Law Firm Associate Development ProgramWhile the practice of law continues to undergo many changes, one thing will not change. Law firms will always need energy, experience and skill to survive. Smart firms understand that developing this type of firm starts with actually hiring the right attorneys.  And it continues with effective training, evaluation programs and compensation. Law firms with strong associate development programs will develop and retain their leaders and will be better positioned to handle future challenges.


Establishing a great associate development program involves a committed effort, the right systems and the right people. The infographic below lays out the necessary components of an effective associate development program. The links to the articles below can help law firms to put this plan into action.

Besides experience and skill, associate, staff, and even income partner performance are a reflection of the law firm’s management effectiveness. Attorney and staff performance are based on a variety of legal and non-legal activities, which can be described as behaviors that require motivation.  Such motivation can be categorized as extrinsic or intrinsic, both of which should be fostered by the firm’s leadership style.

While incentives like compensation and bonuses are obvious management tools to drive extrinsic motivation, it requires a more thoughtful approach to support intrinsic motivation among the members of a legal organization. Intrinsic rewards are positive emotions triggered by the activity itself, in other words, behavior for the enjoyment of the activity. Ultimately, these rewards satisfy needs for self-esteem and self-actualization. Since intrinsic motivation is not controlled by external factors but the self, it is a lot more powerful.

Practicing law, researching legal documents, managing the office, running accounting software, etc. are all behaviors that require motivation. Assuming an individual has the necessary skill set to perform a job, the level of motivation determines the performance. Since intrinsic motivation cannot be controlled externally, it is important to combine supportive workplace conditions with a suitable leadership style. Focusing especially on law firm staff and young attorneys we propose the following management principles to establish a work environment supportive of intrinsic motivation:

  • Competence – an individual’s awareness of their capabilities
  • Value – a sense of meaningfulness
  • Empowerment – autonomy over work performed
  • Personalization – individualized work approach
  • Team orientation – strengthening relationships

By integrating these principles into attorney and staff management, the firm leadership establishes a work environment that fosters intrinsic motivation.

law firm compensation plan, bonus, subjective, objectiveIn determining attorney compensation,  bonus considerations can be either subjective or objective in nature.


Subjective bonuses should be considered when intangible value is created or the achievement is not economically measurable. Typical areas of work that fall under this bonus category are:

  • Quality of professional work
  • Work ethic
  • Client relations and service
  • Personal development
  • Business development competence
  • Professional recognition
  • Training contributions
  • Adding to the reputation of the firm

Such awards are not tied to a specific economic contribution but encourage continuous development among lawyers. The value is seen in increased capability and value to clients as well as personal growth. For this bonus category, it is important to adjust expectations towards long-term rather than short-term benefits.

Objective bonuses are defined as rewards for meeting or exceeding levels of billable hours, billings, collections or profitability. Unlike subjective awards this bonus type requires consistency in its methodology to incent attorneys. Certain measurements like profitability bonuses with rather long-term benefits are harder to calculate and therefore require a thorough explanation to the team members.

The use of profitability models requires a certain level of transparency and information sharing concerning cost structures. The benefits of sharing profitability information include:

  • Helps manage expectations;
  • Can pressure firm management to operate efficiently;
  • Helps ensure that compensation is competitive;
  • Incents improved billing and collection realization, cost management and revenue maximization (rates and other billing approaches);
  • Improved business acumen and maturity at all levels;
  • Supports building a profitable practice;
  • Better prepare lawyers for eventual partnership; and
  • Mitigates the tendency to focus on billable hours to the exclusion of all else.

Through comprehensive guidelines and accountable management, a firm can ensure that lawyers do not feel unfairly treated based on available profitability information.

In some situations, firms may prefer alternative compensation plans that differ from typical salary and bonus approach. Typically, these plans include fee sharing, profit sharing, hourly compensation and completion/task- based compensation. In any case, compensation policies and pay plans should be based on a comprehensive approach that includes written guidelines, rules, context and philosophy, and transparency, while anticipating strategic needs of firm.


