1. Is it reasonable to expect a particular outcome in connection with this matter?
o complaint dismissed
o patent issued or upheld
o infringing product removed from the market
o financing obtained
o deal closed
o positive decision from a regulatory or government agency
o volume of transactions/commercial agreements handled
o or even, client’s brand-strength or reputation preserved
2. Is the desired outcome measurable in terms of dollars or timing?
o Litigation settled for less than x
o Recoveries obtained in excess of y
o Deal closed within z months
3. Should a portion of outside counsel’s compensation depend on delivering that result?
o Portion of the fees set aside, to be paid if the outcome is achieved
o Potential bonus if firm achieves measurable success beyond expectations
4. Should the definition of success be more comprehensive to encompass legal fees as
well (i.e. focusing on total resolution cost)?
o Net recoveries, less fees, should exceed X
o Net liabilities, less fees, should not exceed Y
5. If there is not enough information in hand to do this now – what additional info
in needed, how do we get it, and when do we revisit? (Many companies use
Early Case Assessment (“ECA”) to produce this information.
Defining Value According to Cost of Comparable Services
1. Where outcomes are difficult to measure, how can we define value delivered relative
to the cost of comparable services from similarly qualified firms?
2. Do we have enough data, and is the matter sufficiently predictable, to focus on the
cost of the entire matter? (e.g., Pay x to handle single plaintiff employment discrimi-
nation case from beginning to end, through trial.)
3. Alternatively, would it be better to price distinct components or stages of work?
How do we break it up? (See examples in the chart on page 6.)