Key insights:

• • • Human rights and environmental sustainability in sports are inseparable 鈥� Environmental harms from major sporting events 鈥� such as pollution, extreme heat, and flooding 鈥� directly undermine fundamental human rights including health, housing, and safe working conditions.

    • Mega sporting events require an integrated, lifecycle-wide approach 鈥� From supply chains and stadium construction to urban planning and event delivery, the sports industry鈥檚 environmental footprint and human rights impacts span the full lifecycle of these events, demanding a single, integrated playbook.

    • Accountability extends to sponsors and partners, not just hosts and organizers 鈥� As scrutiny from regulators, media, and civil society grows, sponsors and corporate partners are increasingly seen as responsible for the combined human rights and environmental impacts of the events they support.

This blog post was co-written with Sreeratna Kancherla and Anna J. Christians of the Henekom Group.

Sports are entering a defining decade. The convergence of climate and nature risk, growing environmental accountability, and increasing scrutiny of how mega sporting events affect the communities that build and host them has brought a long-overdue challenge to the center of sports governance.

Due to their scale, frequency, and global reach, the upcoming FIFA World Cup 2026 and the 2028 Olympics to be held in Los Angeles, alongside competitions such as the 2027 Rugby World Cup and the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup, form part of an ambitious pipeline of major events in a generation. How the sports sector responds to that challenge will shape how the next era of global sport is planned, delivered, and remembered.

Human rights due diligence during mega sporting events and environmental sustainability are often thought of as neighboring agendas, related but managed separately. In practice, however, they are inseparable. When air quality deteriorates, the right to health is at stake. When flooding displaces communities, the right to housing and livelihood is at stake. When extreme heat makes outdoor labor dangerous, the right to safe working conditions is at stake.

The environment is the condition in which human rights are either protected or violated, and sustainability, properly understood, is the commitment to preserving those conditions for current and future generations.

The need for an integrated playbook

The case for an across the lifecycle of sport reflects the scale and complexity of the sporting industry鈥檚 impact, with emissions comparable to those of a midsize country, according to . The industry’s heavy reliance on plastics across stadiums, equipment, and apparel contributes to pollution that worsens the global environmental crisis. And those environmental choices carry human consequences at every stage, for the workers who build the facilities, the residents who live alongside them, and the fans who attend the events.

The environmental footprint of the sports industry touches people across the entire lifecycle of a major event. The supply chains necessary to deliver a mega-sports event span facility development, apparel, technology, and food & beverage. These industries are among the highest risk for labor exploitation, migrant worker abuse, and unsafe working conditions. When a host city builds a stadium and hosts events there, the environmental impact is measurable and so is the human rights impact on the workers building the stadium. Indeed, this impact extends to the neighborhoods that may be displaced to make room for it, and to the residents left to live alongside its infrastructure once the event has ended.

You can find more about the resources, tools, and information that cities and organizations need to address听human trafficking around large-scale sporting events at the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 Large-Scale Public Events Toolkit here

In addition, major events that rely on street circuits or temporary urban infrastructure can significantly reshape public space and surrounding neighborhoods. Air pollution, construction zones, and rising short-term rental demand also may displace residents and the unhoused population, restrict access to services, or place pressure on already fragile housing markets. In these cases, mega-sports event planning intersects directly with citizens鈥� rights to housing, mobility, and access to public space.

Expanding accountability

, rooted in the , is the structured process that makes those consequences visible and gives sustainability strategy its human accountability. Because environmental and human rights impacts are inseparable in practice, that accountability extends beyond organizers and host governments to the sponsors and corporate partners of the event. Many operate in sectors which already face scrutiny over their global supply chains; and therefore, alignment with a contentious event can amplify these vulnerabilities while inviting additional public and regulatory attention.

As the regulatory landscape, advocacy groups, and the media intensify their focus on the impact of these mega-sport events, sponsors are increasingly seen not only as influential stakeholders, but as actors with a degree of responsibility for the combined environmental and human rights impacts of the events they fund and support.

Moving from principle to practice

For example, Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta 鈥� home of the NFL鈥檚 Atlanta Falcons along with a venue for soccer and concerts 鈥� demonstrates that environmental performance and community impact are the same priority and can be pursued through a single design brief. Indeed, it was the first stadium worldwide to receive for zero waste, and its 2.1-million-gallon system helps prevent flooding in neighboring communities. Additionally, the stadium created targeted employment through the and delivered staff training to more than 700 people.

The same integrated logic is now being applied at the event level. Ahead of the FIFA World Cup 2026, host city organizing committees in Houston and Dallas introduced听that address labor exploitation, including human trafficking risks, alongside targeted environmental measures. These measures are treated as a single procurement workstream to be addressed through an integrated response.

Leadership, legacy & the decade ahead

The organizations that will define the next decade of global sports are those that treat human rights and environmental sustainability not as parallel strategies but as two expressions of the same obligation to the people and communities on which sports depend.

This means designing facilities with both environment and humanity in mind from the outset, managing worker rights and environmental standards together across supply chains, and placing extreme heat measures, labor protections, community access, and sustainability targets within a single accountable governance framework.

Governing bodies, organizing committees, sponsors, and host cities that act on this integrated approach have the opportunity to build systems that are more responsible, more durable, and more trusted to define what credible and future-ready sports event management looks like.

You can find more about the impact of mega-sporting events on communities here

Key takeaways:

• • • Corporate legal AI strategies should start with business goals, not just efficiency 鈥� While many corporate law departments first adopt AI for internally-focused use cases, the bigger opportunity is to align AI with broader business priorities such as revenue growth, risk reduction, and improved operational performance.

    • GCs should measure AI success by business impact 鈥� Metrics such as time saved and tool usage help, but stronger AI metrics connect legal work to business results. In contract review, for example, success may be reflected in improved win rates, reduced revenue leakage, faster deal completion, or dollars of risk avoided.

    • A strong legal AI strategy should produce multiple forms of business value at once 鈥� The most effective approaches do not focus on a single benefit such as cost savings. Rather, they aim to improve service delivery, strengthen operations, support growth, and reduce risk across the business.

Over the past several years, corporate law departments have begun to rapidly adopt AI tools, often spurred on by company-wide AI initiatives. In fact, in just the past year alone, department-wide AI adoption has risen to nearly half (47%) of all departments, according to respondents surveyed for 成人VR视频 Institute (TRI) research.

However, it鈥檚 not enough to simply adopt technology. For AI to truly make an impact, it needs to be integrated strategically. In taking this strategic approach, however, GCs and other legal department leaders are still in the early stages.

According to findings from TRI鈥檚 2026 State of the Corporate Law Department Report, more GCs are focused on technology than ever before. When asked their top strategic priorities over the next year, 28% answered that technology was a top priority, double the portion that prioritized technology just one year ago. And out of those mentions of technology, a vast majority specifically referenced AI as a primary area of focus.