Bonus_win_law_firm_Communication.jpg Determining Attorney Bonuses: Subjective and Objective Considerations
Roadmap_Compensation_Pay_lawyers.jpg Well Developed Compensation Policies and Pay Plans for Lawyers
Set_Salary_Bonus.jpg Setting and Adjusting Base Salaries


Data Driven Compensation Law FirmCompensation issues are a main reason that clients and prospective clients contact us. Our clients view business generation as a means of survival and want to reward heavily for it.  The partners who make up our client law firms understand the transient nature of client relationships and want to realize a high return for their efforts during periods of success. Many partners took considerable risks to create new opportunities and expect fair compensation to parallel their success.

Understanding these dynamics,  the most successful law firms focus on creating an environment where driven attorneys can thrive and see a direct benefit from their efforts. Compensation is a significant determinant in holding a successful firm together. Employing a system that encourages profitable behaviors and pays based on those contributions is essential. It is not that hard, but many just can’t get this part right.

We base our preference for a contributed profit approach to compensation on the following factors:

  • Heavily incents the right behaviors;
  • Enables transparency;
  • Promotes accountability and empowerment; and
  • Is field tested; our most successful firms have thrived and grown using these systems.

Data driven systems help our clients resist unconsciously falling victim to all of the weak arguments that enable unprofitable behaviors. We also understand that it is hard to address partner performance issues.  But pretending they do not exist, hiding them with a non-existent or inadequate measurement systems, or simply hoping things will improve only leads to larger failures.

Measuring legal client profitability for the last 15 years has taught us many valuable lessons that could take up several pages, but here is an example of the power of a single report set.

Practice Profitability With matter Level Detail


This example includes a practice profitability report with matter level detail. Initially, we can review profitability at the timekeeper level. Starting with actual hours billed (not billable hours in WIP) and the amount charged to the client for these hours (revenue credit) we can quickly determine an average rate for each timekeeper.

Nothing new here, but averages can be misleading.  We recommend looking to the matter profitability to ensure that the average rate is a good measure of a timekeeper’s performance. For example, reviewing Client 1’s result indicates that P2’s average rate is below the mean of all client matters for all clients.

Further, Client 1 accounts for only 20% of P2’s total revenue, which makes a review of additional clients and matters necessary. In this instance, assume that we are trying to determine if P2’s average rate has any predictive value or is it the result of a unique client or file result that is not likely to repeat. This same process can provide the same information for all timekeepers supporting P2’s practice.

Moving past the revenue metrics, we move to timekeeper payroll cost, which is a constant throughout all clients and matters. Peer comparisons of payroll costs and benefits can provide insight into timekeeper pay levels and production efficiency. In the same way, peer comparisons of overhead costs can provide insights into cost efficiency.   Collectively, these data form a basis for analyzing pricing and staffing mix appropriateness.

Quickly reviewing staffing and overhead costs, staffing mix, rate realization, and billing rates are all possible with these data. Presenting AR Write off information at the matter level can reveal collection inconsistencies among timekeepers and matters. Enabling partners to quickly understand the impact of production, billing rate, write-downs, staffing mix cost and overhead costs will result in a more financially competent firm.

Unprofitable or struggling partners who have some business can use these data to understand and improve results. As most lawyers are afraid of upsetting a client relationship, the resist making necessary changes to improve profitability. Without compensation consequences, they have no real incentive to improve their results. I use the work consequences deliberately because struggling partners likely need better results just to stay at their existing compensation levels.

High integrity data-driven systems make all information available to all partners, which fosters transparency. Trained partners using quality data allow firms to work with truths rather than debilitating perceptions.

For example, partners often believe differently about the effect of cost on large books of business. We are also frequently asked if the partners with the most business should always receive the most compensation. Profit driven systems are not concerned with regulating how a particular partner or group ethically creates their profits. All profit dollars are valued the same in these systems.

A good origination sharing policy also facilitates collaboration. A system that allows for sharing at the matter level is ideal for partners who collaborate on a file by file basis. See the following report sample and please refer to our law firm best practice blog for more information regarding origination sharing.

Data Driven Law Firm Compensation
Notice the Originating attorney percentage in the top right of the report and also see the allocations of origination profits in the four columns to the right of Client Net Income column. In this example, the originating partner has decided to share 10% of the profit on this client and matter with another attorney.

Compensation systems built on profitability raise the level of partner consciousness in the following areas:

  • Production
  • Billing Rates and Pricing
  • Realization
  • Payroll Costs
  • Overhead Costs
  • Staffing mix
  • Write-Offs

When every partner has a working knowledge of the impact of each of these elements on profitability, a high-performance culture can result.

