitor and the trier of facts put on the record. I noted that day that it took the judge at least twice as long to handle that matter as it did when counsel appears. What if lawyers could volunteer to just appear and be counsel for the limited purpose of getting the right facts on the record? I look at it as sort of a hospitalist approach to legal representation. I can think of any number of ways we can make a difference. Elder Law is becoming a big deal, but something as simple as reviewing a will for a senior citizen and telling them it looks great can create peace of mind. Even if it took a little redrafting or updating, it’s pretty simple and can make a huge difference in the life of another human being.

My point in all this at the holiday season—give of yourself in a way that really makes you feel renewed rather than burdened. Find a way to put joy into the season by reducing the inevitable periodic stress and dread throughout the year by getting involved in the system that doesn’t require sending a bill or writing a check. Pay it forward for all the blessings that we as lawyers have received over the years. A little time working with people that really appreciate the help can go a long way to restoring one's faith in themselves and bringing honor to a profession that we all hold dear.

Happy Holidays to all my loyal readers who put up with my sometimes just plain strange blog post. Your readership has made the process exciting and fulfilling for me and in this season of renewal I am both grateful and humbled. No commercial plug this time; those of you that want to comment or ask a question, I suspect you know where to find me.

Bob --

A Guest Blog – A Blast from the Past but Still Relevant

Robert Minto — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 18:26:00 +0000

I read a lot and some of the stuff can be pretty arcane and some of it is timeless. The other day while cleaning out some papers from my desk drawer, I came across a number of documents written by others and submitted to me for comment (yes, I did respond to them when they were originally written). In all honesty I don’t remember many of them, but one stood out as still timely. I called the author, and requested permission to post it as a guest blog. He graciously consented so here it is. I hope you find it as thought provoking as I did. He wrote this piece in 2000 so please recognize that “current” references are now twelve years old. I have not edited it or changed a word as I didn’t want to change Mike’s original thoughts in the slightest.

---
Attorney Fee Disputes - A Modest Proposal
By Michael Alterowitz, Esq.

Attorneys are regularly reminded that fee disputes are at the heart of many legal malpractice claims. We are advised not to sue clients for fees. Various methodologies are suggested to minimize the chance of a fee dispute which may turn into a legal malpractice claim. How often have we heard our colleagues bemoaning the fact that they are having problems with cash flow or that, because of non-payment of fees, they feel almost in conflict with the client they are pledged to represent “with undivided loyalty”? How many of us have considered retaining or charging liens to assure payment? How many more of us have simply walked away from thousands of dollars of hard-earned fees simply because “Life is to short!”

As an attorney practicing primarily in the area of Family Law, which according to a recent issue of the Montana Lawyer, is one of the two types of practice most vulnerable to malpractice lawsuits. These seem to be never-ending concerns. Over the years, I have adopted most of the recommended procedures and believe that they are appropriate. Still disagreements over fees are an occasional unpleasant part of my practice. I submit the following modest proposal for consideration to the Bar as well as our professional insurance carrier.

In place of our existing varied and generally unsuccessful methods of handling fees, our professional liability carrier should offer a professional billing and collection service to its insureds. What are the potential advantages of such a system?

1. Uniformity of procedure

2. Reduced exposure to claims

3. Increased collection of fees

4. Potential profit to insurer

5. Lower overhead to attorneys

6. Third-party decision-making

7. Third-party collection/insulation of attorneys

Let us examine each potential advantage so that we may engage in dialog and finally approach this dilemma in a pro-active fashion.

Uniformity of Procedure

At present, each law firm uses its own fee agreements, has its own billing cycle, prepares its own bills, has its own collection methods, manages its own trust accounts, makes its own decisions as to when accounts are written-off, maintains its own communications with problem clients, and perhaps most significantly is obliged to deal with the occasional dissatisfied and predatory client. In the computer age, there is really no justification for such “pride of authorship.” After all, these are bills – they are not elegantly crafted legal documents! Who better than our professional liability carrier to advise as to a form of fee agreement which addresses the most common problem areas? We all bill monthly; why not agree that the billing cycle ends on the 25th of each month, or the 15th, or the 30th? How much difference does it really make? Surely it would be a delight for most attorneys (as well as their staff) not to have to spend substantial amounts of time on inputting charges, preparing pre-bills, and then revising and reviewing final bills. Instead of the monthly ritual of reviewing past-due accounts and deciding whether to send out collection letters, in most cases this could be handled by the “Attorneys’ Professional Collection Service.” A Subscription Agreement could be prepared which addresses the preferred sequence of warning letters as well as the period of time before suit would be filed (if ever). Can you imagine the joy of being able to post a dignified sign saying “Our accounts are handled by APCS. Please refer all questions to your Account Manager!”

Reduced Exposure to Claims

I submit that when a client receives a letter from the Account Manager of APCS, she is much less likely to be inclined to want to vent over some claimed error on the part of the attorney. After all, the Account Manager did not render the service. He merely represents APCS. He has a simple, professional, courteous, and standard response to such claims. “If you believe that you have a legitimate basis for failing to pay this bill, please forward your explanation to us within 30 days. If we do not hear from you, we will assume the bill is correct.” However, while this is going on, the attorney is insulated from the aggravation of dealing with the client over the bill. What is most important is that the attorney is not directly in conflict with his client.

Increased Collection of Fees

Unfortunately, attorneys are notoriously poor business-persons. We may be highly competent in representing others, but we often have a difficult time representing ourselves. We often are amateurish about our collection procedures. Especially in small firms, record-keeping may be less than accurate; bills may be sent on an irregular schedule; costs may not be accurately recorded; and when it comes to past-due bills, we often tend to want to ignore them because they are unpleasant. This has simply got to be the worst possible way to collect past-due accounts.

It is hard to imagine that ACPS would not do a superior job. After all, it is their primary purpose, not something that gets squeezed in between the handling of demanding clients’ cases.

Potential Profit to Insurer or ACPS

Assume for a moment that a solo practitioner has annual collectable billings of $100,000. Were he to pay ACPS 10%, he would collect $90,000 and pay $10,000. I suggest that most of us would be delighted to recover 90% of our collectible billings. I further submit that $10,000 is far in excess of what the solo practitioner is currently paying for his malpractice premium. In theory at least, if ACPS were a subsidiary of our professional liability insurer, the insurer could reduce (or waive – perish the thought!) the premium in return for the assignment of the attorneys’ accounts receivable. Attorneys and insurers might both benefit financially in both the short and long term, especially if as a result of more efficient collection procedures claims against attorneys are reduced.

Lower Overhead to Attorneys

Under existing systems, virtually every one must have their own billing system and must pay a staff person to handle the monthly billing and collection matters. To some extent, each attorney must devote some time to collection issues. If these issues were handled by APCS, attorneys could devote themselves toward practicing law, and staffing needs would either be reduced or the staff persons could devote themselves to assisting the attorney in practicing law.

Third Party Decision-Making

The ancient maxim remains true: When we represent ourselves we have fools for clients! (We may also have fools for attorneys.) How often do attorneys find themselves so upset over a client’s refusal to pay a legitimate bill that they make bad decisions? This can have an impact on the case or it may distract the attorney in handling other cases. If APCS were handling the matter, the attorney or office manager could discuss the matter with the Account Manager, make a professional and business-like decision, and get back to the practice of law. The benefit of having good advice in such situations can hardly be over-stated.

Third Party Collection/Insulation of Attorneys

It seems to me that once there is a fee dispute, the attorney and the client are in conflict. It becomes difficult for the attorney to give the undivided loyalty she owes to the client simply because the attorney also owes loyalty to her family, her employees, her creditors and herself. To the extent that the attorney is insulated from the billing and collection process, she is able to devote herself to the matter at hand.