Historically, many legal departments have thought about AI from an internal efficiency standpoint, leveraging it to perform their work quicker and cheaper. Increasingly, however, C-Suites are looking to their legal departments to provide more effective business counsel and connect legal analysis to business outcomes 鈥� and, not surprisingly, they鈥檙e expecting AI to play a role in that shift.

So how can GCs effectively make AI a priority not only for the legal department but also for the entire business? It starts with broadening the potential impact of AI processes.

From unlocking to deploying capacity

Still less than four years since the public release of generative AI (GenAI) tools through ChatGPT, many corporate legal departments are still in the early days of rolling out the technology. As a result, most GenAI use cases still tend to focus on low-hanging fruit such as document summarization and review, contract drafting and review, research, and more.

This is understandable from an individual use case standpoint. The problem is, when these use cases are translated to the leadership level for overall strategic guidance, many GCs remain focused on how to maximize the gains from that low-hanging fruit. According to TRI research, less than 20% of corporate law departments measure return-on-investment from AI at all, meaning many departments are using AI tools without any sort of guiding measurement around what success should look like. And even among those departments that are measuring AI success, most of the metrics they use center around internal department usage or department cost savings from the tool.

Those measurements are more helpful than no tracking at all, to be sure. They focus on how AI is unlocking capacity for the legal department and look for ways that attorneys can perform their work more efficiently than before. Indeed, the majority of legal departments that have invested in AI tools are currently at this point.

However, there is an additional step that legal departments need to take in order to full take advantage of the strategic value of AI. And that is connecting AI鈥檚 use to that of larger business goals by deploying the capacity it has unlocked. This requires thinking about AI less in terms of how it will impact the legal department, and more in terms of how it will impact those that the legal department serves.

For example, take a common AI use case such as contract review. Currently, the most common measurement around contract review technology is speed, such as how quickly the legal department can help a contract go from start to signature. Maximizing that value can improve the efficiency of the department, to be sure. But C-Suite partners aren鈥檛 necessarily looking for an efficient department as the end goal 鈥� they鈥檙e looking for business success.

As a result, some forward-thinking GCs are looking to connect AI usage directly with business goals or revenue. For contract review, that could mean demonstrating the impact on overall contract win rate, or whether close rates increased through use of AI. Or it could mean more successful revenue leakage protection; and it could even mean risk avoidance, measured in dollars of risk avoided. All of these can demonstrate value and be connected to the rest of the business.

Further, all of this requires close collaboration with other business units, both in terms of sharing metrics as well as understanding what success throughout the organization should mean to all parties. That said, GCs have told TRI for countless years that breaking out of a silo is a top priority for the legal department. In this case, AI implementation should be no different.

Wide areas of impact

As it currently stands, corporate law departments are seeing the most impact from AI in areas of efficiency and time saved. More than three-quarters of GCs who have talked with TRI say that AI is either currently benefiting the department鈥檚 efficiency and productivity, or that they鈥檙e expecting those benefits to occur within the next 12 months.

Connecting AI outcomes with business imperatives provides more areas of improvement, however. In this year鈥檚 State of Corporate Law Department Report and elsewhere, TRI breaks down the law department鈥檚 role into four key functions that we call the four spinning plates:

1. 1. 1. Provide effective legal services and operational excellence
      2. Offer efficient legal value within budget
      3. Enable business and strategic growth, and
      4. Protect the business鈥檚 assets and competitive advantage.

AI鈥檚 impact on efficient legal value is clear; but GCs are beginning to see that it can actually impact all four of those plates.

Those GCs looking to adopt AI as a strategic goal should be aware that said strategy should encompass more than simply internal efficiency. Not all of these benefits will be applicable to all departments, but all departments should be considering more than just one of these areas. An effective AI strategy should have multiple benefits in mind 鈥� and as such, it should take into account multiple business factors when measuring the success of the department鈥檚 AI strategy.

Entering into an AI strategy is a laudable goal for today鈥檚 GCs, but also not a light undertaking. When thinking about how AI will impact the department, leaders should take the next step beyond deploying capacity into unlocking capacity, helping attorneys not only work more efficiently but also make a bigger impact on the business at large.

You can download a full copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚

Key insights:

• • • AI can help lawyers prepare better, more relevant client conversations 鈥� AI鈥檚 real value lies in synthesizing news, regulatory updates, client activity, and relationship data so lawyers have timely, tailored insights that make outreach easier and more meaningful.

    • AI works best as a foundation for client discussions, not a script 鈥� Panelists at a recent Forum repeatedly stressed that AI-generated briefs and opportunity matrices should only guide lawyers, but authenticity, experience, and interpretation are still what make client conversations effective.

    • Firms must actively and clearly talk to clients about their AI capabilities 鈥� Clients increasingly expect AI-savvy law firms, and those that can confidently explain how AI improves their service offerings while keeping humans at the center will stand out, while silence or vague messaging is a missed opportunity.

AMELIA ISLAND, Fla. 鈥� During the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 recent听33rd Annual Chief Marketing & Business Development Officer Forum听(formerly the听Marketing Partner Forum), one concept became clear very quickly: When it comes to AI in law firms, the technology itself isn鈥檛 the hard part anymore. The real challenge 鈥� and the real opportunity 鈥� is how firms use AI to deepen client relationships and, just as importantly, how they talk to clients about what they鈥檙e doing.

Indeed, more than three-quarters of respondents (77%) say they believe law firms should take the initiative to begin these talks with clients around AI usage, according to the recent 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 2026 AI in Professional Services Report.

Across multiple Forum panel discussions, speakers returned again and again to the same idea: AI is becoming a powerful business development engine, but only if lawyers and law firm business development teams are willing to use it proactively and communicate its value in human terms.

AI as an assistant, not a replacement

One of the most practical discussions that arose during the Forum centered on using AI to make client outreach less painful and more effective. Too often, panelists contended, senior lawyers often don鈥檛 send regular client notes 鈥� but it鈥檚 not because they don鈥檛 care. These notes get put on the backburner because crafting them takes time away from billable work and is hard to prioritize.

You can find out more about next year鈥檚 Chief Marketing & Business Development Officer Forum 2027听here

Several panelists talked about how AI can change that equation by pulling together information from news coverage, regulatory developments, earnings calls, relationship data, and even what clients are actively reading. Instead of staring at a blank page, partners can walk into a meeting or send a note armed with relevant, timely insights that actually matter to the client, they explained.

鈥淲e can plant things in our lawyers鈥� and partners鈥� minds to move the needle with clients so they can open conversations with clients that will make a difference,鈥� said one panelist.

Of course, the point isn鈥檛 to automate relationships, rather it鈥檚 to give lawyers a smarter starting point 鈥� a short list of clients to contact, paired with concrete conversation openers that feel tailored rather than generic. 鈥淭hose conversations and what results from those conversations will be revolutionary for your firm,鈥� the panelist added.