For more information on implementing Data Driven Compensation Systems, please see our law firm best practice blog (CLICK HERE) and see our resources page (CLICK HERE) for client profitability seminar materials. See also our post on rewarding for training and leveraging (CLICK HERE).


Law_Firm_Marketing_Planning_InfograpicMarketing is necessary for the longevity of a legal practice. A structured marketing plan will steer lawyers in the right direction of targeted clients and will make sure any time and money invested in marketing is well spent.

In developing the actual plan, lawyers must consider the impact of various factors such as:  the firm’s priorities regarding workload increases, client types and billing arrangements; funding and marketing support availability; and the timeframe for the implementation of the marketing plan.

 Based on these considerations, we suggest a planning workflow consisting of five steps:

  1. Goal definition,
  2. Status analysis,
  3. Market segmentation & target client definition,
  4. Activity planning and
  5. Implementation

Having marketing goals that are specific and measurable is key to developing a worthwhile marketing plan. Not only does precise goal definition give lawyers a better understanding of the level of engagement needed, but it also helps them to analyze and improve the actual performance of their marketing plan.

A status analysis in the form of a SWOT analysis creates a clear picture of a lawyer’s strengths and weaknesses concerning their current marketability. Additionally, it allows for the identification of marketing and business opportunities, as well as threats to business growth. The next step, segmentation and target client definition, serves as the foundation of the activity plan.  In defining their core practice services and characterizing their ideal clients based on demographic, geographic, psychographic and behavioral traits, lawyers can create a more effective platform for selecting the best marketing tactics for a target audience.

The objective of the activity planning and implementation stages is to develop an activity portfolio that delivers the most effective marketing message to the target audience defined in the previous step. For the purpose of this exercise, we divide legal marketing activities into three categories:

  • Relationship building activities (organizational involvement/memberships, client and referral source entertainment)
  • Content development and delivery activities (content marketing (blogging, social media, newsletter), speaking engagements, publishing)
  • Contact database management (app- or software-based contact management system)

After a weekly or monthly split of the marketing hours between these categories is determined, the implementation can be guided by a marketing & budget calendar to manage the frequency, cost and required support for the activities.

law firm, base salary, lawyer, compensation

Setting and adjusting base salaries requires law firms to consider many factors. While initial base salaries for lawyers are often driven by external market factors, we encourage law firms to consider qualitative factors such as work quality, work ethic, and client service when determining the capability and progression of their lawyers.

To ensure that a law firm develops a market-competitive and fair compensation system that rewards the firm’s valued behaviors, we recommend a balanced approach. Within this approach, we advise firms to evaluate base salaries separate from objective rewards for economic performance. Economic contributions would be considered as one criterion among a range of qualitative criteria that are based on the firm’s culture, experience, strategic needs, client needs and financial model.

Each lawyer receives a score on a factor-based rating table. Since the importance of each factor will vary from firm to firm, it is important for each firm to clearly communicate performance expectation guidelines. In addition to setting base salary, firms can also use this rating assessment, to determine bonuses for economic and other specific qualitative contributions.

When setting compensation for more senior lawyers (8+ years), law firms should also apply profitability methods.

While there is no magic formula for setting and adjusting base salary, effective systems will encourage and reward the behaviors that ultimately contribute to the long-term success of a law firm.

READ OUR DETAILED POST “Setting and Adjusting Base Salaries“, which includes helpful tables and graphics, on our Law Firm Best Practices blog.


compensation, attorney, law firm

When should attorneys receive a bonus? And when does a salary increase make more sense?  From our view, bonus payments represent compensation for contributions that are not necessarily repeatable.  For example, an attorney worked on a large case and generated significant income for the firm. Unless the attorney became more marketable in the process, the current year financial results might not repeat. Without producing the same results in the future, the higher base salary would be difficult to cover.

If law firms can align salaries with such factors as a growth in marketable skills, the ability to serve clients, and a more diverse practice,  they can remove some of the risk associated with paying higher base salaries.  For example, a lawyer who adds a new practice area to her market offerings can increase her ability to remain profitable, making her higher base salary less risky.

