Wired, Aug. 2007 at 56, urges people in charge of meetings to consider a half-dozen ways to improve them. (1) Don't have a meeting at all. Perhaps the law department can settle the issues by e-mail or phone or in the informal one-on-one chats. (2) Prepare a clear agenda. For every meeting, outline for the participants ahead of time what will be discussed, what decisions have to be made, and some sense of the order and timing of the topics. (3) Invite as few people as possible. Just as you should keep to a minimum whom you copy on emails, likewise prune meeting invitees to the essential people.

(4) Do away with chairs. If people can only stand during the meeting "It'll keep things high energy, short, and to the point.” (5) Start on time. "Consider an incentive system that records promptness -- say, buying only enough snacks for early birds or letting people speak in the order they arrive and ending on time. Tardy folk don't get their turn." (6) Set a timer. Start and end your meetings promptly according to a clock that everyone in the room can see.

At RBC Financial Group (part of the Royal Bank of Canada), the law department uses an internal survey to ask its lawyers to rate on a scale of one to 100 the performance of the firms they use. The numeric ratings matter, "but the most useful information is often the anecdotal comments provided in the survey responses."

Moreover, as described in LEXPERT, Vol. 8, July/Aug. 2007 at 64 by Richard Brzakala, law firm manager at RBC Financial Group, the law department has moved away from the traditional RFP structure and inquiries. Now they send out a “questionnaire” that includes such questions as "What distinguishes your firms culture from the competition?”, “What are your most successful partnering arrangements/experiences?," and "Describe any successes involving innovation in the areas of law you have requested to do work for RBC."

The questionnaire assumes that each firm can deliver first-class legal services and therefore does not ask as much as traditional RFPs do about staff and firm experience. The inquiry also shifts from quantitative information, such as billing rates, to qualitative responses.

Rick MacKenzie, and associate general counsel at BMO Financial Group in Canada, offers some insight about how his bank intends to reduce outside counsel expenses by 10 and 15 percent over three years. As described in LEXPERT, Vol. 8, July/Aug. 2007 at 63, the bank's new procurement system takes advantage of customized software developed in-house.

"Anyone within the organization who needs to purchase legal services must pick from an online list of preferred suppliers -- firms that offer a wide range of legal services -- or a secondary list of approved suppliers -- usually more specialized firms. Purchases of more than $5,000 must be approved electronically by the legal department. If anyone tries to buy outside legal services without going through the electronics store, the law firm will not get paid -- a powerful incentive for everyone to cooperate."

This system keeps an eye on expensive uses of outside counsel yet gives clients the right to buy de minimis amounts of outside guidance (See my post of Oct. 1, 2006 on one department’s limit of four hours a month.).

A highly-competent, high-performing lawyer can make a huge difference to a law department and indeed to a company (See my posts of Aug. 16, 2006 on super-lawyers; and March 16, 2006 on A-players.).

Many law departments try to identify very strong performers early and nurture them (See my posts of March 31, 2007 and three references cited; May 20, 2005 on the risks with a star; and May 7, 2006 on GE’s treatment of high-achieving lawyers.). In fact, succession programs are a muted and more comprehensive version of high-potential programs (See my posts of July 31, 2005 about succession planning; Jan. 4, 2006 on hallmarks of a robust performance management system; May 1, 2005 on sabbaticals and succession; Oct. 10, 2005 on internal competition.).

Special efforts in favor of a few are not without their problems (See my post of June 24, 2007on the pitfalls of high-potential programs.). The philosophical question has to do with the rightness of generally trying to raise all boats or investing in one or two to make them yachts.

The McKinsey Quarterly, 2007 No. 2, at 23, defines what economists call “rents” – “additional earnings requiring no additional, marginal investment of capital or labor." This blog has mentioned the term previously but briefly (See my posts of April 27, 2006 and its definition of rents as “excess profits”; and Aug. 26, 2006 #2 as “gains not offset by losses.”) so it is appropriate to offer some more examples.

When a law firm raises its billing rates, it generates rents. The firm incurs no extra costs of labor, physical plant, or management even though its profits increase. When a law firm promotes an associate to partner and the lawyer's rate jumps $100 an hour, that is a pure example of rents.

If there were negative rents – savings without additional resources used, then when a law department freezes billing rates beyond the current year, it generates cost savings later without any further investment of resources. Another example of negative rents would be if a law department with an e-billing system tightens its disbursement formula (“As of today, no more than five cents a page for copies.”); that change costs the law department nothing, but saves money.

Many in-house counsel procrastinate when it’s time to do some administrative tasks that they dislike, such as to submit timesheets, review invoices, complete evaluation forms, or enter status updates into matter management systems. Prodded by an e-mail alert, they can ignore it amidst the flood of other emails. Pop-ups on calendars spur no action. Policies online, no matter how strict and clear, fail. But if you unleash the power of "ambient information," lawyers may be much more likely to act.