Another theme that resonated at the Forum was the idea of matching client needs with firm capabilities in a much more structured way. AI can help generate documents that clearly show what a client is dealing with and where the firm can help 鈥� essentially an opportunity matrix that鈥檚 built from real data.

Strong need for lawyer training around AI

Several speakers were quick to stress, however, that this doesn鈥檛 mean that AI should be left on autopilot. The best results come when firms train their partners before client meetings, using AI-generated briefs as a foundation, not a script. That balance 鈥� between automation and authenticity 鈥� came up repeatedly throughout the Forum. As several panelists described, AI can bring insights to the surface, but lawyers still need to interpret those insights, contextualize them, and deliver them in a way that feels personal.

鈥淎I might get you 90% of the way there, but that last 10% still depends on human judgment, experience, and relationship skills,鈥� said one law firm technology specialist.

Indeed, if there was one clear takeaway from the Forum, it鈥檚 that AI adoption rises or falls on training. Not broad, one-size-fits-all sessions, but bespoke, one-on-one training that shows lawyers exactly how AI helps them prepare for client conversations. Indeed, several panelists argued that it is essential that firms educate their attorneys on how to use these tools effectively or give them very specific guidance 鈥� anything less will lead to hesitation, confusion, or outright resistance.

Of course, the problem is that AI adoption isn鈥檛 waiting for everyone to catch up. As one speaker noted, the train is already leaving the station, and those firms that fail to bring partners along 鈥� especially by showing clear, practical benefits of AI use 鈥� risk falling behind quickly.

In fact, several panelists discussed how the excitement around agentic AI is real, but so are the risks. They warned against assuming these more advanced tools are smarter or more autonomous than they really are. In fact, AI agents are still constrained by the data and tools they鈥檙e given, and a flawed understanding at the leadership level can lead to poor decisions and misplaced expectations.

That said, business development was repeatedly described as an ideal starting point for experimenting with agentic AI. The workflows are less rigid or high stakes than agentic use for legal work, the feedback loops are faster, and early wins are easier to spot.

Talking to clients about AI matters

Overall, perhaps the most important takeaway from the Forum wasn鈥檛 technical at all. It was strategic.

Because clients are increasingly expecting their law firms to be AI鈥憇avvy, firms have to be proactive in their response. Firms have to not just be using AI internally, but understanding how the technology improves their service, efficiency, and insight. Those firms that can clearly and confidently explain to their own partners and clients how AI supports their best efforts 鈥� and where humans still play a critical role 鈥� will stand out. Staying silent about AI, or worse, being vague and generic about its value, is a missed opportunity, several panelists explained.

Those law firms that thrive, especially around business development and client service, will be the ones that treat AI not as a back-office experiment, but as a client-facing capability 鈥� something to be discussed openly, thoughtfully, and authentically.

You can read the full听Executive Summary of the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 33rd Annual Chief Marketing & Business Development Officer Forum听here

• • • EI is emerging as a critical strategic capability 鈥� Stronger emotional intelligence can enable law firm leaders to build trust, navigate complex relationships, and strengthen both internal collaboration and client engagement.

    • Culture is now the defining factor in retaining top talent 鈥� As professionals increasingly expect transparency, purpose, and human鈥慶entered leadership rather than traditional top鈥慸own structures, law firms need to adapt.

    • Successful lateral integration requires coordination 鈥� Firms need to provide consistent messaging and fulfill their commitments to ensure that new hires feel aligned, supported, and positioned to contribute meaningfully.

AMELIA ISLAND, Fla. 鈥� If you鈥檝e spent any amount of time inside a law firm, you already know that the people stuff is often the hardest part of the job. Sure, the work is complex, the clients are demanding, and the deadlines are relentless 鈥� but navigating human dynamics? That鈥檚 where things get really interesting.

During the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 recent听33rd Annual Chief Marketing & Business Development Officer Forum听(formerly the听Marketing Partner Forum), three panels zoomed in on law firm talent: how to attract it, how to integrate it, and how to keep it. And while the themes ranged from emotional intelligence to lateral hiring to long鈥憈erm culture building, one takeaway stood out loud and clear: Those law firms that want to succeed have to start thinking about talent as a strategic engine 鈥� not an administrative task.

EI is not just a soft skill, it鈥檚 a strategic power skill

Emotional intelligence (EI) is having something of a renaissance inside law firms, and frankly, it鈥檚 overdue. As several panelists emphasized, EI isn鈥檛 about being warm and fuzzy 鈥� it鈥檚 about , especially in a high鈥憄ressure, fact鈥慸riven environment like law.

Stronger EI, especially among firm leadership, will enhance everyone鈥檚 ability to perceive, understand, and manage their own emotions and relationships. Emotionally intelligent professionals are better able to motivate themselves, read social cues, and build stronger relationships. And because it requires being aware of emotions in oneself and others, it can positively impact internal collaboration and external client relationships.

You can find out more about next year鈥檚 Chief Marketing & Business Development Officer Forum 2027听here

For example, one panelist explained, if your go鈥憈o opener with clients is still, 鈥淗ow鈥檚 it going?鈥�, don鈥檛 expect anything more insightful than a polite shrug. Lawyers should use intentional conversation starters and even simple prompts, such as sharing the 鈥渢op 10 things clients say we can do better,鈥� the panelist explained.

Of course, EI isn鈥檛 always easy for lawyers because they are trained to trust facts, not feelings. That means firm leaders often need to dig deeper especially when someone seems resistant. It鈥檚 crucial for law firm leaders to remember that EI isn鈥檛 emotional fluff. It鈥檚 how firms build trust, lead through uncertainty, and strengthen both internal teams and client relationships. It鈥檚 a differentiator, panelists said, and one that law firms can no longer treat as optional.

In retention, culture is the whole game

Indeed, so much around talent hinges on the workplace culture, and as another panel discussed, that it has become the linchpin for successful hiring and retention of top talent. Indeed, in today鈥檚 environment, even the best firms may have trouble hiring and keeping top talent in a market where expectations, especially after the pandemic, have changed dramatically.

鈥淚t鈥檚 just changed so much since the pandemic where people just did their jobs and were expected to do so,鈥� said one panelist. 鈥淣ow, they want to feel valued and want to feel like they are making a difference.鈥�

Several panelists agreed, pointing out that top talent is harder to hire than ever, largely because client demands have increased and the talent pool hasn鈥檛 expanded at the same pace. However, culture is where firms either win or lose the long game, they concurred.