Are there negative aspects to this proposal? No doubt. It occurs to me that there would have to be provisions for maintaining attorney-client confidentiality. In addition, most attorneys value their independence of judgment, and it would be essential to insure that ACPS did not attempt to influence substantive decision-making within subscribing law firms.

However, if we can learn by example, we should take a hint from the medical profession. Have you ever had the physician handling your case discuss the fee with you? Have you ever heard of the physician calling his patients about past-due bills? Rarely, it ever! Instead, physicians occupy such a lofty status, that it almost appears that the question of compensation is beneath their dignity even to discuss. We wonder why attorneys’ reputations and the reputation of the profession as a whole is often characterized as tarnished (to say the least) and in some cases as solely motivated by money. Perhaps this proposal would be a step in the right direction.

---

If you have any thoughts about Mike’s proposal, feel free to respond to the blog and I will make sure he gets them. If you want additional information about ALPS’ position on any of his thoughts, or our attorney advisory services feel free to post a comment or e-mail me at: rminto@alpsnet.com. Toll free 1-800-327 2577.

A Cautionary Tale Part II: Cyber Liability – The Unintended Risk

Robert Minto — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:00:00 +0000

I promised a second installment to the “Cautionary Tale” and here it is. Cyber security breaches have seemingly come out of nowhere in the past several years with no usual and customary insurance product claiming ownership of the risk. General Liability policies, unless endorsed, do not generally cover cyber security breaches, and professional liability insurers won’t normally take on the risk as it really doesn’t fit the definitions of the risks insured under their forms either. Candidly, the risk hasn’t fully defined itself as to the nature of the risk, the extent of exposure or appropriate pricing.

ALPS has studied cyber security and risk for a number of years and we find a few companies that offer a stand-alone policy to provide this coverage, but at a pretty significant price. Over the years ALPS developed very strong ties to some major reinsurance facilities and I am pleased to say we have found a cost effective solution for our current and future insureds. Before I detail the solution I want to give some detail on what constitutes cyber or security breach risk. You will note a lot of “blue-lines” in the post which when clicked link you to additional resources or greater detail on a particular part of this blog post. Feel free to just read this blog or dig as deep as you like into all or parts of the linked resources. This post has been an adventure to develop and write in that it’s nothing like my usual offerings. I must acknowledge significant help from Kiffin Hope, ALPS social media and cyber communications guru, who has forgotten more than I’ll ever know about this subject.

There’s been a great deal of media chatter related to cyber breaches in law firms. Cyber criminals have done their homework and fully understand the fact that client and case data harbors potentially very valuable information – information that is “not necessarily well-protected,” according to Kelley Drye & Warren security manager Jim Fortmuller.

For perspective let’s look at some statistics. By the way I don’t intend to scare you with all these stats, facts and details, I want you to understand a real and growing threat to the legal community and, as a result, client confidences.

· Mandiant Corp., a cyber security firm based in Alexandria, VA estimates that at least 80 major US law firms were hacked in 2011. (Article)

· The 2011 International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) Survey indicates for law firms that:

o 87% do not encrypt laptops

o 61% have no intrusion detection tools

o 64% have no intrusion protection tools

o And, for all those iPhones and Androids purchased by firms for their attorneys, 94% don’t bother to track them.

Attorneys, whether solos, firm associates or principals, have an ethical duty to manage and protect client data, regardless of where we store the data (in the Cloud, on hard drives, or Smartphones). We can no longer assume that just because we work in a small firm or in a rural community that we won’t or can’t fall victim to a cyber-attack. With the hacking of law firm data on the rise, risk management takes on an expanded and more important role. I learned a few weeks ago that iPhone 4s users who use the voice searching mode, and have the iPhone connected to the office e-mail server may be exposing data on that server to cyber attack when the voice search mode goes out on the Internet to find what you asked it to find. Essentially, it has opened a portal to the e-mail server by being on the Internet in search mode. I don’t know the extent of the problem, how to fix it or even whether a fix exists. I do know it poses a potential risk and attorneys better find out all they can about the risk and the fix, or they expose sensitive data. (Note to ALPS insured attorneys, I use a Blackberry for that reason. I know it is secure and does not expose data.)

ALPS identified cyber-crime some time ago as a new and emerging risk to law practitioners. We also heard the concerns of our insured attorneys. As a result, we have customized a cyber security policy, ALPS Cyber Response, to provide broad coverage with limits options to protect any size firm in case it suffers a privacy breach. ALPS and a team of cyber risk experts designed Cyber Response specifically for attorneys and law firms. To simplify the process, when you apply for a quote our insured attorneys won’t face any additional application requirements; ALPS will automatically add the basic coverage to our professional liability policy for a very low, standard per-attorney rate, with a simple “opt-out” process for firms that don’t want cyber response liability coverage. As always, we will have higher limits available in situations where the firm sees a need. Cyber Response insures a lot of stuff, but hitting the high points:

It covers damages and expenses resulting from:

· The theft, loss or unauthorized disclosure of personally identifiable non-public information

· The theft or loss of third-party information

· A failure to timely disclose or a violation of any Breach of Notice Law, and

· Claims for violation of privacy laws

Additionally, it includes coverage for the expense of:

· Retaining a computer security expert to determine the existence and cause of loss, and

· Retaining an attorney to determine requirements under Breach of Notice laws.

Current ALPS insured firms will receive additional information in the next few weeks about how ALPS Cyber Response can enhance their firm’s information security; provide help responding to the unforeseen, and how to sign up immediately.

I apologize if this last section sounded a bit like a sales pitch, but describing how the program works comes down to explaining the concept and as excited as I am about Cyber Response I just had to pitch it a little. Frankly, we want Cyber Response to be much more than just another coverage form. We intend it to become a lifestyle change for our insured attorneys that prepare them to practice more wisely in the 21st century.

The biggest part of this effort revolves around making sure attorneys and firms understand how to manage this risk and avoid pitfalls that can lead to a cyber breach. Fundamentally, each law firm has to identify and manage this risk internally. That said ALPS commitment begins with making sure our insured firms know what to look for and the best way to plug any holes in their defenses. This process starts with each firm taking an in-depth look at their cyber security from a risk management perspective. Our Risk Management and Educational Services team has presented and will continue to present CLE seminars in the coming months to help identify risk factors and present some simple ideas on how to improve firm practices and procedures to keep electronic information safe. In addition, ALPS risk managers can help with specific issues over the phone by calling 1-800-367-2577.

As Steve’s tale in Part I of this blog post indicated, there is really no infallible method of data retention and protection technology – cyber criminals are always finding new ways to mine data. From a political perspective the concept of regulating cybersecurity challenges Washington as much as the risk challenges cyberusers. Sen. Jay Rockefeller recently discussed the legislative side of this issue in a letter sent to the CEOs of the 500 largest US companies. A link to an article outlining this discussion follows as part of our overall perspective on cyber liability. (Article)

I feel like I am rambling a bit so I’ll close this blog post with someone else’s words of wisdom. Jeffrey Brandt, a contributor to the Legal IT Professionals blog, drives home the ultimate importance of cyber security right now for the legal profession. “As the rest of the world and industries tighten their security, it places law firms in the unenviable position of being viewed as the weakest link… Unfortunately, for far too many law firms, security *is* an afterthought. Law firm culture and attorney convenience undercut and compromise security.” (Article)

Please take these words to heart and protect your practice. Your future financial and reputational security may depend on it.

Technology: A Cautionary Tale in Two Parts

Robert Minto — Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:37:51 +0000

I have been absent from my Blog for a while; it has been one of those periods in my life when I really needed to work and develop ALPS as an Insurer and major support system for practicing lawyers. Trust me, though, I wrote down all the topics that came to mind and I’ll be writing them up as time permits.

