Rees Morrison has consulted to more than 250 law departments (and several law firms) over 22 years to help them better manage themselves and their outside counsel. For more, visit reesmorrison.com, email me, or call 973.568.9110.

All posts (C) 2005-9 Rees W. Morrison.
If you would like a Metapost Plus: please email me with the name and I will send it.

Archive by Month


Archive by Category

Technorati Profile Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License.

« A disconcerting impression of lawyers who walk and speak with ear plugs | Main | Half-time partner, half-time general counsel – full-time exhaustion »

A method to rate outside-counsel guidelines

Intriguingly, the Ethisphere Institute offers to complete a Code of Conduct analysis using its methodology and ratings on 57 elements. As described in Ethisphere, Qtr. 2, 2008 at 13, each of eight critical components has a weighting and they aggregate the scores of experts on those ratings.

Perhaps someone will organize a comparable panel of experts to rate outside-counsel guidelines on a range of components. Both law departments and firms could submit guidelines and receive a rating of the guidelines on the various scales, plus an overall assessment. Departments would like to know new ideas and how they might improve their statements of operating principles; law firms would like to know if a department is over-reaching.

I have written frequently about guidelines that set compliance requirements for law firms (See my posts of Dec. 17, 2007: profusion and prolixity of guidelines; and Feb. 6, 2008: nine ways to improve them.). Many posts concern specific injunctions set out by such guidelines (See my posts of Jan.10, 2006: use of company’s name for promotional purposes; March 4, 2007: disbursements; Aug. 16, 2006: over-time charges; Jan. 10, 2006 and Sept. 5, 2007: billing for travel time; Dec. 1, 2006: disbursements; Aug. 9, 2006: managing partners certify compliance; Nov. 5, 2006: retention of your legal files; March 25, 2008: budget expectations.).

Other posts have ranged across a variety of other topics regarding guidelines (See my posts of Aug. 1, 2006: questions whether they achieve their goals: Sept. 5, 2007 and March 5, 2008: detailed and strict guidelines compared to short and constitutional; Aug. 24, 2006: differences between retention letters and outside counsel guidelines; and Oct. 29, 2006: beyond retention letters and outside counsel guidelines.).

Posted on July 11, 2008 at 10:29 AM in Outside Counsel | Permalink

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Post a comment