Today鈥檚 employees want to feel valued, engaged, and connected to meaningful work 鈥� not just completing tasks in the background. They want transparency, authenticity, and involvement in strategy, panelists said. 鈥淧eople need to want to be part of your team, they need to feel prized once they鈥檙e there,鈥� said another panelist. 鈥淭hey want leaders who are human first, and executives second.鈥�

While this cultural tightrope may seem daunting, when a firm gets it right, recruiting becomes significantly easier. People want to work in environments in which they can be themselves, questions are encouraged, and their participation actually shapes outcomes, another panelist explained. 鈥淜eeping great people isn鈥檛 about perks or ping鈥憄ong,鈥� they said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 about trust, clarity, and connection.鈥�

The strategy behind making lateral integration work

Another aspect of the talent discussion, lateral hiring, has become a cornerstone of modern law firm growth, according to another panel. But to be honest, several panelists argued, even firms that recruit great laterals often fail to integrate them properly.

This can be a critical failure, they added, because lateral integration isn鈥檛 a task 鈥� it鈥檚 a firmwide commitment. When done well, it accelerates growth; but when done poorly, it creates churn, skepticism, and reputational risk.

Panelists stressed that laterals need clear messaging from everyone in the firm about how they fit into the broader business strategy. That means offering them consistent narratives and articulated opportunities, as well as stories of client wins, proof points about firm strengths, and external endorsements 鈥� all of which can help build credibility, they said.

Further, laterals need structured opportunities to showcase their expertise 鈥� such as CLEs, webinars, client events, internal spotlights. 鈥淭hese aren鈥檛 just marketing activations,鈥� one panelist noted. 鈥淭hey are culture鈥慴uilding moments that signal, 鈥�You鈥檙e part of this team, and we want people to know what you bring.鈥欌赌�

On-boarding laterals, especially lateral teams, often can be a fraught proposition, and ideally one person should coordinate the entire process on the firm鈥檚 behalf. Otherwise, the new partner ends up drowning in inconsistent communication and duplicate requests. 鈥淣erves are very high during this time 鈥� worries about whether the lateral made the right choice, whether support staff is being accommodated, and, most critically, whether clients will come over too 鈥� and all that has to be managed,鈥� a panelist said.

However, the most important thing firm leadership can do when it comes to laterals is to simply deliver on their promises. Few things sour a lateral鈥檚 experience faster than broken commitments, another panelist offered.

Overall, the thread throughout all these panels on talent challenges within law firms showed that law firms need to evolve not just how they manage work, but how they manage people. Whether leveraging EI to power leadership and motivate teams, unifying communication to drive successful lateral integration, or fostering a culture in which top talent wants to stick around, firms would be wise to invest in human鈥慶entered strategies.

Indeed, the potential payoff is massive: More engaged teams, stronger client relationships, and a more resilient future. And for those firms that don鈥檛 make this shift? Well, talent always has other options.

You can read the full听Executive Summary of the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 33rd Annual Chief Marketing & Business Development Officer Forum听here

Key insights:

• • • Pricing power now depends on clear, measurable value 鈥� Firms must prove their worth at every client touchpoint to justify charging premium rates.

    • Value delivery spans five critical stages 鈥� Demand management, service design, delivery excellence, value capture, and relationship management. All must be systematically audited and improved.

    • Action is essential 鈥� Diagnosing gaps is only the first step; law firms must assign accountability, set goals, and continuously adapt to meet evolving client expectations and avoid competing solely on price.

The 2026 Report on the State of the US Legal Market, published jointly by the 成人VR视频庐 Institute and the Center on Ethics and the Legal Profession at Georgetown Law,听shows that over the past three years, legal industry pricing has skyrocketed at an unprecedented pace.

Many law firms have enjoyed strong demand and the ability to command higher rates, often without significant pushbacks from clients. However, that era of unchecked growth is coming to an end. Today鈥檚 clients are far more discerning about what they are willing to pay for and why. More often, they scrutinize every invoice, questioning whether the value delivered truly matches the premium price charged.

The danger for many law firms is complacency. Past success can create a false sense of security, leading to assumptions that reputation alone will sustain pricing power. However, as client procurement teams become more sophisticated and alternative legal services providers enter the market, firms that fail to prove their worth will find themselves competing on cost, which can result in a race to the bottom that few can afford.

This shift signals a fundamental change in the market in which pricing power is no longer guaranteed by reputation or past performance. Instead, pricing power hinges on a firm鈥檚 ability to demonstrate clear, measurable value at every stage of the client relationship. Those firms that fail to adapt risk being forced into price-based competition, eroding margins and undermining long-term sustainability.

By 2025, even as inflation eased to a more typical 鈥� but still elevated 鈥� 3%, many law firms continued to push rate increases at more than twice that level. The disconnect between pricing and underlying economic conditions had widened into a significant gulf, underscoring the critical need for firms to clearly demonstrate and defend the value behind their premium rates.

So, how can firms ensure they are delivering premium value to earn the right to charge premium rates? The answer lies in systematically diagnosing where value is created 鈥� and where it is destroyed 鈥� across the entire client experience journey.

The 5 stages of legal service delivery

To maintain pricing power, firms must examine their service delivery through five key client experience stages. Each stage represents an opportunity to create value or destroy it.

1. Demand management

Do you truly understand the client鈥檚 business problem, or are you focused solely on the legal question? Effective demand management requires moving beyond transactional requests to uncover a client鈥檚 strategic objectives. This ensures the solutions proposed align with business impact, not just technical compliance.

You can hear more about the 鈥�2026 Report on the State of the US Legal Market鈥� in听, on YouTube

Start every engagement by asking: What client business goal is driving this need?, What constraints is the client operating under?, and How will success be measured beyond legal compliance? These questions can reframe the conversation from a focus on deliverables to a focus on strategic results, positioning your law firm as a proactive partner in the client鈥檚 success.

By facilitating co-design workshops with clients and requiring clear documentation of business goals for each project, your firm ensures that every initiative is aligned with measurable impact. This approach not only demonstrates leadership and a deep understanding of client needs, but it also builds lasting trust and drives greater value throughout the relationship.

2. Service design

Are your offerings built around client outcomes or your own internal structure? Many firms design services based on practice groups and billing models, not on what may serve clients best. This can create friction and inefficiency.

Adopting a client-centric design philosophy requires mapping the client journey, identifying pain points, and designing integrated services around client business needs. For instance, bundling advisory and compliance work into outcome-oriented solutions and coordinating delivery through a single relationship manager simplifies decision-making, strengthens trust, and delivers consistent, measurable value throughout the engagement.

3. Delivery excellence

Do you have safeguards that prevent failures before they ever reach the client? Even the most sophisticated legal advice loses its impact if delivery is inconsistent or error prone. Breakdowns in market research, service design, process conformance, or communication don鈥檛 just create inefficiencies, they erode client trust and diminish the firm鈥檚 perceived value. This is about embedding reliability into your delivery model, so clients don鈥檛 have to chase updates, catch errors, or manage deadlines on your behalf.

Invest in quality checks and project management tools and use proactive risk controls 鈥攕uch as early warning systems for potential delays 鈥� that provide automatic status updates and clear ownership. These measures signal professionalism and reliability, reinforcing your premium positioning.

