One small firm in a large metropolitan area lost two major clients within six months, substantially hurting the firm's accounts receivable as well as attorney and staff morale. A special partner meeting was called, and all agreed that the firm could not tolerate another such loss, particularly since both instances could easily have been prevented.
Both clients had left after the firm had missed two or three important filing deadlines on small matters, apparently ignoring those for larger more lucrative matters. The clients accused the firm of wanting only their most profitable work and not really caring about their overall well-being. The attorneys and staff involved in those cases had been called in to private meetings and had been reprimanded, but the firm's partners were concerned that the same thing might happen again without more dramatic remedial steps.
The partners agreed to begin putting a great deal of emphasis on one centralized firm docket and calendar. They realized that dockets deal with legally prescribed and binding dates, whereas calendars refer to dates dealing with strictly firm related dates. They also understood that the two clearly impact each other, so keeping them interrelated on one document makes sense in most situations.
They decided that the general office manager would be responsible for its overall ongoing maintenance while individual partners and attorneys would be required to input all significant dates as soon as they became aware of them.
The office manager would release a three-sheet program on the first day of every business week, listing important dates for that week on one sheet with considerable detail regarding the nature of the deadline, matter, or event.
Dates for the current and next month would be listed on another sheet with some detail about the nature of their importance and, finally, on a third sheet, dates for the current month and following 11 months would be listed with names of the partners, attorneys, and staff involved in the matter.
The partners decided that failure on the part of attorneys or staff to input data in a timely manner or update them when necessary would result in a verbal warning from the partners for a first offense, a written warning for the second offense, and a penalty to be decided at that time based on the nature of the lack of compliance for the third offense. Firm partners agreed that to make sure attorneys and staff understood how seriously they viewed the situation and the calendar, a fourth offense would result in dismissal of staff or associates and a distribution reduction for partners.
An immediate difference was noticed. Attorneys were reminded of all deadlines by the receipt of their weekly calendar from the general office manager. Firm partners and even colleagues made mention of the more important deadlines, since they too were now aware of them. Many of the attorneys, associates, and even staff began to take their time management efforts more seriously.
After the system had been in place three months (with no additional clients lost because of missed deadlines), the partners announced that firm meetings would be held each Monday morning. The purpose of the meetings would be to discuss the calendars and allow each attorney, associate, and staff member to note important but perhaps unmentioned facets of particular matters. The partners found that soon a lesser sense of friction and a greater sense of cohesion existed within the office since everyone understood when a particular attorney or staff member was under pressure for a deadline.
One year after implementing the system, the entire firm evaluated its effectiveness. Not one client had been lost because of inadequate time management or missed deadlines by firm members. Additionally, because of greater firm efficiency, more time was spared to bring in new clients, which the firm expected would soon occur.
The problem just described required a simple solution, easily implemented and with very little additional maintenance: accountability. This is the only key to successful docket and calendar control. It can be delegated to a staff person or may be retained by the attorney, but all attorneys and staff associated with client work should be aware of important matters and related deadlines as well as who is accountable for making sure they are handled appropriately.
CONTROL METHODS
It is not necessary for a docket and calendar control method to be sophisticated, although such methods are available. Control may be asserted simply by using a manually produced monthly calendar, with updated versions distributed weekly throughout the attorney's office, listing matters, deadlines, and persons responsible. Dates for filing, discoveries, adversarial dead-lines, and statute of limitations can be entered when the files for those matters are initially opened.
This serves a number of purposes. For one, it allows the attorney to keep track of his or her own work schedule. It gives an indication of matter priority and provides a sense of how much attorney time is still available for new client work. Such a calendar also allows partners, other attorneys, and associates to realize what will be holding that attorney's attention in the very near future. Partners will be less likely to make promises to clients which their attorneys and staff cannot reasonably keep. Attorneys and associates will have a greater awareness of the individual attorney's availability for other matters as well as social accessibility. Staff benefits because the calendar demonstrates the areas of work for which they will be held responsible and that they are accountable for meeting deadlines.
This system can become more sophisticated through the use of a time management computer software program. Firms may find such a method beneficial.
