Tag: Ron Baker

Pricing the Client, Not the Work: A More Flexible, Value-Driven Approach to Legal Billing

I often see lawyers debating on LinkedIn about the merits and disadvantages of hourly billing versus value-based pricing. I don’t see it as a question of doing it one way vs. the other. Each client will have their own unique needs regarding how they prefer to be billed. And it doesn’t have to be just one way. The right way to price/bill is the one that best meets your client’s needs.

We need to start offering options: that could mean two or three different options, including hourly billing or value-based pricing, or a hybrid billing option, which includes a monthly retainer plus hourly billing, etc. This is my twist on “Price the client, not the work”, as Ron Baker recommends.

Clients Have Different Needs, So Give Them Different Options

Some clients still prefer hourly billing. Others want predictability through flat fees or monthly retainers. Some are open to value-based pricing or outcome-contingent models. A few are even willing to pay a premium for guarantees or guaranteed availability.

All of these models can coexist. Your job is not to convince every client to fit your preferred pricing/billing method. Your job is to understand what the client values, then design a fee structure that reflects that.

In Implementing Value Pricing, Ron Baker lays out a clear, eight-step process for moving firms toward value-based pricing models. But even Baker doesn’t argue that it’s all or nothing. Instead, it’s about moving along a continuum, away from pricing based on effort, toward pricing based on value.

Hourly Billing Isn’t Going Anywhere, But It Shouldn’t Be the Only Option

Let’s be realistic: hourly billing isn’t disappearing anytime soon. And that’s okay. What we can do is evolve from relying on it as our only pricing model.

Hybrid models are often more practical and better aligned with both firm and client interests. A client might be on a monthly flat fee for routine advisory work, with defined scope projects priced at a fixed fee, and a litigation file on a success-based arrangement.

The point is flexibility. And when you build tailored fee structures, you change the conversation from “what’s your hourly rate?” to “how can we work together in a way that makes sense for both of us?”

Unique Pricing Drives Unique Value and Breaks the Race to the Bottom

If your pricing model looks like everyone else’s, then you’re just another commodity. That’s when clients start comparison shopping based on price alone.

But if you’re structuring your pricing based on deep knowledge of the client’s goals and preferred ways of working, you’re no longer interchangeable. You’re delivering something tailored and valuable. You’re a legal professional, not a plumber.

And most importantly, you’re helping the client win, which means you’ll win too.

Track Your Time Even When You’re Not Billing It

One more essential point: I believe you should still record time, even when using non-hourly billing models.

Time tracking isn’t just for billing. It’s how you understand your internal costs, opportunity costs, and profitability. If you abandon time tracking altogether, you lose visibility into whether a fixed fee or value-based arrangement is actually working for your business.

Think of it as managing a portfolio. You need data to know what’s sustainable and where the value really lies.

Value Pricing Doesn’t Mean Taking All the Risk

A lot of firms resist alternative billing because they think it means giving up control or taking on all the risk. But that’s not the point.

A good pricing model finds a win-win. The client gets predictability or performance incentives, whatever they need most. The firm gets fair compensation aligned with results and client satisfaction.

Bartlit Beck LLP, the original poster child for alternative billing, still did 50% of its work on an hourly basis in the early years. Why? Because not every client was ready to make the shift. Some simply weren’t comfortable. And even the most visionary firms need to meet clients where they are.

Stop Arguing. Start Listening.

We don’t need to keep arguing about which model is superior. Hourly billing is not the villain. Value pricing isn’t a panacea. What matters is what your client wants and needs.

If you build pricing options around that, you’ll build trust and long-term success for both you and your clients.

References and Further Reading:

  • Ron Baker, Implementing Value Pricing: A Radical Business Model for Professional Firms
  • The American Lawyer (1995), Diamonds Are This Firm’s Best Friend – Profile of Bartlit Beck and its hybrid approach to alternative fees

Win-Win Alternative Billing Strategies – Part II

This is the second installment of a three part series based on my presentation on “Win-Win Alternative Billing Strategies” at the CBABC Sixth Annual Branch Conference in Las Vegas November 18-20, 2011.

Value Pricing – Part II

In Ron Baker’s book “Implementing Value Pricing”, he puts forward an eight-step plan on how to price a job up front on a fixed fee basis.