4. Value capture

Can clients clearly see and articulate the value you鈥檝e delivered? If your impact is invisible, your pricing will always feel inflated. Many firms struggle to articulate outcomes beyond hours billed, which can leave clients to wonder what they are paying for.

Communicate value in terms that matter to clients. Use outcome-based reporting to show how your work mitigated risk, accelerated timelines, or unlocked opportunities. Record these in quarterly impact reports 鈥� because when clients see tangible benefits, they are far more willing to pay premium rates.

5. Relationship management

Do you build trust systematically or hope it happens organically? Trust is the foundation of pricing power, but it doesn鈥檛 happen by accident. Firms that rely on personal rapport alone risk inconsistency and vulnerability when key contacts change.

Implement structured feedback loops, client listening programs, and regular value reviews. These mechanisms demonstrate commitment to continuous improvement and deepen client confidence in your firm鈥檚 ability to deliver.

Turning insights into action

Assessing your client鈥檚 journey is only the first step. The real challenge and opportunity lies in acting on those insights. Start by identifying gaps in the five key stages, then prioritize improvements that will have the greatest impact on client perception and outcomes.

Assign accountability for each stage, set measurable goals, and track progress over time. Consider creating cross-functional teams to break down silos and foster collaboration. Remember, value delivery is not a one-time project; it鈥檚 an ongoing discipline that requires vigilance and adaptability.

As the legal market transforms, so do client expectations. Firms that cling to outdated assumptions about pricing power will inevitably find themselves competing on cost alone 鈥� a losing strategy in an increasingly crowded and sophisticated marketplace.

You can download a full copy of the听2026 Report on the State of the US Legal Market, published jointly by the 成人VR视频庐 Institute and the Center on Ethics and the Legal Profession at Georgetown Law, here

Key insights:

• • • Opacity challenge 鈥� AI models operate fundamentally differently than traditional models. Unlike linear, traceable calculations, AI develops its own inferential logic that model owners often cannot fully explain or predict.

    • Third-party dependency risk 鈥� Most traditional financial institutions use foundational models from external providers rather than building proprietary ones in-house. This adds another opacity layer that makes traditional validation and monitoring nearly impossible.

    • Regulatory and trust implications 鈥� Regulators worldwide are demanding transparency and control despite these limitations. The inability to explain AI decisions undermines customer trust, complicates compliance, and creates governance gaps.

The challenge for financial institutions around developing customer-facing or internal models in the AI age may be simple to understand, but it鈥檚 not easy to solve. Financial institutions develop models to enhance their decision-making, improve financial reporting, and ensure regulatory compliance; and these models often are used across various banking and financial services operations, including credit scoring, loan approval, asset-liability management, and stress testing.

Traditional models 鈥� for which existing model risk management was written 鈥� often operated in a predictable, linear fashion. A model user could enter inputs, trace calculations, validate assumptions, and forecast outputs with relative confidence. These are in stark contrast to some applications of AI models, particularly those using deep learning. Often, AI model users may not be able to predict its outputs or precisely explain the model鈥檚 inferences.

The third-party complication

Here’s where things get even more complex. Most financial institutions don’t build their AI models from scratch; instead, they’re leveraging foundational models from companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. These large language models (LLMs) serve as the backbone that can be configured for everything from customer service chatbots to risk assessments.

This creates a new dimension of opacity. Banks aren’t just dealing with models they can’t fully explain; they’re utilizing models they didn’t originally build and don’t wholly control. The original training data, architecture, and parameters all remain proprietary to the model providers.

The model risk management implications are numerous. How do you validate a foundational model when you don’t have access to its training data? How do you ensure it won’t produce biased outputs when you can’t examine how it infers its data? How do you monitor for model drift when the foundational builder might update the model without notice? Traditional vendor risk frameworks weren’t designed for this level of dependency on opaque, constantly evolving systems.

When traditional risk management fails

Traditional model risk management relies on three components: initial validation, ongoing monitoring, and the ability to challenge model assumptions. Third-party foundational AI models may disrupt all three.

Initial validation becomes problematic when you’re validating a system you can only observe from the outside. Unlike traditional statistical models built on explicit assumptions, AI models develop their own inferential logic through training, which isn’t always visible.

Banks aren’t just dealing with models they can’t fully explain; they’re utilizing models they didn’t originally build and don’t wholly control.

Ongoing monitoring faces similar challenges. If an institution is relying on a foundational model like OpenAI’s GPT or Anthropic’s Claude as the basis for their own AI application, the institution is subject to the foundational model鈥檚 updates. A model that performed reliably last month might behave differently today due to changes the institution didn鈥檛 execute; the assumptions present in each version may not be readily measurable.

Further, government regulators are beginning to implement more detailed guidelines specifically targeting AI models. Financial institutions must demonstrate transparency and control over complex systems, including those they source from third parties. In mid-2024, for example, the Monetary Authority of Singapore issued guidance on AI model risk management; and now similar initiatives are emerging globally, from the United States鈥� Federal Reserve and Canada鈥檚 Office of Financial Institutions, to the European Union’s AI Act. However, just as fast as AI models update, global regulatory oversight and momentum can pivot near immediately.

Real-world consequences and the search for solutions

The stakes extend beyond regulatory compliance. When a model generates outputs that are understood only by a team at an external company, operational risks can cascade. For example, customer service representatives often need to explain why a fraud system flagged a transaction; or loan officers must be able to provide specific reasons why a credit model rejected an application 鈥� and black box AI makes these basic requirements nearly impossible.

The trust deficit affects everyone. Customers denied services without clear explanations lose faith, and regulators struggle to verify compliance. Internal audit teams may not offer confidence when models are proprietary third-party systems, and board members face governance questions they can’t adequately answer.

The industry is responding with various approaches. Some institutions are demanding greater transparency from AI providers, negotiating for access to model documentation and performance metrics. Others are building testing frameworks to validate third-party models through extensive input-output analysis.

attempt to illuminate black box decisions by approximating how models weight different factors. Some institutions are adopting hybrid approaches, combining simpler, interpretable models with complex foundational models to balance performance with transparency.

Financial institutions must demonstrate transparency and control over complex systems, including those they source from third parties.

These solutions involve trade-offs, however; chiefly that more interpretable models may sacrifice predictive power. Post-hoc explanation techniques provide approximations, not perfect transparency. The tools for managing third-party AI model risk are still maturing, even as deployment accelerates.

What needs to happen now

Financial institutions must build explainability and control mechanisms into their AI journeys from the start. This may require cross-functional teams of data scientists, risk managers, compliance officers, and vendor management specialists who can negotiate appropriate terms with foundational AI providers.

Institutions also need comprehensive governance frameworks that address the unique challenges of third-party foundational models. This could include enhanced vendor due diligence, continuous monitoring, contractual provisions for model transparency and update notifications, and a willingness to forgo some AI capabilities when risks can’t be adequately managed.