In the process of performing my day job I got a note on LinkedIn from one of ALPS insured lawyers about a situation he found himself in. Not wanting to have the conversation on a social media site (always wise from a confidentiality perspective), we did something very old fashioned—we exchanged e-mails and actually spoke on the telephone (not even a cell phone). I asked his permission to publish parts of his e-mail in my Blog as it really resonated as a great companion to a piece I’ve been working on related to cyber liability, data and file protection. Graciously he has granted permission and I’ve made a few cosmetic changes to protect his identity and location. Steve’s (not a real name) story sheds light on a real risk for even the best and most sophisticated practitioners. With all the best intentions, processes, procedures, and due diligence we can still have something technologically go horribly wrong.

Steve’s story came to light in a legal professional liability lawsuit in a case where he least expected it. In preparing to defend himself he found that his file was not as complete as he had hoped. A few years earlier, he defended a lawsuit for a person he knew socially. The case was unusual in many respects, but oddly Steve’s client did not want him to send him anything in writing. The first time Steve sent his client his evaluation report, the client called Steve and asked to meet so Steve could read the report aloud to him. The client made it clear that he would not read anything Steve sent him. He told Steve that when he wanted to communicate with him (the client) he should schedule a meeting and report in person. While clearly one of the early warning signs of a problem client, Steve recognized the risk and took the case. He protected himself by keeping meticulous notes of all conversations and telephone records.

Steve’s firm used a very reputable practice management software program making the extra record keeping a snap. Like most of them, it tracked notes, telephone calls, time entries, etc., and the firm had used it with satisfaction for several years. Each time Steve met with the client, he returned to his office and made detailed and time-stamped notes of their conversation. The firm had not been purchasing the annual upgrades because frankly they liked the present version better. Long after the original case ended they stopped using this software and switched to another provider. The firm stored the old database on a separate hard drive in case they ever needed to retrieve anything from it.

The original suit proceeded to trial, the client lost, but Steve got it reversed on appeal and ultimately the case settled for less than the original judgment and well within the client’s insurance limits.

Now back to the professional liability case. The complaint primarily alleged that Steve did not adequately attempt to settle the claim prior to trial. Steve denied that allegation. He had worked hard to settle the case, but his client refused to offer more than a fraction of the ultimate verdict and subsequent settlement. Steve had begged and pleaded with him to increase his offer, and he would not. At one point, the Plaintiff offered to settle for an amount that would have been extremely generous to Steve’s client given the final outcome, but the client answered the offer with some choice words to the plaintiff’s lawyer.

Steve documented all of this perfectly in his notes, so he asked the firm’s IT people to pull the drive and extract the information so he could give it to his lawyer. At that point, Steve learned two things: 1) the software to read the database was no longer available; and 2) the disk was corrupt. Thankfully, Steve’s lawyer defeated the claim on grounds that did not require the information. But, if the information had been necessary, the firm would have been required to send the disk to a vendor to try to extract the necessary data—a process both very expensive and very uncertain. Not to say that this process could have taken a long time and delayed the litigation.

What Steve and his firm learned by this episode will likely prevent it from ever happening again. Practice management software is a great tool for staying organized and for quickly finding information about your case. However, don’t use it as long-term storage to document critical parts of the file. Today we have file management programs written in open source code that exist specifically for long-term file storage. All good case management software programs have a simple process for converting its contents into PDF or other universal format files. This with all the hard documents from the case file can be stored electronically and easily retrieved when needed. When electronic information like this gets maintained on a server continuously backing up the data makes the risk of loss minimal and old data remains right at your fingertips.

Technology provides great advantages in the practice of law, but like any modality it needs maintenance and attention. Remember over the last five years we’ve seen three new MS operating systems, four revisions in MS Office, Word Perfect (Corel) has faded into the past, and the Apple operating system has gone through multiple upgrades and many practitioners now practice on iPads, or other tablets in ways far different from even three years ago. We live in a paperless world now and still need to maintain files for whatever time our firm policies and Bars require. So even if you don’t do it yourself, make sure that someone, staff or vender, pays attention as you make changes in your system (hardware and software) so that you maintain continuous access.

This leads me to the introduction to Part II of our cautionary tale. Cyber liability looms as a major threat to law firms. What happens if you get hacked and files disappear, your whole system crashes with no chance of recovery, or a hacker takes and distributes your client lists and contacts over the Internet? Unlike Steve’s tale, you have less control, but you can take measures to minimize the risk and soon you will get damage repair coverage as part of your ALPS Professional Liability Policy unless you decline it. My next Blog post (coming in about a week) will detail the risk and how ALPS plans to provide protection for our LPLI insured attorneys. This product has been a year in development and will provide protection for an enterprise risk to law firms (large and small) that most of us have never contemplated. Stay tuned; I promise it will be worth your time to read “A Cautionary Tale Part II.”

Retirement and the Solo Practice – A Gold Mine for a Young Lawyer

Robert Minto — Wed, 09 May 2012 12:00:00 +0000

Last week I turned sixty-five and realized that I am not far off being eligible for Social Security and Medicare. The problem is I don't feel old enough to be eligible for either, and I have no desire to retire. Sixty-five used to be the milestone that people kept in mind as the date when they got the gold watch and started drawing their retirement from their employers defined benefit pension. Very few of those exist anymore and most of them have been turned over to the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC) as part of a corporate chapter 11 bankruptcy filing. Now for many of us it's just another birthday with no meaning greater than any other. This thought string got me thinking about lawyers and retirement generally.

The world has changed a lot over the past forty years, and the legal profession is no exception. When I joined my first firm I didn't buy in, I just made a commitment to participate in the buy-out of senior partners when they retired. It was neat, clean and easy. I didn't get hit coming in when I didn't have a lot of money and had a young family to care for. I had some years to get my practice better established and my financial situation a bit better situated before the first senior partner retired. It worked well and the buy-out represented little more than his share of the receivables as of the retirement date and it actually worked out that paid monthly over a period of years, I came out net ahead as the receivables covered the early payments. In talking with firms today, they have different mentalities (varied) which include buy-in, no buy-in, no plan, and a whole bunch more options that I don't understand. Today, firms seem to be more worried about lawyers leaving early and who owns the clients and how do we deal with defections. These are indeed different times. Retirements in mid- to large firms generally go pretty smoothly, with little or no buy-out, but a well-funded 401(k) plan to make the golden years comfortable.

As the old saying goes "old layers never die they just lose their appeal." I am beginning to think "die" should be replaced with "retire," at least as far as for those in solo practice or small firms of 1, 2 and 3 person(s). Where economics remain tough and available, retirement plans consist of IRAs and not 401(k) plans. Sure you can incorporate a solo practice and set one up, but if you do you have to fund for employees and the headaches become much more difficult with safe harbor rules and the like. Besides, if you fully fund it every year you will be taking it out of your own pocket and somehow that seems harder to do than when you take it out of the firm's collective pocket.

So how do solos and small firms manage the transition? I find that mostly they ignore it until they have to deal with it and then it usually means breaking things up. The lifelong practice of bringing younger lawyers into a practice so you could turn over clients seems to be waning as fewer and fewer young lawyers want to take on solo practices and many of them have so much debt going in that they can't support themselves and make the debt payments. I know of several cases of small town practices just closing because the lawyer at age 75-80 decided he or she needed to give it up. They can't even give their practice away. It would seem that some young lawyer would want such a situation; you have a mentor, a built-in client base and an office setup. Okay the office setup lacks all the gadgets and toys that you had in law school and would have if you went to a big city practice, but you can get those. The clients are generally older and not of your generation, but the will and probate and real estate practices could be pretty good. The mentor deal is the real steal in this equation. Today you just don't find good mentoring going on in many firms. The partners don't have time to spend (waste) teaching a new lawyer all the things about practice that they don't teach in law school. In a small practice with a retiring attorney you have a gold mine, a virtual mother lode if you will. They aren't trying to build a practice, their economic needs will be considerably smaller and they will want a place to come to the office and have coffee for a number of years so they will be around when you have questions or need help or even to fill in so that you can take a vacation. I can go on for hours about the benefit of taking over an existing practice, in a city or a small town, but I think you get the picture. It's about getting started on the right foot, learning the ropes from a pro and not having to take everything that comes in the door to survive.