The concept of value pricing that he talks about is different than the value billing concept that lawyers have talked about for years.  Lawyers usually work on an hourly basis, and then try to charge a premium at the end of the file based on the extra “value” as perceived by the lawyer.  So on a $30,000 file, if a significantly higher recovery is obtained than expected, the lawyer may try to charge a premium of $6,000, or 20%.  The client’s response might be, “Why are you charging me a premium at the end of the file. We had a contract for an hourly rate, right?”  Ah yes, the lawyer says, but in the fine print of the engagement letter there is a clause that allows the lawyer to charge a premium of whatever the lawyer wishes on top of the hourly rate based on the lawyer’s perception of value provided.   The client either says no, or thinks twice about using that lawyer the next time.

Instead, the value pricing system calculates the value up front, not at the end of the file as value billing does.  A very important distinction.

Another benefit of pricing for value up front is that it also allows you to obtain a larger retainer up front as well.  If you have scoped out the work properly and provided a fixed fee quote, with some measure of certainty for the client on the total amount of legal fees to come, they will be much more willing to give you a third or a half of the fixed fee up front.  If there is uncertainty as there is under hourly billing, the client is much more hesitant to pay a retainer, or will only provide a very small retainer up front.

So you need to negotiate the value and the price of the legal work in a conversation with the client up front.  Ask the client what he or she values. That value will determine what price you can charge for your legal services.

How is value determined? 

Does the client or the lawyer determine value?  The answer of course is the client.  Notwithstanding that the lawyer may have many years of experience in the practice area, every client has a different perception of the value that your firm provides.

Ron Baker says, “Price the customer, not the service.”  So each client needs a different value/price proposition.  What that means is that you may charge a different amount for the same service to different clients. However, keep in mind that each client wants service provided in a different way.  So each client has a different value “package” that it requires.  One client may want a service guarantee, one may want a fixed fee, and another may want the service provided tomorrow, not next week.  Each service feature carries a different price tag.  So it’s like a new car, which is provided with several different option packages, and each client gets to choose the options she wants.

The most important point here is that it’s all about choice.  The client wants choice.  They may decide to go with either a fixed fee or an hourly fee, or a hybrid fixed and hourly fee, but they want to have the choice to select from.  You need to provide them that choice.

4 Main Ways To Add Value For Clients

– Increase revenue – such as increasing the recovery for a plaintiff in a lawsuit

– Reduce the payment required as a defendant

– Reduce risk for client with a fixed fee

– Enhance reputation, such as using a blue chip law firm’s reputation to secure public financing that you may not have received otherwise.

Costing Out The Work

Once you’ve determined the price for your fixed fee service, you can then determine what it will cost to do the job.  You will need to to budget costs to arrive at the desired profit.  If you can’t make the cost work in order to get the desired profit margin, you simply decide right now not to take the job.  Why get involved in a loser if you know the answer up front?

Another key to Ron Baker’s pricing on purpose is that timesheets are actually done up front, instead of as the work is done.  By doing your timesheets ahead of time, you are able to determine what your costs are for pricing purposes to obtain the profit margin you require.

Do you still need to track time?

Yes! You still need to track time in order to understand what your costs are on each file and whether you were profitable.  This is one area where I disagree with Ron Baker, who says he wants to trash the timesheet.  Timesheets are still important for costing your files, and ensuring that you price your future jobs to optimize profitability.

Keep in mind that as you get into alternative billing and fixed fees, there’s always a danger that you will get involved in price wars.  Don’t.  This is a race to the bottom, as there’s always someone who will do the job cheaper than you.  Instead, do whatever you can to distinguish your legal services from the competition, and “uncommoditize” them. Any service can be “uncommoditized”.   If not, and it truly is just about price, get out of that business and replace it with something else where you can make money.

Another rule to consider is the 80/20 rule of profits.  Under this rule, you make 80% of your profits from just 20% of your clients.  Read Ron Baker’s “Implementing Value Pricing” and you’ll see the study backing up this guideline mentioned in one of the appendices.

So what that means is that you have to be ruthless in evaluating the profitability of your clients, and cut the bottom 20% on a regular basis and replace them with more profitable clients.  The first step is to determine profitability of each client, however. We’ll talk more about that in a future post.

Related articles