Still, the fundamental tension remains: AI’s power comes partly from its ability to identify trends at scale, and currently, operating in ways we don’t fully understand. When third-party providers are thrown into the mix, predictability and control become even more tenuous. Institutions must leverage the benefits of foundational models while acknowledging what remains unknown and outside their direct control.

If attained, this comprehension can be a strategic driver. Institutions that can harness third-party AI’s power while maintaining genuine oversight will gain a competitive advantage. Those that don’t may face serious consequences if black boxes from third parties produce outcomes they can neither explain, predict, nor defend. In an industry where trust and compliance are paramount, it is crucial for financial institutions to truly comprehend AI-associated risks.

You can find out more about how financial institutions and other organizations manage their risk here

The first quarter of this year had some bright spots for certain law firm financial metrics, particularly in terms of demand and worked rates. However, Q1 also brought concerns about demand patterns that differed from what was previously anticipated 鈥� and this is particularly important development for law firms that are looking to maximize gains in the coming months.

Why demand in 2024 was so successful

In 2024, the average law firm saw an increase in legal demand growth of 2.8%. Indeed, last year鈥檚 acceleration was remarkable, being the second fastest annual growth since 2008 and was particularly noteworthy given 2023’s growth of just 0.8%. The only comparable rise occurred in 2021, which saw a 3.7% growth largely due to the rebound from the 1.6% decline that came as a result of the global pandemic that began in 2020.

In addition to 2024鈥檚 substantial expansion, which built on an already solid performance in 2023, last year鈥檚 growth originated from a broad range of practices. The demand surge for counter-cyclical practices that started in 2023 persisted throughout 2024, becoming even more pronounced, especially in the practice areas of litigation and labor & employment.

Register now for The Emerging Technology and Generative AI Forum, a cutting-edge conference that will explore the latest advancements in GenAI and their potential to revolutionize legal and tax practices

While counter-cyclical practices continued to be the primary source of growth in 2024, this was the year in which transactional practices finally showed signs of life, which was one of the legal industry鈥檚 most anticipated comeback stories. Throughout 2022 and 2023 transactional practices had remained in negative territory, but in 2024, the group of practices finally saw expansion. The two main drivers of this performance were corporate and real estate, which saw considerable gains last year. Still, tax finished the year with flat growth and M&A remained in contraction.

2024鈥檚 late corporate resurgence

It wasn鈥檛 until Q4 2024 that the legal industry started to see a shift in demand trends. While litigation continued to exhibit significant strength in the market, Q4 was the first time in nine consecutive quarters that corporate work grew faster than litigation, likely hinting the resumption of the transactionally driven demand environment that law firms experienced during most of the last decade. The only question at that moment was whether the transactional demand comeback would be able to make up for the deceleration of counter-cyclical practices that also occurred in Q4, which would allow law firms to sustain their strong growth in demand throughout 2025.

Volatility in Q1 upends the transactional comeback

Transactional practices鈥� surge over counter-cyclical ones that began in Q4 2024 had the potential 鈥� to the hopes of many law firm leaders 鈥� that this trend would become a new reality within the legal industry, heralding a return to the prior transactional work-dominated status-quo.

And while the start of 2025 did bring a modest growth of 0.5% in overall demand, it also brought a hefty dose of political and economic changes in the United States. So, even though transactional demand continued to accelerate faster than counter-cyclical in Q1, from a monthly perspective, the data suggests that this trend could be coming to an end sooner than many had hoped.

Since October 2024, weekday adjusted demand growth showed transactional practices gaining a substantial advantage over their counter-cyclical counterparts. Yet, by March, the gap in performance between the two groups only narrowed to almost zero.

What is interesting yet unsurprising about this trend is that the shift happened only after the new administration of Donald J. Trump took office and started announcing impactful actions on the broader economy, bringing volatility into the markets. What March鈥檚 outcome could be telling observers is that this uncertainty has started to impact demand from clients, as they seek legal protection from anticipated regulatory changes, leading to disputes over compliance, adding to clients鈥� financial stress, and finally resulting in disagreements over contracts, financial obligations, or other types of business dealings. In that event, a resurgence in demand for counter-cyclical practices during the second half of 2025 would not be surprising.

What to expect in the future

Today, demand in the legal industry stands solid, not quite at the highs of 2024, but neither is it on the negative trajectory that December 2024 and January 2025 suggested. Indeed, the late surge in Q1 should give firms some solace that there aren鈥檛 significant signs of weakening. Still, the legal market cannot ignore that the recent economic, commercial, and geopolitical uncertainty has impacted their business and may continue to do so, especially as clients鈥� needs change.

Further, some of the policies proposed from the Trump administration, if enacted, could hinder overall economic activity, affecting industries, including law firms, in many different ways.

Given the environment, law firm leaders would do well to monitor and study these industry trends frequently to better understand from where the sources of growth are originating and how and which of their clients鈥� businesses and industries will be impacted by government regulatory and legislative policy changes.

Being able to leverage this type of insight can be a game-changer for law firms 鈥� because for every challenge there also comes opportunity.

You can download a copy of the recent听Q1 2025 Law Firm Financial Index听from the 成人VR视频 Institute, here

Indeed, according to panelists at the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 32nd annual Marketing Partner Forum, held in late-January, securing the buy-in may be a more difficult task than actually getting the financial resources needed to undertake the new initiative.

Today, many law firm leaders are most worried about addressing their firm鈥檚 talent issues and trying to mitigate any potential revenue loss, one panelist said. However, that does offer firm marketing professionals and opportunity 鈥� if they can focus management鈥檚 attention on these worries, it may be easier to make a case for an investment in tech innovations or client programs to alleviate some of these concerns.

鈥淔ear and risk mitigation are powerful ways to convince firm management to act,鈥� the panelist explained.

Firms seem eager to invest in tech

In fact, according to recent data, law firm leaders already may be getting the message about the necessity of investing in advanced AI-driven tech solutions to improve workflow efficiency and leverage data for better decision-making. Tech spending by law firms has been on the rise, growing at a historically high rate of 9.4% at the end of 2024, with a notable year-end acceleration coming in the last month of the year.

According to the recent 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚听2025 Report on the State of the US Legal Market, many law firm leaders see tech investment as a way to gain an advantage with clients in a highly competitive legal market. And as clients increasingly expect the integration of tech solutions in the work of their outside law firms, law firms are feeling the pressure to invest heavily in data infrastructure and AI tools, even given the increasing costs of development and maintenance.

While many legal market experts 鈥� and more than a few at the Forum event 鈥� expect tech spending to continue to increase as generative AI (GenAI) investments become non-negotiable for law firms, the path to getting the rest of the firm on board with these investments, especially around adopting the new technology and properly training lawyers and staff to use it, is daunting.