Attorneys can experience higher percentage increases in base salaries early in their careers. These increases are primarily a result from economic improvements relating to increases in billing realization, an ability to handle more workload, and less frequently, billing rate increases.  As mentioned earlier, adding skills can lead to a higher value to clients and can help justify higher base salaries.  As attorneys progress through different levels of expertise, (which typically include novice, intermediate, advanced, and expert), they increase their ability to generate more income.


However, prevailing market factors can limit an attorney’s capacity to create the income and resulting profit needed to support base salary increases. Some of these factors include:

  • Clients rarely agree to an annual increasing rate scale commensurate with experience;
  • Lawyers can struggle with adding noticeable increases in marketable skills sets;
  • The provided legal services can have limited value to clients;
  • The supply of available lawyers;
  • New technology;
  • Increased litigation management and client scrutiny; and
  • Alternatives to providing traditional legal services.

Since these existing market factors can often constrain base salaries, additional compensation becomes more reliant on economic contributions.


Law firms can minimize market limitations and risks with a bonus approach. Bonuses usually rely on the accomplishment of certain factors such as billable hour targets or profitability contributions. The at-risk component of compensation typically increases as an attorney matures, and at the equity member level, all compensation is at risk. Again, well-run firms can offer certainty in the process for determining compensation, but the results depend on profits.

Consider the following chart of a 10-year equity membership track that portrays a typical relationship between compensation, economic contributions, subjective contributions, and experience level.  All law firms compensate differently, but the basic relationship between a new lawyer’s compensation (which is largely guaranteed) and an equity member’s compensation (none of which is really guaranteed) is as depicted. Equity members are paid from profits. If a firm has no profits, there is no income to allocate.

attorney compensation, law firm, infographic

The economic and subjective contributions include the most common elements we encounter. Many firms, however, do not formally recognize training and supervision or billing management as discrete economic contributions. Some firms recognize training contributions subjectively, and billing management can earn some credit in an origination sharing system.

We recommend that our clients create a similar guideline for their firms and share it with all of the lawyers. We also recommend for firms to  explain the compensation and progression process to their lawyers, provide them with the necessary profitability information, and help them learn the  business of law.  Excellent tools that support a process-oriented approach include practice plans, mentoring programs, and ad hoc feedback.


When we implement a structured approach to compensation and progression, we sometimes encounter resistance from some of the lawyers. At the partner level things such as confidentiality, competitive fears, and concerns relating to an irresponsible use of the firm’s important financial data is not uncommon. We appreciate these concerns, but firms who struggle to share information run the risk of fomenting a back channel information system (rumor mill) that disseminates inaccurate information.

At the non-owner level, providing more transparency, guidelines, financial information, and profitability reporting can result in a level of accountability that can make some uncomfortable and even intimidated. If a firm has trust issues, the process may initially seem contrived. It is our experience, however, that as lawyers progress in a transparent environment, they either become comfortable and thrive or they decide to move on. Lawyers who are fortunate enough to work for a firm that shares information about the underlying economics of the practice can learn to practice more successfully.





This article is Part 4 of a four-part series focused on subscription-based services for law firms.  READ PART 1 and PART 2 and PART 3.

law firms, subscription services, AFA

Given the necessary focus, developing a customized subscription-based agreement for legal services can be beneficial for both law firms and their clients. Communication is the key to success. When a law firm’s incentives are aligned with their client’s expectations, the focus is on end result, not the number of hours it takes to get there.

Front-end loaded agreements and service level management

Developing a customized subscription based agreement can present challenges, especially when a client requires a disproportionate level of initial time investment. In such instances, a law firm can find themselves with negative profits for several months. For example, an on-boarding process that requires an initial review and documentation process of several files before new work can commence. Status reporting and progress reviews can ensure that clients appreciate the level of the firm’s commitment.

The decision to include the start-up costs at no additional cost or to charge an on-boarding fee is another significant consideration. It is certainly an inducement for the law firm to absorb the startup costs of a new agreement, but it is better to negotiate an on-boarding fee if possible. Law firms that have good pricing processes can also consider a hybrid approach that includes absorbing part of the startup costs and spreading the remaining amount over the term of the agreement. Other options include a higher first-year fee with future adjustments based on negotiated volume, results, realized efficiencies, and other agreed upon metrics or milestones.

Each practice area comes with unique priorities, and professional responsibilities stand. But working to an agreed upon service level can produce efficiencies that help manage the level of time and cost invested in matters at a given point compared to the revenues.