Why do I care about transitioning practices rather than closing them? I have a lot of reasons, but mostly it's about continuity for clients, and finding a way for older lawyers to slow down and still remain useful in their own eyes (big one here) and able to make a huge contribution to the future of the profession. I know a lawyer right now in his eighties that still comes to the office (all alone) every day that outsources his clerical work and handles non-court matters for his clients. He enjoys the clients, but he wasn't a good planner and still needs the money to supplement his social security and Medicare. His practice (I know it very well) could easily produce enough to support a young lawyer and a secretary if he didn't refer the court matters out of the office and he could probably work less and have just about the same income if he had a younger lawyer helping him with the office administrative stuff. In addition I can't think of a better mentor for a young lawyer than this particular gentleman.

My point of this particular ramble I am not really sure, but I guess I want to bring focus to an ever growing issue. Being a Baby Boomer, I have an army of brothers and sisters at the bar that will be facing practice transition in the next ten years and I see it as an opportunity for law schools and law students to make a difference. The law schools could start focusing on pairing graduating students with these opportunities rather than settling to post them on an employment board in the student lounge. They can develop mentoring guidelines and suggestions that give order to the transition and give a little thought to how they might assist older lawyers frame or posture their practices to make them more attractive to a young lawyer in the coming years. The local and State Bars might look at what they can do to help make the generational connections work better and promote the advantages of small firm practice.

I don't know where the practice is heading; I wish I did, but I can tell you it will change. The signs from the large firms indicate a struggle to make the economics work, and the signs from the small firms indicate insufficient structure to make them attractive to new lawyers. We probably should have been thinking about this a few years ago, but we didn't so now we get to crunch and try to catch up with solutions.

As always if you want any information about ALPS or have a comment on this blog post, please e-mail me at: rminto@alpsnet.com or call 1-800-327-2577. ALPS policyholders can also call or e-mail their Account Manager to discuss what this sort of future could mean to you and your firm. The rest of the world can call or email Julie Patterson (1-800-367 2577, mjpatterson@alpsnet.com), Kevin Beasley (1-800-367-2577, kbeasley@alpsnet.com), or Keith Fichtner (1-800-367-2577, kfichtner@alpsnet.com).

In addition if you are a LinkedIn participant you might join us in "ALPS Talk" our very active discussion forum on all topics legal.

CLE – Staying Sharp and Staying Home (if you want)

Robert Minto — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 12:00:00 +0000

It's hard to believe that ALPS has been around for twenty-four (24) years as of this past March 1st. Over that time we have amassed a lot of experience, mostly good and some not so good, but on the whole it allowed us to become the best prepared Lawyers' Professional Liability Insurer in the country to meet the needs of lawyers in rural areas. During that time we've gotten very good at defending lawyers when malpractice claims arise and to quote Kenny Rogers, "We know when to hold-em and we know when to fold-em." I don't mean to sound glib, but this experience has allowed us to produce some of the highest quality live CLE events in the country for our affiliated Bars and thousands of lawyers throughout the country.

At ALPS we take pride in listening to our insured attorneys, paying attention to the needs of the legal community and adapting to the times. In the recent years it has become abundantly clear to ALPS that lawyers lead incredibly busy lives and the demands of the practice seem to be ever-increasing. Juggling court cases, multiple deadlines, all while managing clients, can make otherwise important things fall off the radar. Case in point: Continuing Legal Education. While not all bars have mandatory CLE requirements, staying current on issues that can expose lawyers to risk or assist in more effectively serving clients can help decrease stress levels and improve practice satisfaction and economics.

In 2011, to make life easier for our insured attorneys and affiliated Bars, ALPS took the next step in its commitment to legal education and risk management with the creation of ALPS Educational Services (AES). It's not new; it's just taken a new name and expanded its scope by now offering CLE programs in both webinar and on-demand formats. With AES, getting CLE credits can be as easy as logging onto the ALPS educational portal and picking a program. Like everything else we do we work out the kinks before we go live with it and we are still in the process of final testing and perfecting access, but you can take a peek at what to expect right now. This past October, we offered our first on-demand CLE program, "Managing One's Self," to a test group of Virginia lawyers, both insured attorneys and non-insured attorneys. As our first foray into on-demand programming, we were hopeful to have, perhaps, 25 participants. You can only imagine how pleased we were when ultimately 79 viewed the program. The Virginia State Bar apparently liked it because they approved it for CLE credit for 2012 as well. To get a taste of the future of CLE with ALPS and what to expect from AES just visit http://alpsva.peachnewmedia.com to view this and two other AES produced on-demand ethics courses for Virginia lawyers.

On March 27 of this year, AES premiered its first ever live webinar, "Getting from Here to There: Retirement." Again, looking at things conservatively, we tempered our expectations and hoped for a handful of participants. And, again, we were pleasantly surprised when 118 lawyers viewed the program across several states where the program had been approved, including: Virginia, Kansas, Washington, and South Dakota. We also had a few participants from Idaho, Wyoming, and Oregon. As the accreditation process continues, the recording of this program will soon be available on-demand across most if not all ALPS jurisdictions.

So, what else does AES have in store for 2012?

We will deliver first class education and risk management programs by developing topics and content by assessing each program based on the following criteria:
- What are the pressing issues in the legal community?
- Why are the issues important and how do we best convey the information?
- How will lawyers address these issues in their practice or their lives?
We will expand the delivery channels of our programs to offer "a have it your way approach" so attorneys can access AES via live CLE, interactive webinars and webcasts, our online and on-demand CLE video library and social media channels.
We will tailor content for specific target markets including younger attorneys and solo practice attorneys.
We will grow our presence in the CLE market while continuing to foster our relationships with Bar Associations through collaboration and consultation.
We will continue to serve our attorney clients by providing outstanding CLE programs at an affordable price.

For those of us that still like to do our research in books (dinosaurs) and get our CLE in large crowded rooms with poor ventilation, ALPS will continue to work with our Bar affiliates and offer programs the old fashioned way with our Risk Managers being tapped to speak at professional conferences and events across the country. In addition to our new commitment to Risk Management online (log on to our blog ALPS 411), our traveling Risk Management Team will still be available for in-office or on the telephone consultations just as they always have. The advent of AES won't do away with anything we have done well in the past; we have just grown and evolved by finding and perfecting new ways of fostering professional growth to reach a broader spectrum of the legal community through a larger number of touch points.

This gives our ALPS insured attorneys who have viewed any of our live or on-demand programs more ways to get a 10% credit applied to your individual premium when completing the application for the new policy year. Contact your ALPS representative or underwriter for more information.

For questions regarding ALPS Educational Services and upcoming programs across the U.S., please contact Christine Blackstun, ALPS Educational Services Director: cblackstun@alpsnet.com or 1-800-990-3412. Or feel free to check out alps.peachnewmedia.com to see if live webinar or on-demand programs are already available in your state.

As always if you want any information about ALPS or have a comment on this blog post, please e-mail me at: rminto@alpsnet.com or call 1-800-327-2577. ALPS policyholders can also call or e-mail their Account Manager to discuss what this sort of future could mean to you and your firm. The rest of the world can call or email Julie Patterson (1-800-367 2577, jpatterson@alpsnet.com), Kevin Beasley (1-800-367-2577, kbeasley@alpsnet.com), or Keith Fichtner (1-800-367-2577,kfichtner@alpsnet.com).