Still, as is evident by the numbers, many law firms are gearing up to explore new AI-driven tools to help their lawyers and staff in a myriad of ways 鈥� from conducting legal research, crafting documents, leveraging matter management, and engaging in predictive analytics. Yet, in addition to the considerable capital investments, as well as the costs of maintenance and training, firms may also need to spend sizeable sums to optimize and maintain their data in order to capitalize on the potential benefits of GenAI.

Check out the recent video from here

And that鈥檚 all before you get to securing the necessary buy-in from your team.

Indeed, many a firm has seen its investment in the latest tech tool or client management platform wreck on the rocks of lawyer indifference or outright hostility to the way their workflow will need to adapt to make best use of the new innovation. And that, as many panelists pointed out, is just one of the problems.

鈥淵ou also have to rapidly adapt to lawyers鈥� refusal to cede territory,鈥� said one panelist at the event. 鈥淭oo many lawyers want to be 鈥榯he only salesman鈥� and the only one having any interaction with key clients, which can make creating a new client program very difficult.鈥�

How to secure the buy-in

Many panelists at the Forum had their own success stories in how to best secure the needed buy-in, especially from top lawyers. For example, one panelist suggested framing the investment in new tools, programs, or data initiatives around an insistence to act on it. 鈥淵ou need to create scarcity, or a FOMO [fear of missing out] in managers鈥� minds,鈥� the panelist said. 鈥淵ou need to make them afraid to not act.鈥�

Another panelist suggested that marketing and business development professionals pitch new initiatives as a need to follow what the firm鈥檚 biggest clients are doing in order to remain competitive. 鈥淲e looked at creating a client program with a careful eye on which clients fit the program and which didn鈥檛,鈥� said the panelist. 鈥淎nd we were able to move forward on it by positioning it was a way to use the program as a proving ground for client strategy plans that we could then take further down our client list and increase our work with those clients.鈥�

鈥淔ear and risk mitigation are powerful ways to convince firm management to act.鈥�

For lawyers, the strategy may be a little different. One panelist recommended that when trying to get lawyers on board with new tech innovations or client management programs, you should stress the innovation鈥檚 expanded ability to create opportunities, especially those that will help lawyers interact and engage with clients. 鈥淲e wanted to help our lawyers find the micro-actions that can allow them to see what their clients are doing,鈥� the panelist said. 鈥淵ou have to help them put two and two together and really see how it benefits them without placing a lot more work on their plate.鈥�

Another Forum participants urged taking the long view and seeing securing the buy-in as a process. 鈥淭ake small steps 鈥� get one meeting, get small wins, and foster a coalition of the willing,鈥� the participant said. 鈥淒on鈥檛 let naysayers derail it, and don鈥檛 name the program 鈥� just do the work.鈥�

Once the early work is done and some small wins have been wracked up, it鈥檚 much easier to move on to the next critical step of developing ROIs to show management how to pursue the most profitable areas. 鈥淎nd don鈥檛 let the perfect be the enemy of progress,鈥� she explained. 鈥淲ork with what you have and show success early 鈥� that really helps.鈥�

And never forget, the participant continued, you have to bring the lawyers around. 鈥淪ome lawyers will be uncomfortable with the tech and AI, but they still have to be brought in. Just sell it internally, whet the lawyers鈥� appetite, and then bring them along for the ride.鈥�

Always remember, she added, you eventually have to draw a line to revenue, because that makes the world go around.

You can find out more about听recent Marketing Partner Forum events听here

鈥淭he key question 鈥� not just for marketing purposes, but for law firms鈥� overall success 鈥� is what is your firm鈥檚 data strategy? What is its structure?鈥� asked one panelist at the recent 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 32nd annual Marketing Partner Forum, held in late-January. 鈥淗ow best can your firm cut through the clutter and getting to what your clients really want to talk about.鈥�

Indeed, panelists went through numerous impactful ways that law firms can leverage their internal data to refine their marketing strategies, including by collecting and analyzing information about past and current clients and identifying common characteristics among them, which could enable more personalized marketing campaigns and engagement. Firms can also build out case studies and success stories using their own internal data that can be highlighted on the firm鈥檚 website, shared on social media, or used directly in client proposals.

Check out the recent video from听听here

Also, running the data on firms鈥� performance metrics around various marketing campaigns 鈥� determining such key indicators as email open rates, website traffic, and conversion rates 鈥� which can help optimize future campaigns for better results. Overall, panelists discussed how by effectively using their own internal data in these ways, law firms can create more targeted, efficient, and impactful marketing campaigns that attract and retain clients, enhance the firm鈥檚 reputation, and ultimately drive growth.

鈥淓ven those law firms that don鈥檛 have a lot of time or money can still get insight and value out of analyzing their data,鈥� one panelist said.

Understanding what you have in your data

Ideally, this requires marketing professionals to look at their firm鈥檚 data more holistically, before deciding what client-centric data could be used to help lawyers in writing pitches and engaging with clients, several panelists explained. 鈥淭he best data is that which gets looked at and understood,鈥� offered one panelist, adding, however, that many law firms simply aren鈥檛 there yet. 鈥淐learly, so many firms are still struggling with the use of their own data,鈥� the panelist noted. 鈥淚t is daunting 鈥� however, data will take you farther down the road than you would have gotten with index cards in a recipe box.鈥�

Several panelists described their own experiences with trying to wrestle their firm鈥檚 data into a structure that could be leveraged to provide marketing and business development professionals 鈥� and by extension, the firm鈥檚 lawyers 鈥� with the insights and understanding to more effectively pitch work or write the kind of proposals that will get clients鈥� attention.

鈥淭he best data is that which gets looked at and understood… Yet so many firms are still struggling with the use of their own data.”

鈥淲e looked at our data overall and saw what worked and what didn鈥檛 work,鈥� another panelist explained, adding that this data included the RFPs the firm won, the ones it didn鈥檛, the business mandates it received, and the situations in which it lost out to other law firms or legal service providers. 鈥淎nd once we looked at the data we had, we had to figure out what we should do with it. There were a lot of expectations and challenges right off the bat.鈥�

Very quickly, however, once a firm is involved in the data retrieval and analysis process, other questions rise to the surface. 鈥淵ou need to draw up a roadmap for innovation,鈥� a panelist explained. 鈥淎nd that means taking inventory of the data you have, no matter what form it is in, and then examining who within the firm uses what and how it鈥檚 being used.鈥�

For example, using data for client mapping can reveal key touchpoints and areas where clients may drop off, become disengaged from the firm, or worse yet, take their business elsewhere. By leveraging internal data, panelists said, the insights gained can be used to enhance the client experience, from initial contact to matter resolution, and ensure a smoother and ultimately more satisfying process.