Value-added Services

As mentioned previously, law firms can learn a lot from technological and other value-added services that provide clients additional insights into managing their legal efforts, budgeting, best practices, improved outcomes, and advanced legal business intelligence.  Today, law firm must provide value-added services to have a competitive advantage.

Examples of value-added services include:

  • Activity management and reporting;
  • Response time management and reporting;
  • Real-time case status reporting;
  • Average cost per matter;
  • Average matter duration;
  • Service level compliance summary and detailed;
  • Exception reporting and early warning systems;
  • Predictive metrics and trend analysis (legal and cost);
  • Document repositories and forms management;
  • Web-based portal for requesting services and managing open items (dashboard);
  • Recommendations for improving the client’s customer service regarding legal.

Many other value-added services can exist based on the practice area, client practices, industry, and the role of legal services in a client’s business. We recommend creating SSA’s using a value-added approach that only an outside law firm can provide.

Perfecting a subscription based pricing model can be difficult for law firms, especially for firms geared to hourly billing. Several key business processes will need attention, including profitability measurement, workload distribution, productivity measurement, compensation and incentives, advanced pricing, and marketing support. An objective 3rd party is often necessary to help support the development of the necessary processes and improve internal core competency.

Though some time and effort are needed to initially develop these customized agreements, the end result includes strengthened client relationships and increased firm profitabililty.


This article is Part 3 of a four-part series focused on subscription-based services for law firms.  READ PART 1 and PART 2.

Law firm pricing

Developing a pricing structure for subscription based legal services can be difficult, especially if your law firm is geared to hourly billing.

For existing clients – historical data and knowledge of the client’s needs can make it easier to set subscribed services fee levels.  Other factors, however, can make the process strategically difficult.  Concerns can range from setting a price that causes a client to include new competitors in the process to opening oneself to internal scrutiny – “the new deal is not as good as the hourly deal.”

Arriving at a pricing structure for a new client will initially rely on client-supplied data, which I have often found to be limited. In other service industries, it is typical to conduct an in-depth analysis of a prospective client’s current costs and service level expectations. In the legal market, however, due to confidentiality and attorney-client privilege concerns, prospective clients rarely share any data beyond estimates of their total legal spend, types of matters, and possibly a projection of future service needs. A client may provide more information if they believe it will benefit them in developing a credible fee level.

Finally, small and mid-sized clients (legal spend and needs) may not have any organized approach to their legal spend. In these instances, modeling based on assumptions is necessary. Other sources of data may include running simulations on similar current clients and discovery questionnaires designed to organize the evaluation process.

Economically justifying subscribed services fee agreements can rely heavily on removing administrative costs that include billing, collection, the speed of cash flow, other savings related to automating workflows. Efficient staffing models, which include the freedom to assign any appropriate resource to the task, should also provide additional cost efficiencies and better realization (value for time spent). Firm’s who primarily bill hourly can struggle with cost allocation for non-hourly billing approaches.

It is also important to gain agreement on the cost savings that the client can realize, which include reduced bill review, matter management, and payment processing.

A Trial Run

Such clients will require a more fundamental business case:

  • clients who do not have an organized process for managing their legal spend,
  • clients who do not take a strategic approach to their legal spend or
  • clients who do not yet understand their legal needs will require a more fundamental business case.

To insulate the client and firm from the risk of a bad agreement, I suggest a trial period with a reassessment opportunity. The length of the trial period can depend on the scope and complexity of the agreement.

Focus on Efficiency

Finally, considering compensation drivers and incentives for timekeepers working on subscribed services accounts is necessary. The focus must shift to efficiency and adherence to service levels from billable hours based compensation and pay.


Keeping time on on subscribed services accounts is still necessary for internal measurement purposes. The type of services provided can inform the level of detail needed, but a code based timekeeping system that is tied to matters, projects, advice or another logical schema will work. Recall that one element of an SSA is to reduce administrative burden.

A code based timekeeping system that groups like tasks can facilitate advanced metric analysis including  efficiency analysis for each timekeeper, timekeeper experience level, task level, and several others that can help identify improvement areas.  The data should also indicate potential staffing issues, client-side inefficiencies, and  key profitability metrics.  All of these data can inform operational decisions, timekeeper compensation and incentives, and future pricing decisions.