Acknowledgement:

I want to give a special thanks to Kiffin Hope, ALPS Social Media Community Manager and Chris Blackstun, Director of ALPS Educational Services for their invaluable contribution to this post. Kiffin provided both the idea and some heavy duty development of the post and Chris Blackstun authored the AES concept and provided significant background for both AES development and this post.

The Practice of Law is Dead – A Postscript

Robert Minto — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 19:55:00 +0000

I received more public comments on The Practice of Law is Dead blog post than any other I've written and they covered the waterfront as to cause and cure. Clearly, lawyers have concerns about the future and much of that concern revolves around lawyer population control. Apparently, Time Magazine was so impressed with my post that they published an entire article, written by Bill Saporito, on the subject entitled The Law vs. Supply and Demand - Is becoming a lawyer a bad investment? The article is so well written and so on point to my earlier blog discussion that I encourage you to read it so you can get the full impact without having to read my paraphrase of it in this post. Unfortunately, you may have to pay to read the article (it's worth the price). I would have loved to have included some of it here, but it is copyrighted and even though I don't copyright my stuff, I am a stickler about protecting the copyrights of others who choose to. The Blogosphere netted a similar article that won't require a subscription: The Job Outlook for Lawyers: Projections from the BLS. While this article is more fact driven and flows more by the number it still raises the issue of population control within the legal profession and provides great perspective on my discussion.

The Time article really gets to the heart of the whole lawyer population, what is legal work, and how does the average person afford legal work when they really need it. The article points out what we already know; in the majority of cases, lawyers could have made as much with a BS or BA in another occupation. Sure we still stand in the middle of an economic down turn and the troubles on Wall Street have made life lean for big city practices, but it doesn't explain the problems in small cities and towns. We have developed a national mentality of "get it on the Internet." That, if nothing else, suppresses the pricing of local commodities and services. Many of the Internet legal service clearing houses advertise hourly rates that wouldn't support the infrastructure of a small general practice. The fact that "Legal Zoom" and others offer no face time in your locality, and may or may not have any understanding of local court rules and statutory schemes, seems to make no difference. We have become a consumer society where price drives everything. Needless to say this is not good for the legal profession or the consumer.

I am all in favor of making legal services affordable for everybody, but I am also in favor of delivering quality legal services. Perhaps the answer lies in leveraging technology to further reduce costs so that price and quality can peacefully co-exist. I'll leave it to my tech folks at ALPS to publish blogs on that in our other blog ALPS 411. They are younger and more up on the latest time savers and efficiency tricks with the iPad, iPhone, and other devices, and that seems to be where business is headed-smart phones and tablets.

On the subject of legal education, I wonder if the overpopulation issues the profession faces won't self-correct. One of the comments to my initial blog suggested that reducing the cost of public legal education might force the for-profit players out of the game, thus reducing the number of new graduates for the profession to absorb. I applaud the suggestion not for the reason of putting private law schools out of business, but rather for reducing the cost and limiting educational availability. It would put the graduates in a better position to find good jobs and it might increase the quality of the graduate population. Don't read me wrong; there are a lot of really good lawyers coming out of law schools today, but there is also a bunch that went to law school because they couldn't find a job and it looked like it might be fun. Well, law school is not meant to be fun; it's meant to challenge the mind and train law students in the art of critical thinking, the basics of the law, problem solving and how to find answers and solutions where there might not be obvious ones. Let's face it, creating competition for fewer slots in law schools just might help get people entering law school who really want to be lawyers for the right reasons. The risk in the process of natural selection comes with the quality of the education. We came across an interesting site in the Blogosphere dealing with this very issue. While I don't endorse the information as factual (I have not verified it personally) Nine Law Schools to Avoid makes a good read for people interested in the subject and students looking for value in a legal education to start the process of figuring out the right choices and the right questions to ask.

As pointed out in the Time's article, the law of supply and demand may solve the numbers problem for us, but it still doesn't address the question of the economics of lawyers in small places. Maybe it does in a way, but lawyers who can't find the high paying jobs in the cities may opt for the life of a country lawyer and settle in small towns and cities. While the practice may seem far more mundane than the specialty practice of the large firm, the satisfaction of helping people may be enough. I fear that the pay scale may deter the most determined. I spoke with a lawyer from a town in an upper plains state who posted a notice at the only law school in the state offering to give a new lawyer the practice and stay with the practice as a mentor for up to three years. He didn't even get a single call. What happened to him is not uncommon; rural practice is not sexy or exciting. The fact that several thousand people depend on this practice for all their legal affairs isn't enough. Times change on a continuum and right now the Big, Big Firms continue to lay off lawyers and not necessarily replace them. And an article on Law.com (Bye-Bye Big Firm; Is the Exodus from Big Firms to Mall Firms here to Stay?), gives a lot of perspective to the whole issue of the changing playing field. The big question still not answered by that article remains where do the small firms open up, in the cities or in the small towns? For the most part it appear that the new small firms simply morph off a practice group from a big firm and stay in the same place, sometimes even in the same building or part of a big city.

I'll close this post with a simple question: "Is the problem with the small practice all economics or is it something that can be fixed through education?"

As always if you want any information about ALPS or have a comment on this blog post, please e-mail me at rminto@alpsnet.com or call 1-800-327-2577. ALPS policyholders can also call or e-mail their Account Manager to discuss what this sort of future could mean to you and your firm.

Read Part One of this post here.

The Practice of Law is Dead; Long Live the Practice of Law

Robert Minto — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:30:00 +0000

Okay so it's a bad paraphrase, but it makes a point. At some point in life every lawyer realizes that the practice culture, practice rules, client demands and expectations have changed drastically from what they knew oh so may years ago, and for many not for the better. I think this probably holds true for most lawyers who entered the practice in the last century, but I suspect it applies more for those of us that started practice just before the beginning of the information age. Population growth and concentration, inflation, speed of communication, ease of research and economic expectations all played a role in the meteoric change. The future of the practice of law belongs to the younger generation of lawyers and they face a daunting and at times unfriendly future.

I think it fair to observe at this point in history the Civil and Criminal Justice systems don't work well for either the providers or the consumers and there does not appear to be any silver bullet in the offing to solve the problems. In our country today we need to recognize a few hard realities:

The poor can't even think about civil or adequate criminal access to our courts.
Middle income folks can't access it without mortgaging everything they have.
The economics of the law practice can't be rationalized based on the public need for the affordable legal services and the sheer expense of running a law practice and supporting a family.
Salaries for new lawyers coming out of law school can't justify the cost of a legal education.
Salaries for seasoned lawyers in small towns and middle sized cities have plateaued while the cost of maintaining a practice continues to rise.
Legal services aren't seen as essential services like medical care, and consumers don't see the need to the degree that they are willing to buy "prepaid" legal services.
Prepaid Plans don't offer choice of counsel or much coverage.
Large firm practices cater to businesses and individuals that really don't care what their services cost, but rather buy the brand for the influence factor.
Lastly, consumers lack confidence in the legal profession to the degree that the entire judicial system is looked upon in the worst possible light.

With these problems in mind how do we fix the system? Glibly, much like you eat an elephant, one small bite at a time. We should first start by recognizing that the civil and criminal justice systems are public institutions and that by our oath we are first officers of that institution. We did this before we became members of a firm, before we became judges, before we joined a corporate legal department, so as officers we must step up and lead the repair of the system. Clearly, the practicing Bar can't wave a magic wand and poof the problem goes away. I wish it was that simple. We need to start by educating the public, the legislature and our own members about the needs and deficiencies in the current processes. We need to get prospective lawyers and current members of the Bar to be realistic about their economic expectations in choosing to become a lawyer.