Getting the data in front of people

Of course, one of the primary ways to make all this work is collaboration among the parts of a law firm that touches the data as it makes its way to utilization. 鈥淭he key to collaboration is that you all have to speak the same language 鈥� those that collect the data, own the data, and ultimately use the data. And there is a lot to do to make kind of collaboration happen.鈥�

Yet, firms that undertake this process can see benefits immediately. 鈥淲e needed to create a plan that would keep our data strategy in front of people,鈥� explained another panelist. 鈥淎nd one thing we found right away was that we could cut down on the number of meetings we had by using more actionable data that team members could follow up on.鈥�

While clearly, an AI-driven examination of the characteristics of successful work pitches, for example, could be quite useful, one panelist explained that their firm saw almost right away that it had too few professionals who could analyze this data in that way. 鈥淲e saw that data cannot be a side-project, rather there has to be someone in a role that manages it, whether that鈥檚 within the practice innovation team or somewhere else, someone has to own this data,鈥� the panelist said.

鈥淭he need to solve for the disconnect between data that offers insights and those business development professionals who may be uncomfortable bringing this to lawyers is crucially important.”

To solve this problem, many law firms make the mistake of simply creating data positions often using those existing team members who may be more data-inclined; but it鈥檚 actually more important to bring on a data specialist 鈥� whether internally or through outsourcing 鈥� because someone has to have the knowledge and skill to interpret the data and guide against any misuse.

Then, panelists explained, comes perhaps the most difficult, yet potentially rewarding, challenge: Once you have identified and collected the data and used it to identify critical insights, you have to make sure the firm鈥檚 lawyers will accept and use what you鈥檝e found.

鈥淭he need to solve for the disconnect between data that offers insights and those business development professionals who may be uncomfortable bringing this to lawyers is crucially important, as is making sure your lawyers have a way to discuss these insights and opportunities with clients,鈥� another panelist offered. 鈥淎ll of this has to be brought through, ultimately to sales, for the use of your firm鈥檚 data to be considered a success.鈥�

And as advanced AI-driven tech evolves, it will become more important for lawyers to have the skills to use this tech themselves, which will allow them to see first-hand the interactions, the engagement, and the opportunities. 鈥淭hat will be the ultimate test 鈥� when lawyers are using these data-driven insights themselves to improve their clients鈥� experience, that鈥檚 the win.鈥�

You can find out more about听recent Marketing Partner Forum events听here

In addition, clients are asking for more transparency into billing and fees to ensure that they are getting the best value for their money. And as their internal tax functions and their outside tax firms embrace technology, clients (and firms alike) are realizing that high billing rates for tax preparation is no longer feasible.

Clearly, tax & accounting firms must not only consider ways to promote growth, must incorporate business development strategies into those efforts in order to meet clients evolving demands.

How can your firm grow its business development?

is a set of intentional activities aimed at improving an organization鈥檚 market position and achieving revenue growth. These activities involve strategic planning, market research, relationship building, and exploring new opportunities. For many tax & accounting firms, this might mean, for example, expanding client bases, enhancing service offerings, or entering new markets. Business development has long been viewed as something reserved for larger firms, and as something more novel for smaller firms; in the current environment, however, it has become crucial for smaller firms as well.

Competition is real, as larger tax firms continue to merge with other large firms, creating opportunities to expand their reach into more geographic regions and putting pressure on small and midsize tax firms. Larger firms tend to have more resources and stronger brand recognition, making it challenging for smaller firms to attract new clients and possibly retain their current clients.

By crafting a strong business development strategy, tax firms of any size can identify unique selling propositions and differentiate themselves from their competitors. Indeed, tax firms leaders who spend the time to understand how the business of tax and the needs of their current and prospective clients have changed will be able to tailor their firms鈥� services much more effectively. Again, this strategic positioning not only attracts new clients but also fosters loyalty among existing ones.

Strengthening client relationships & experience

It鈥檚 important to remember that at the heart of business development is relationship building. Many firms may tout their strong relationships with clients, but upon closer look, these relationships are often frayed, with clients that have been paying the same fees for more than five years or longer. With the firm eating the cost of adjustments for inflation and the like, it becomes an untenable situation.

And the problem isn鈥檛 just financial, many tax & accounting firm leaders have complained about clients that do not submit needed documents in a timely manner, or those that ask for free tax advice鈥�, and the list goes on. Quite frankly, many firms鈥� relationships with their clients were born out of a Oh, I am so happy to have a client feeling, that not much examination of the benefits and pitfalls has taken place. Indeed, any relationship in which the boundaries aren鈥檛 set is difficult to sustain into a strong, healthy relationship.

Firms that have clarity on what type of relationship they want with their clients can better set those relationships up for success, even as early as during client recruitment and during more difficult times, such as moving the current clients to the firm鈥檚 new business model. All of it can be finessed, but it does require work.

Any plan to improve client relationships must include what now will be the client experience. To that end, all business development strategies also must focus on understanding and improving the client journey. This includes knowing what the clients鈥� pain points are 鈥� and evaluating how the firm interacts with the client may yield some answers to this question. For example, how long does it take for a firm member to call a client back with the information they requested? What is the process for clients to submit their tax documents 鈥� is it simple? Or is it a process that works best for your team but not the client? And, finally, have we asked the client what they would like in terms of how we work with them?

Following that kind of self-evaluation, leaders should consider streamlining as many work processes as possible, with the client being center of mind. Has what鈥檚 been implemented enhance clients鈥� experiences with the firm? The correct answer should be obvious.

Using business development to attract & retain talent

As the tax & accounting industry as a whole continues to experience a contraction in talent, especially as more individuals are leaving the industry, it鈥檚 worth mentioning that business development can play a crucial role in stemming this tide. Firms that can create a dynamic and growth-oriented work environment are more likely to retain their staff, as well as signaling to potential employees that those firms are forward-thinking and committed to growth.

Indeed, this can make those firms more attractive to high-caliber professionals who may be seeking career development opportunities. The bottom line is that a firm-wide focus on growth and innovation can enhance employee satisfaction and retention, reducing turnover and ensuring a stable, experienced workforce.

Promoting sustainable growth

Early in the post-pandemic environment, many tax & accounting firms saw significant financial growth with little intentional planning, due in part to the pandemic-era government loans. So robust was this growth that in the annual , Allan Koltin, one of the consultants involved, called it the Golden Age of Accounting. Now, as the dust settles and normalcy returns, firms need a growth strategy that is sustainable to ensure that they can survive as a business. For small and midsize tax firms, business development provides a roadmap for achieving this. It involves setting clear objectives, identifying growth opportunities, and implementing strategies to achieve them.

Whether it鈥檚 expanding into new geographical markets, targeting a different client segment, or introducing new services, a well-thought-out business development plan ensures that growth is strategic and sustainable. Further, it may prevent firms from overextending themselves, allowing for instead a measured, manageable expansion.

Conclusion

Business development is not a mere adjunct to the operations of small and midsize tax firms, it is a fundamental component of their success and longevity. For these firms, the question is not whether they can afford to invest in business development, but whether they can afford not to. Indeed, for many tax & accounting firms, embracing business development is embracing a future of opportunities, resilience, and sustained success.

You can find more about here.