A predisposition to hourly billing and profit measurement is a major challenge to the creation of a successful subscribed services model in many law firms. A well-developed cost accounting process and profitability measurement system can encourage partners to allow the time needed to perfect a subscribed services model.

Check back on our blog soon to read more about subscription based legal services, including:

  • Challenges of this type of billing model.

This article is Part 2 of a four-part series focused on subscription-based services for law firms.  READ PART 1.

Subscrition services law firm As a consultant who rarely bills hourly, I have had my trials and tribulations with scope development and client expectation management. I have even considered if the concept was workable. Achieving a sustainable market-fit approach has taken creativity, the patience for trial and error, and a level of flexibility in the early stages.

Our experience finds that a subscribed services approach is still considered too risky by many lawyers, but some lawyers are earnestly probing for the right approach economically and ethically.  If you or your firm are considering a subscription based pricing strategy, apply the following fundamentals to increase your success chances.

Scope Development and Expectation Management

Perhaps the most difficult element to perfecting a subscribed services pricing strategy is to develop a scope of the agreement. “Scope creep” occurs when clients request additional services not covered by the agreement without also offering to pay additional fees.  This can destroy profitability since most lawyers are eager to please their clients and provide these additional services without much resistance.  Scope creep will be further discussed later in this section.

When a subscribed services agreement (SSA) includes a well written scope, terms and conditions, and pricing, success is more likely.  It is also important to adhere to the provisions which requires discipline and excellent communication skills.

Developing a Scope: An Example

A scope of basic services included in an agreement is easy to develop. For example, your firm may agree to do the following for a client:  manage human resources compliance efforts, review and support hiring and termination processes and decisions, and to oversee management training twice a year. An experienced employment lawyer can easily write an adequate agreement scope.

Under this agreement, “pressing the scope” could occur if the client requests a lawyer to participate in the termination process of an employee. Wanting to keep the client happy, the lawyer agrees.  The termination process goes so smoothly that the client decides it is a good idea to have an attorney present at all difficult terminations.

When creating the initial scope, the lawyer never anticipated offering this level of service, which is often time intensive and comes with potentially more risk. And while the client is pleased in the short run, these added services quickly become an expectation and profits begin to evaporate.

If we were advising our fictional lawyer, we would recommend the following:

  • Immediately analyze the agreement to determine how well the pricing fits the expanded services offered. We will address accounting issues later, but for now, assume the data exists to perform the recommended analysis. Next, determine how the additional services impact the pricing model built for the agreement.


  • If the impact is material, contact the client and review the initial scope. Gain agreement that additional services are beyond the scope and offer solutions.


  • Think of solutions: It is in this area that creativity is needed. For example, instead of raising the price, you may consider eliminating a service from the initial scope as an offset. You may determine that you can handle a limited number of additional instances and propose an incremental fee for every instance beyond the allotted number. Finally, you may decide that the solution is a fee increase.

In these situations, it is important that clients see an honest effort to manage the cost of the agreement.  Your firm’s credibility will increase if it can propose alternative that do not involve a fee increase.

With experience, future scope agreements will anticipate potential additional service requests and inform pricing agreements.

Expectation management

Managing client expectations is important regardless of pricing agreement or service model. An advantage of hourly billing, although slight, is that clients receive a detailed record of the service provided on their invoices. When a subscribes services invoice only includes a line item for the monthly fee, clients may not appreciate all the work performed during the billing cycle or over the course of the agreement.

To communicate the value received under such agreements, an alternative communication process is necessary.  Borrowing from the IT world, I like adaptations of the help desk ticketing systems.  For example, bespoke versions of Zen Desk or Fresh Desk (several similar systems exist) can help manage client expectations and measure a firm’s service level performance. Further adaptation of these systems includes a web-based client portal process that allows clients to submit requests for legal services online.

Once initiated in the system, tracking, approval and reporting processes can occur.  Depending on the type of agreement, I recommend that lawyers use these data to measure performance and communicate with clients periodically. For example, a firm may review the number of legal requests submitted during the period, the status of each request, any items that need client action, and any other items that can improve the quality of the agreement. As necessary, standard narrative case reports can supplement a metric based reporting system.

A formal process for managing client expectations is an essential part of a successful subscribed services agreement.

Check back on our blog soon to read more about subscription based legal services, including:

  • Pricing (Setting Fees)
  • Accounting
  • Challenges of this type of billing model.