Lawyering is a learned profession founded on a principle of public service not on wealth accumulation. There is not a "Plaintiffs Bar" and a "Defense Bar." There is just one Bar encompassing all those admitted to practice before the courts. We need to be realistic about what cases get brought and we need to be more vigilant about how much expense we run up in discovery and pretrial tactics. I've often wondered if we wouldn't be better practicing under the old Field Code (trial by ambush) rather than dragging disputes out forever. In short, we need to make ourselves more affordable and available to all our citizens. Think about it; if we had to do less work on cases, they would take less time, they would cost less and we could take on more cases (even a few Pro Bono). I realize that I have not proposed a perfect or even great solution to this tiny piece of the equation, but it's a start and the dialogue needs to begin somewhere.

My Senior Partner, Donovan Worden (now deceased), once told me that "It is not a lawyer's job to prove a client right, but rather to help them solve a problem even if that means telling them that what they believe is not accurate and they are wrong." Lawyers should make the best of their client's bad situation and help them get the best possible result given the facts they have to work with. In representing a client, lawyers shouldn't bend facts, manufacture them or try to hide them; they should just use them to come out with the best possible outcome that the facts justify. As Officers of the Court that is our ethical obligation. I think that some of us may have lost sight of this simple proposition along the way. We have become zealous advocates to the extreme - out to win (beat the other lawyer) at all costs. Zeal has its limits in the execution of our duties to the court.

We need more lawyers in the legislature. We need more around the legislature to advise lawmakers about the needs of the legal system and the demands society continues to place on our courts. Some will say "I pay State Bar dues for the State Bar to do that for me," and I concede the point with the qualification that doing so does not relieve each of us from our duty to the courts to get personally involved and make our positions known. After all, not all lawyers agree on everything. I know that may come as a great shock, but while lawyers sometimes get paid to disagree, we are never supposed to be disagreeable in the process. Many times our State Bars get caught in the middle and just don't take a position on an issue that really can impact judicial case loads, compensation, and the speed of the system.

We need to encourage older lawyers (I am one) to consider second legal careers as volunteers in the courts. I took a Pro Bono case to hearing the other day and found that in the session of court, I was the lonely lawyer in the room. All the rest of the litigants were appearing pro se - all divorces coming out of our family law self-help clinic. I sat there and watched while the Judge took a lot of court time being lawyer for each side just to make sure that the record was protected with all the right testimony and representation. A retired lawyer could find a home as a "Barrister" just showing up a little before the hearing and getting pro se litigants documents in order. Move now to the court room, put litigant one on the stand, ask the right questions, and then move on to the next one. It would speed up the process and resolve a huge problem for the judges. The concept is not all that different from what we see in health care today with the use of "Hospitalists" who only deal with patients while they are in the hospital. I concede that my idea of daily "Barristers" has a few holes in it, but the seed is planted and with nurturing by a few more members of the Bar, we can see it grow into a healthy improvement to the civil justice system.

I think I've made my point: our justice system is close to needing life support and only we can fix it. I see little we can do about our costs, but we certainly can reduce client costs and assist in streamlining the judicial processes. Take your local judge to lunch and just ask what they need and what you can do to help. But be prepared, it may take all afternoon just to hear what your local courts need from you, as well as other lawyers and the legislature. If we don't try to fix the system we have, the legislature will find us a new system that may put many lawyers on the outside looking in.

Disclaimer: This post is based on my experiences and personal observation of the justice process over forty years, and I must be clear it is not an observation about or condemnation of the tireless individual effort that individual lawyers, judges, court staffs and Bar Associations put into keeping the process functioning. Most are dedicated to the civil and criminal justice system and work hard every day to make it function for the citizens that find their way into the system. Many lawyers could make more money in other occupations, but do what they do for the love of the profession and the understanding that our citizens need lawyers to do all the things they do in order for the Rule of Law to continue and remain strong. I applaud the individual effort of every one of them and truly believe that our younger generation of lawyers will figure out how to keep the system working - "Long Live the Practice of Law"

As always if you want any information about ALPS or have a comment on this blog post, please e-mail me at rminto@alpsnet.com or call 1-800-327-2577.ALPS policyholders can also call or e-mail their Account Manager to discuss what this sort of future could mean to you and your firm.

Read Part Two of this post here.

The Hard Market and the US Economy—Where ALPS Fits

Robert Minto — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:20:00 +0000

By Robert W. Minto, ALPS CEO, robertminto@alpsnet.com

It usually follows that when the wind blows the insurance market acts accordingly. Bracing itself the market hardens and prices go up. It's logical; repairing wind damage costs money and insurance prices increase to cover those costs. The wind blew in 2011 and early 2012 so we should see firming in property and casualty pricing in the next renewal cycle. What does the wind have to do with Lawyers Professional Liability Insurance (LPLI)? Technically nothing, but practically everything. LPLI is a subset of Casualty Insurance and is dependent on the same reinsurance sources as the general casualty markets. In other words, the industry as a whole floats on the same tides.

In Theory

The economy and the insurance industry are intertwined in so many ways that it is hard to look at the latter without analyzing the former.

The insurance industry depends on investment returns for that portion of its income that allows it to keep premiums down. When investment income drops, premiums must go up to cover the cost of losses previously subsidized by the investment side of the business.

When the economy goes into recession, claims frequency tends to rise for a period of three to four years, as troubled business ventures attempt to find deep pockets to avoid failure.

When the wind blows and the insurance industry pays claims, it creates jobs in all sectors of business as communities rebuild.

When the economy declines, insurance premiums generally decline as people and businesses try to cut expenses, which puts a heavier burden on insurance company investment income to support claims cost.

In an economic downturn, interest rates generally fall, putting pressure on the insurance industry's investment income which in turn drives premiums up (theoretically) to cover the cost of claims.

In any case, I think you get the picture that the relationship between the economy and the fortunes of the insurance industry can't be separated, nor can they be easily predicted. In a way I like this tangled relationship, because as ALPS CEO and an insurance industry leader, it requires me to think, speculate and project just to keep ALPS in the game. The good news is that most years I'm right and ALPS continues to be a strong player.

Right now the broad professional liability industry faces real challenges as we see the claims prognostications coming true, investment returns declining and the softest market many of us can remember. The soft market needs to end in order to keep the industry as a whole viable. Competition is good and I believe that a single insurer can't meet the needs of all risks. Accordingly, those insurers who recently entered the market hoping to grab significant market share need to get realistic about pricing or they will not survive. Let's face facts, loss costs for professional liability and LPLI in particular have risen in the past two years and there doesn't seem to be any end to that trend in sight. The Wall Street Journal ran a good article a week or so ago that really thoughtfully addressed the whole issue. Here is the link so you can dig deeper if you like. It portents a need for greater sanity in the market place and a greater understanding by professional liability insurance consumers of what they really want and need from their insurer. For so many, for so long it has been about price. In these economic times price can't be King. Particularly in this market, consumers need to understand the coverage they need (certainly) and that all policy forms don't provide the same protection or the same service. It's not simply about premium. It's about how you want to be treated not only at renewal and when a claim occurs, but throughout the entire relationship. The other day one of our staff, Kiffin Hope, came across a blog on what to look for when purchasing malpractice insurance and shared it with me. As a blogger, I was impressed and decided to share it with my readers as well. I'll be interested in what you think about it.

In Practice

This whole thought string took me back to the inception or conception of ALPS when we set out to create a fairly priced stable market for LPLI. It still amazes me what we accomplished and how far we have come in the past 25 years:

ALPS remains the most stable market in the country for LPLI. We don't leave markets when claims issues arise; we price to the cost and work with our insured lawyers to reduce the risk and keep the cost down.

