Innovative Practice Management

“Twas brillig and the slithey toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe,  all mimsy were the borogoves, and the mome raths outgrabe.”

Written by Lewis Carroll, his poem “Jabberwocky’ in “Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There” is considered the most famous nonsensical poem in the English language.  It was certainly one of my favorites during my alcoholiclly impaired college years in the 1960’s.  It re-occurred to me today as I read a post by Ric Payne on the Principa blog titled Time Based Billing is Unethical - What Rubbish. 

I wouldn’t recommend reading the entire post.  Payne talks in circles.  He at once advocates advising clients of the proposed fee in advance (which I agree with) but supports using timesheets as a necessary tool in doing so.  He has thoroughly confused the importance of knowing what your resource cost is with the value of the project.   He naively seems to believe that the majority of clients who receive invoices based on time sheets know in advance how much those bills will be and they are “happy with a bill based on hours” because they were some how able to divine how much it would be prior to receiving it.  That is counter intuitive.  He rants on and on trying to justify time sheets, but at the same time advocating ’pricing’ in advance as a superior alternative.  It all seems to make sense, until you realize the methodolgy he is proposing can’t get you to the results he seeks.   That’s my point.  Don’t take everything you read at face value - especially if it comes from a consultant - think about whether or not it makes sense.  Question authority.

Most consultants I’ve met are regurgitating the same tired old garbage they were taught in college 40 years ago.  They wouldn’t recognize a new idea if it bit them.  The practice management methodology they espouse is antiquated and without innovation.  You can’t get better doing the same old thing.  Yes it’s safer, but remember the reward for risk is profit.  People like Ric Payne know there is opportunity for improvement, but they will consistently try to justify old methodology because it is safe, they are cowards and they don’t know any other way. 

Like Jabberwocky it sounds good and seems to make sense.  It just doesn’t work.  Oh, and if anyone wants to debate the specific issues of his post I’m happy to do so.  Just comment.

Earlier this week David Maister posted Satisfaction Guaranteed on his website.  You can read it for yourself, but the essence is committing to a service and performance guarantee for the services you provide.  Several years ago we began including this language in our client service agreements:

                 ”Our work is guaranteed to the satisfaction of the customer.  If you are not completely satisfied with the services performed by Mark Bailey and Company, Ltd., we will, at the option of the Company, refund the price or accept a portion of said price that reflects the Company’s level of satisfaction.”

Initially this sentence caused serious concern among my associates, and I’ve have heard numerous ‘warnings’ from peers.  But what is it that we have to be afraid of?  It’s our work, and certainly if we don’t have enough confidence to back it up we shouldn’t be a service provider.  Should we be concerned about the unscrupulous client who arbitrarily decides not to pay, and uses our guarantee as an excuse?  We’ve never run into that problem, and don’t expect to.  We ‘price’ our services in advance so that our client agrees up front and is not ’surprised’ by a bill they didn’t expect.  Realistically you are already giving this guarantee, whether you realize it or not, because it’s usually not worth a lawsuit.

If a client claims to be dissatisfied with your service and refuses to pay your invoice are you really going to pursue it in court?  Hopefully not.  Most lawsuits against accountants are filed as counter claims to collection attempts.  The legal costs, including the wasted efforts, frustration and stress on your part generally just aren’t worth it.  Negotiate a settlement that makes everyone unhappy, and  move on.  (And then fire them.)  Certainly if your service was sub-standard you would already have agreed to negotiate a write-down. 

The confidence our clients gain from receiving our ‘guaranty’ extends not only to the price, but also to the quality of work we are doing for them.   Offering performance guarantees has set us apart, and  has been nothing but positive for us. 

We do not believe the ‘benefits’ of a system based on time sheets justify the ‘costs’.

So how much does a system based on time sheets and the billable hour cost? » » » more

Several years ago we discontinued using time sheets as a basis for doing our billing, and began pricing our services based on our conviction that the amount of time committed had absolutely no relationship to the value of the service being delivered. » » » more

In the December 17, 2007 issue of Accounting Today, Gary Boomer asked three questions in his article titled Pricing and Partner Compensation. (1)Does your firm have a documented strategic plan; (2) Does our partner compensation system integrate with the strategic plan, and; (3) Am I still pricing by the hour?

Ignoring the first two issues, Gary nails the significance of pricing in the service professions when he clearly states, “The hours x dollars (or cost-plus ) formula does not work in today’s results-based economy.” In my opinion this is true in establishing firm policies for both client satisfaction and even more importantly in associate / staff satisfaction and retention.

Further in the article he refers to author Ron Baker, one of my mentors and unquestionably the leading voice in burying the billable hour. He goes on to outline what he considers important considerations in partner compensation. Notably all are characterized by effectiveness, not efficiency. Damn! You mean the things easiest to measure are not the most important?!

I’ll bet you can name ten!