Embedded in our practice model is to focus on how well services are provided, not how long it takes to provide them.

Nearly ninety per cent of the legal work we do is not billed by the hour. The firm has no hard and fast policies on how it charges for its services. What is important is that: A) clients feel that they are receiving proportionate value in exchange for the fee they pay the firm; and B) the firm feels that they are proportionately compensated by the client for the services they provide to the client.

  • 1. We use Activity Sheets not Time Sheets

    Not only do we price on a value-based model instead of a time-based one, our internal process for analyzing lawyers’ performance is not based on how much time they spend but on the results they achieve. We collect precise data on each lawyer to draw inferences on their legal expertise, potential and actual growth, quality of client engagement and service delivery. Our performance measurement models give no one any incentive to spend more than optimal time on matters.
  • 2. Price reflects value, not just effort

    In an hourly billable arrangement, the cost is based only on the amount of time it takes to complete a task or series of tasks and may not reflect: The difficulty of the task. The importance of that task to the overall matter. Not all tasks are equally valuable to the company, and each task does not contribute equally to the matter's resolution. Similarly, not all tasks are equally important to the project, regardless of the time it takes to complete them. In each case, the value of outside counsel's contribution to the outcome of the matter may vary greatly for each task.
  • 3. We moved from Thoroughness to appropriateness

    Our team emphasizes the need to move from thoroughness to where not every rock is turned over, to appropriateness, where only the right type and number of rocks are turned. Meaning that we explain to our clients they they are often paying a high price for thoroughness where the stakes of the matter do not warrant it. Time often spent researching every issue and taking every conceivable deposition, usually in the interest of avoiding risk, assumes as though every lawsuit was a “bet-your-company”. Appropriateness means recognizing case objectives and obtaining cost-effective results appropriate to the stakes involved.. To determine appropriateness, both outside counsel and FAA law firm, in consultation with the business client, strategically assess the value of the case and determine the most efficient, cost-effective means to resolve it. As a result major litigation and complex transactions ordinarily require more extensive treatment than matters of lesser complexity and consequence.
  • 4. Alternative (Fixed Fee) Arrangements

    Nearly ninety percent of the legal work we do is not billed by the hour. The firm has no hard and fast policies on how it charges for its services. What is important is that:


    A) clients feel that they are receiving proportionate value in exchange of the fee they pay the firm; and


    B) the firm feels that they are proportionately compensated by the client for the services they provide to the client.

  • 5. Intra-disciplinary teams

    We have taken a new and efficient approach to multi-disciplinary legal services. Instead of the continual engagement of multiple lawyers, one from every practice area, our lawyers have multiple skills in addition to their key areas of expertise. It enables us to engage fewer lawyers on each matter.

Keeping costs low

  • By being truly multi-disciplinary

    We have taken a new and efficient approach to multi-disciplinary legal services. Instead of the continual engagement of multiple lawyers, one from every practice area, our lawyers have multiple skills in addition to their key areas of expertise. It enables us to engage fewer lawyers on each matter.
  • Utilizing Technology

    Technology utilization to drive collaboration, improve efficiency, eliminate duplication and measure results. We want clients to be on board with us utilizing technology to integrated matter and knowledge management. Act as “wise counselors” who help their clients understand not only what is legal, but also what is right. To be “effective leaders” who are the final decision makers on important matters which involve complex considerations beyond the law.
CLIENT GUIDE

How to decide the best fee arrangement for you

Understand the Project and the Goals
AFAs can be used to help achieve many corporate goals, but no single AFA structure can achieve all of the company’s objectives. Each AFA structure has limitations and may not be appropriate in certain situations. Choosing the wrong AFA can have adverse consequences for the company and the law firm. Therefore, in-house and outside counsel must have a thorough understanding of the project and the company’s legal and business objectives before deciding what type of AFA to select.
For example, if the primary objective is:
  • Cost certainty, an at-risk fee arrangement would not help achieve that goal. In that case, a flat or fixed fee would be a better option.
  • Prevailing in material litigation, it may be appropriate to include a success fee for achieving a notable result.
In-house counsel also should understand how each AFA may affect the way outside counsel approach a matter. The company should choose the AFA that provides outside counsel with the right incentives to attain the company’s goal. For example, if the goal is to resolve a lawsuit swiftly, then an at-risk fee could provide outside counsel with the right incentives to achieve that purpose.

Fareya Azfar

MANAGING PARTNER

f.azfar@fareyaaraoui.com
+971 56 705 8483