We price our risks based on the profiles of every lawyer in the firm so that just because one lawyer in the firm has a high risk practice, the whole firm doesn't pay for one lawyer's risk factors.

When you call ALPS you will be greeted by Nancy or Kristine (real people), not an auto attendant, and you won't get dumped into voicemail unless you want to go there. I still believe in the personal touch.

Surprisingly, you will hear from us throughout the year in a number of ways, not just when it's time to collect more premiums.

Our technical services (Web presence, social media, blogs, etc.) far outpace the industry as we work to bridge the age range of all our insured lawyers. Our website (www.alpsnet.com) serves as your electronic portal to all our services and information.

Our Risk Management services set the standard with our live CLE events, ALPS 411 blog, online CLE and most importantly your ability to have one of our Risk Managers actually come to your office and do a confidential risk assessment at a very nominal cost.

Our personalized claims service is individualized to each firm's needs on a claim-by-claim basis. Our claims attorneys don't just manage the claim; they provide invaluable assistance to you and your firm in returning you to productivity.

It's all good stuff. ALPS has grown in many ways and I still have a vision of how to make it better, stronger and more responsive to our customer needs, even in this amazing time of instant gratification, text messaging, social media and digital handshakes. It all centers on what ALPS customers want us to be. We want to do it your way on your timetable and without creating additional stress or time pressure. Stay tuned as you see ALPS evolve in the next couple of years.

The Future

To a great extent the economic crisis of 2008 changed the world forever in that for the first time we got a glimpse of what Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged) and George Orwell (1984) predicted relative to corporate control and intrusion into government and economic controls. We finally admitted that in order to avoid a total meltdown we had to recognize that some corporate institutions were "too big to fail" and that the populace and small business would bear the burden of restoring the economy, not the corporate giants. It's a bitter pill to swallow, but the reality of what it means for the future actually gives our governments and the people an opportunity to face realities sooner and on a more micro level that will help us avoid repetition of the drastic meltdowns of the past.

Interestingly, the property, casualty and surety insurance industry faired pretty well through the last three and a half years. There were only a couple of problems - the flight to capital from other sectors into the insurance sector, and an increase in claims frequency and severity for the professional liability industry as a result of the downturn in the general economy. All the additional capital put a damper on the natural industry trend of increasing premiums to reflect the increased loss expense. It was sort of a double whammy; on one side losses cost rose and on the other investment income went down due to the government forced interest rate environment designed to stimulate the economy. Four years later, the loss costs have eroded some of the capital base and the industry will need to move its pricing up to make sure that it doesn't become a late casualty of the 2008 economic crisis.

Across the industry, pockets of leaders recognize the need for stronger pricing to cover losses and have raised prices to prevent negative solvency impacts. I am happy to say that I am one of them. ALPS stands for stability in coverage. We must be in a leadership position if we want to maintain our position as the industry stabilizer. ALPS has also been the leader in its use of technology allowing us to target the increases to the segment of our book (areas of practice, firm size, limits profile) where the losses occur rather than just a blanket across-the-board rate increase. Some of you won't notice the difference; some will see a slight increase and others will see increases that may seem high. Our customer service staff and underwriters work tirelessly to make sure that before a quote goes out of the office we get it right for the firm based on the information we have.

What you Can Control and how ALPS helps that process

The cleaner the application, the more complete the information, the better the quote reflects the risk of an individual firm. I have always viewed ALPS's relationship with our firms as a partnership where ALPS takes the stress and concern off the backs of our insured firms for all the potential risks that the policy form and its endorsements anticipate. Whether it the stress of a claim or the stress of making sure that the LPL policy fits the firms practice profiles and client mix, ALPS commits to stand with you and support you to get it right. We understand that policy forms don't all look the same and can be modified to add coverage or remove coverage by endorsement to make sure our insured firms get the best fit. All this happens within the annual application process. The more robust the discussion between our customer service folks and you, the more complete the application becomes and the better our underwriters can fit coverage and cost to the needs of the insured firm.

Bottom line, I believe that the insurance market is firming (moving toward a hard market) and we can all expect our insurance costs, all P&C lines, to increase over the next year. The good news for our insured lawyers is that we have prepared for it and you can be assured that you will get the best, most stable coverage at the best price from ALPS. Like anything else, you may find LPLI coverage cheaper, but you won't find ALPS's quality coverage anywhere at a lower price.

As always if you want any information about how ALPS calculates rates and ultimately individual firm pricing, or just want to comment on this blog post, please e-mail me at <rminto@alpsnet.com> or call 1-800-327-2577. ALPS policyholders can also call or e-mail their Account Manager to discuss what this means to you and your firm. The rest of the world can call or email Julie Patterson (1-800-367 2577, jpatterson@alpsnet.com), Kevin Beasley (1-800-367-2577, kbeasley@alpsnet.com), or Keith Fichtner (1-800-367-2577, kfichtner@alpsnet.com).

Corporate Citizenship: Musings of an Unlikely Girl Scout Leader

Robert Minto — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:07:00 +0000

I've been thinking a lot lately about leadership, both in the context of businesses and communities. At times the concept makes me crazy, because many business leaders I know won't get involved in community leadership as they lack the patience to try to drive consensus. In truth when a friend suggested that I run for the legislature, I rolled my eyes and made some comment about not having the time to devote; this from the guy that drives corporate civic involvement home as being so important. This really got me going on an internal dialogue about what I have personally done in my community, and the importance of contributions, large and small.

It may surprise some of you to know that at one point in my life I was a registered Girl Scout. When my children (all girls) were younger my wife got involved as their Brownie Leader and later Junior Scout leader. I don't remember exactly what happened, but my wife needed to give up the leadership role and no other mothers from the group stepped up to take on the job. Faced with the choice of letting the troop dissolve or taking it on myself, I talked another father into co-leading the troop with me. To make a long story short the state and national scouting organization didn't know what to do with two men from Missoula, Montana who wanted to be Girl Scout Troop Leaders. After we got over the hurdles of ulterior motives of an unsavory kind we got down to making it happen and I had to become a Girls Scout to do it.

I had no idea what I had taken on. When I agreed to this responsibility I really had to juggle being a scout leader with growing my practice and finding time for myself and my wife. Interestingly this troop led by dads became the largest and most active in Missoula and everybody had a blast. It also ate a bunch of time. But to the positive it stands as one of the greatest leadership learning experiences of my life. I had to plan the impossible schedule, manage the unmanageable (thirty pre-teen girls) and organize an untrained sales team (contrary to popular belief cookies don't just sell themselves).

There is a family moral here that may well become an entirely different Blog post, but it's not the point of this one. While the time I spent helping set up wall tents for winter camping, teaching wood working, fire building, compass reading, outdoor cooking skills, knot tying and the like didn't contribute to the bottom line of my practice, it profoundly shaped my way of thinking about my work , community, civic commitment and the obligation to participate on a 24/7 basis. Giving back as a Girl Scout Leader challenged me to innovate. Along the way I rattled the cage of a longstanding institution, and in a very small way, advanced the cause of equality of the sexes. The process showed me the value of challenging conventions constructively to help people and organizations grow. Perhaps more importantly volunteering my time gave me a refreshed view of the real value of time.

Everything we do every minute of every day matters. What we do can move society and the people around us forward. Even our inaction matters. By doing nothing, we become part of the roadblock that makes up the status quo. In an era of streamlining and doing more with less, giving back gets pushed to one of the lower priorities for all of us. Especially in companies where time is money, corporate giving and community involvement seem like diversions from efficiency. In the interest of the bottom line they become a seemingly easy line item to cut. However it's times like these when charitable giving and community involvement become the most important. When times get tough, hours long, and staff short, the soul of a company gets cut in the interest of the bottom line and nobody will notice until it's too late to revive.