According to Wired, Aug. 2007 at 54 ambient-information techniques try to "combat data overload by moving information off computer screens and into the world around us." One of the devices is known as the Ambient Orb, a small ball that changes color in sync with incoming data. It would glow red on the lawyer’s desk when the lawyer is late for some task.

Studies have shown that people are much more likely to act on a subtle but continuously present message than an intermittent one. Here is an entrepreneurial opportunity (See my post of Sept. 22, 2006 on other money-making ideas in this blog.).

GC Mid-Atlantic, July 2007 at 19, mentions that “recently, Wal-Mart Inc. reportedly required that its top 100 firms include at least one woman and one minority attorney among the top five attorneys handling the giant corporation’s legal business." E-billing software makes it easy for law departments to track compliance with such requests.

The thrust of the article focuses not on how to monitor diversity bon on whether such quotas and scrutiny are actually illegal in that they may violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In the view of some people, both the law departments that mandate and the law firms that comply are vulnerable to discrimination charges.

The Harv. Bus. Rev., Vol. 85, March 2007 at 115, article on human capital management practices has spawned multiple posts (See my posts of May 11, 2007 with the first 9 practices and May 28, 2007 with the final 14; as well as June 10, 2007 on Leadership; June 11, 2007 on Employee Engagement; June 14, 2007 on Knowledge Accessibility; and June 30, 2007 on Workforce Optimization.). Here are my references and comments on the practices of the fifth and last category, “Learning Capacity”:

1. Innovation: "New ideas are welcome." (See my post of Oct. 29, 2006 on creativity and references cited; and my article on creativity in law departments.).
2. Training: “Training is practical and supports organizational goals." (See my posts of July 14, 2005 on training methods; April 13, 2006 on antitrust training; April 15, 2006 on role play; April 12, 2006 on university training programs for in-house counsel; May 1, 2005 on disseminating CLE learning; and Dec. 1, 2006 about law firms (rarely) training law-department lawyers.).
3. Development: "Employees have formal career development plans." (See my posts of Feb. 8, 2006 on emotional intelligence predicting career success; Sept. 5, 2005 about a career spotlight on up and coming lawyers; Dec. 28, 2006 on career paths but few promotions in-house; March 6, 2006 on dual track careers; Jan. 30, 2006 on career development through leading teams; and March 28, 2006 on reasons to join a corporation or not.).
4. Value and support: "Leaders demonstrate that learning is valued." My category on Knowledge Management has dozens of posts and see my post of Dec. 19, 2005 on how to think of law departments as learning organizations.). Tuition reimbursement benefits are one manifestation (See my posts of June 24, 2007 generally and with several references on training; May 1, 2005 on sabbaticals and tuition reimbursement; and Feb. 28, 2006 with a comment.).
5. Systems: “A learning management system automates aspects of training." I have not run across a law department that had its own learning management system, but the employees of many of them take part in company-wide training programs with their attendant tracking systems (See my posts of July 5, 2006 about these systems and a number of vendors; and Dec. 19, 2005 on BP’s system.).

Buried in the back of InsideCounsel, July 2007 at 95, is a mysterious item. It explains that "law firm managing partners and law school deans nominated the winners" of the Burton Awards for “Legends In Law.” The awards program is run in association with the Library of Congress and is sponsored by LexisNexis. Selections were made on the following criteria: “reputation in both the legal profession and as a proven authority in a specialized area of law; background and experience; complexity and scope of matters handled; global or national importance of issues confronted; and proven and exemplary leadership.”

The 2007 winners were all general counsel at corporations witih revenues in excess of $1 billion: James T. Hale (Target Corp.), Michele Coleman Mayes (Pitney Bowes), Tim Mayopolous (Bank of America), Geralyn Presti (Forest City Enterprises), and Richard Walker (Deutsche Bank). A different law firm nominated each of the five winners.

A quote by Norman Augustine, the retired chairman and CEO of Lockheed Martin, appears in an interview in Met. Corp. Counsel, Vol. 15, July 2007 at 46. Augustine makes a good point about the scope of a general counsel’s responsibilities.

“If the general counsel is to be looked upon as a persuasive counselor, it may not be advisable for the general counsel to manage departments unrelated to the general counsel's duties as lawyer for the company. When that occurs, I become concerned that if the decision made by someone in one of those departments goes awry, the general counsel's advice may be tainted, consciously or otherwise, because the general counsel is, in this case, responsible for the performance of the department.”

Two recent examples would run afoul of Augustine’s argument for separate roles. Teresa Bryce, the general counsel of Radian Group, is also the company’s chief risk officer (GC Mid-Atlantic, July 2007 at 27) while Mary Jo Dively, the general counsel of Carnegie Mellon, is also the university’s head of human resources and risk management (GC Mid-Atlantic, July 2007 at 9). If something were to go wrong legally in one of those departments, Augustine asks whether the general counsel – who manages the department – can remain objective.