As federal and state budgets decline, non-profit organizations, not surprisingly end up having to do more with less and rely more heavily on private sector funding. Just as stable funding sources dwindle, the need for programs goes up. How do we promote the health of our society without promoting a level of equity in our communities? This remains a vicious circle that never ends, and at some level we all feel it. Whether it's the phone calls at dinner time asking for a donation, a massive increase in non-profit solicitation mailings or endless invitations to this gala event or that auction, at some point we all want to crawl in a hole and just not respond. That doesn't solve the problem either, individually or corporately. We must be part of the solution at some level. We as individual must allocate limited resources, and as corporate leaders we must not only do that we have to look at a public view of our organization. Even if we avoid or put off making a decision to help or be involved we make one; the decision to stay on the sidelines and not participate in society.

Despite the economic climate, corporate citizenship and charitable giving has a place. It says as much about the company as the quality of the services or products it offers. I find corporate citizenship and charitable giving, even when it's not publically recognized, builds a loyalty that transcends price and direct competition. People want to do business with companies that they trust and believe have a soul. Once you have these values fully integrated in the fabric of the company you would no more get rid of them than you would the sign on the door. Without these values the company identity vanishes.

At ALPS Corporate Citizenship and Charitable giving stand as one of the five pillars of our strategic plan. We encourage employees to volunteer their time (both on and off the clock) through our community involvement program. As a company we also give of our time collectively for various events. We provide a corporate match for our employees' private donations. ALPS also commits a percentage of its annual profits to charitable and community causes as determined by our senior management or our Charitable Giving Committee.

I have found that serving our community and serving our clients are not mutually exclusive activities. In truth, being engaged in our community helps us stay connected and creative. It keeps the staff motivated and engaged no matter what the daily crisis in the office might be. It also helps us attract people who care about people, which ultimately translates into caring about the integrity of our product and the level of service we provide to our clients.

I am proud of the difference ALPS has made over the years in the lives of people I will likely never know. In the end it is not about recognition, but rather peace of mind and soul. For me, it's about ALPS, to borrow from the Girl Scouts, leaving this "camp site" a cleaner and better place than we found it.

I look around Missoula and ALPS doesn't stand alone in this philosophy. A number of other companies, large and small step up every day to make a difference, however small. We need to get everybody on board for the benefit of their customers, the community and most of all their employees. Community involved employees have energy and drive businesses to success, which in turn drives the local economy, etc. In the end everybody wins.

Author’s Note: I want to give special recognition to Laura Churchman from ALPS marketing team who inspired this blog by laughing at my girl scout leadership story and prompting me with ideas for content that really made this blog post what it is - really important for society.

Abraham, Martin and John: Has anybody seen my old friend Martin?

Robert Minto — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:29:00 +0000

Few people remember Dick Holler who wrote this song that Dion made famous in the late 1960s. His words represent a tribute to a century of Icons for social change. As I sit here thinking about Martin Luther King, Jr., I find it prophetic that a song wedges him between two equally incredible and perhaps circumstantial heroes of a common cause that began with the drafting of our Constitution, got swept under the table until the 1860s and simmered until the 1960s when our nation of laws finally decided to enforce the rights of people of all races, ethnic backgrounds and beliefs. Like the times before when rights of human dignity and belief surfaced before we raced to embrace them and then back slid to a state of comfort. Today, we grapple with rights of the unborn, rights of Gay, Lesbian and Transgender individuals, but there looms in the background the underlying issue of racial equality.

I wonder what Abraham, Martin and John would think if they could see America today. The targets have changed, the tactics more sophisticated, but the issues remain. We still have groups attempting to impose their will on the nation as they really believe, delusional or otherwise, that they know what's good for all of us. In addition, the new sophistication of poll manipulation, media promotion and "thought leadership" by special interest groups in Washington, DC and our State capitals brings a greater threat to our constitution and way of life that at any prior period in history.

Abraham would likely sit in wonder at how far society has scientifically advanced, how far it has spiritually decayed and how we have so misused and abused the scientific and communicative gifts we've been given. He would laugh at how some things have not changed; the fraud and corruption of today so resembles the profiteering of the Civil War era. Our ability to move it from the business to business and business to government has only been outstripped by our new use of technology to take it global and straight into our homes. Today, those inclined to prey on others have a much broader array of tools and much fewer hurdles to touch their ultimate marks. Abraham would have looked at our congress and political processes with enormous disdain. Politics in his day makes modern political disagreements seem like child's play. The difference and the disappointment comes in our use of "sound bite politics" to make it personal. In doing so, we put up roadblocks that bar the ability of individuals in leadership to let the process of compromise work for the good of the nation. We seem to have burned the bridges of civility that allow egos to be set aside and legitimate debate on principles to craft a conversation that brings solutions. He would so wish he could participate today to bring perspective to the opportunities we squander because of ideology and ego.

John would be proud of our younger generation who still hold idealistic views of being a force for change and finding ways to help others. Just as my generation did in the 1960s, today's youth represent the bright future of our country's position in the world as a leader for global change in a peaceful fashion. I know he wonders what happened to my generation and all the idealism of the 1960s and all the positive energy we demonstrated at the time. We staffed his Peace Corp, we embraced the Civil Rights Movement and we worked to put a dent in poverty and hunger. Somewhere along the way the idealism died for many of us and we checked out; why he wonders. He might conclude that the pace of life quickened, families needed to feed themselves and the modern political process sucked the life out of his young idealist. Even with that he would see today's technology for the opportunities it brings to stimulate enthusiasm across generations, marshal resources, and produce energy to further the common good. He would deplore its commercialization and use to track individuals and groups to prey upon for ideological fundraising and fear mongering. I wonder how he would view the incidents of 9/11 and the huge impact it had on freedoms in this country, and the military industrial complex's utilization of it to profiteer and create fear for fear's sake. If alive today he would build bridges between the factions and provide much more opportunity for both sides to move forward. He might even be Pro-Life, but not to a political end. He knew how to count votes to move an agenda and he would do it again.

I saved Martin for last even though it messed up the song title. He brought me a much more complex mental discussion. In his life he focused on rights for Americans of African heritage to be full participants in American life with an eye on schools, worship, housing, representation, jobs and freedom from fear. I've read most everything he's written and a lot of what others wrote about him and while a Black Preacher from the South, he represented much more. He brought a voice of hope to African Americans and the poor all over this country. He represented a voice against ignorance, racism and hate without regard for ethnic origin. Some say he was a modern day saint. History doesn't support that proposition-he was an ordinary human being, in the right place at the right time, with a compelling message and the ability to deliver it. He will go down in history as one of our country's greatest human beings. He would want it that way as he saw himself as a mere mortal with a God given gift to lead and preach. He did both with great skill and a style that even his detractors admired.

Were he alive today, he would wonder how he failed so badly. Not that the Civil Rights Movement didn't accomplish a lot but rather at how it has become part of the establishment, complete with its own profiteers. He wanted a movement that stayed the course until African Americans and even Caucasian and other ethnic minorities climbed out of poverty, got heard (even locally) and could stop making the process about catching up. He would abhor the current state of immigration in this country. We represent opportunity for all peoples and have for two hundred years been the melting pot of the world. Today, his cause lives on in even a larger scale than before. He dreamed of a society free of barriers to achievement and advancement where educational opportunities and scholarships didn't have a color, gender or language criteria. He had many dreams and today they are still mine. I will not live to see them fulfilled, but as long as I live they will remain a front burner work in process.

As we celebrate Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, let's remember his dreams and the dreams of Abraham and John. They and the framers of our constitution started something that remains unfinished-an America free from prejudices, with opportunities for all people to live in peace, and prosper. It's not a lot to ask.