Vol. 71, No. 10,
October 1998
1998 Member Survey:
Gauging Members' Needs
By Dianne Molvig
Editor's Note: To view the figures referenced in this article
you must have and/or install Adobe
Acrobat Reader 3.0 on your computer.
"You have gotten away from primarily big-to-huge firm interests,
and that's great."
"There has been a clear effort over the past several years
to include the interests of the government lawyers in overall State Bar
activities. Earlier I had felt that my interests were being ignored."
"I appreciate the change in attitude."
"If the bar were disbanded tomorrow, I doubt anyone except
the groupies would care."
The newest membership survey continues the Bar's effort to gauge members'
needs and how to better meet them. Questions sought to identify members'
income, practice area, and geographic location; what Bar services and products
they use and whether they're helpful; how the bar can help members prepare
for the future; and more. |
These are just a few of the comments from the more than 700 attorneys who
took advantage of the opportunity to air gripes, convey kudos, or offer
suggestions in the latest State Bar membership survey. The 1998 membership
survey is part of a continuing effort to learn more about members' needs
and how the Bar can better meet those needs.
With that goal in mind, earlier this year a six-page survey questionnaire
was sent to a random sample of 1,467 resident attorneys and 1,035 nonresident
Bar members, who responded at rates of 34 percent and 24 percent, respectively.
Precision of results is plus or minus 4.3 percentage points for residents
and plus or minus 6.1 percentage points for nonresidents.
The content of this year's survey questions was similar to that of the
most recent prior survey conducted in 1992, with some adaptations. The Bar
intends to continue to conduct membership surveys on a periodic basis in
an effort to keep up with members' changing needs and to improve Bar services.
For those of you who didn't get to participate this year, look for your
chance next time around. Below are a few highlights from this year's survey
results.
About you
The average age of resident survey respondents is 44.4 years, and 41.8
years among nonresidents. Most of you are men (73.6 percent of residents
and 72.8 percent of nonresidents), but the gender distribution has shifted
somewhat compared to the 1992 survey. Back then men accounted for 80 percent
of residents, 81 percent of nonresidents. The gender composition of the
latest survey sample closely mirrors the current makeup of the State Bar
membership as a whole, which has resident and nonresident male ratios of
75.5 percent and 73.9 percent.
How do you work? About one-third of residents are law firm partners,
while 20.7 percent are sole practitioners, and 12 percent are law firm associates.
Sole practice proves to be rarer among nonresidents, at 11.7 percent. Among
nonresidents, law firm partners again make up the largest group (26 percent),
followed by law firm associates at 16.1 percent. (See Figure
1: Practice Settings of Residents and Nonresidents.) Of all nonresident
respondents, about two-thirds work in the District of Columbia or one of
three states: Minnesota, Illinois, or Michigan.
The largest share of resident respondents (36.2 percent) say they invest
40 to 49 hours per week in practicing law, followed by another 30.4 percent
who put in a 50-to-59-hour work week. Nonresidents show a reverse trend:
38.9 percent work 50 to 59 hours a week, and 24.5 percent practice law 40
to 49 hours per week. (See Figure 2: Hours
Devoted to the Practice of Law.)
As for types of practice, the top five among residents are general practice,
business/corporate, civil litigation, criminal law, and employment/labor.
Nonresidents are most apt to be in civil litigation, followed by general
practice, business/corporate, employment/labor, and insurance.
What about pay? The span in net income is wide, from less than $20,000
to more than $200,000 a year. Most surveyed members, whether residents or
nonresidents, are in the $40,000-to-$59,999 income bracket. (See
Figure 3,:Net Income.) More than half of resident
lawyers have their Bar dues paid by the firm that employs them. If you're
a nonresident, you're more apt to have to pay dues out of your own pocket.
Meeting your needs
The questionnaire asked lawyers to rate how well the Bar responds to
their needs, to the issues facing the legal profession, and to helping members
prepare for future changes in the profession. Ratings ranged from 3.06 to
3.56, with 5 being the highest possible score and 1 being the lowest.
An additional question posed to residents cut to the heart of the question
of the Bar's usefulness to its members. It asked: "If State Bar of
Wisconsin membership were voluntary, would you remain a member?" Nearly
80 percent of residents said they would. (See Figure
4: Retain State Bar Membership if Voluntary Bar?)
For nonresidents, many of whom are not required to belong to the Bar,
the survey asked why they retained their memberships. The top three reasons
were to preserve the ability to practice law in Wisconsin in the future,
to receive the Wisconsin Lawyer, and to be able to practice in Wisconsin
this year. (See Figure 5: Nonresidents: Why
Retain Membership?)
Another section of the survey asked members to rate the Bar's customer
service on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being "excellent." Ratings
on service by telephone, fax, email, Internet, and order fulfillment ranged
from 3.73 to 4.36. The highest scores appeared in the areas of friendly
staff, timely email, timely orders, and accurate orders.
Rating the Bar's offerings
The survey aimed to find out which Bar products and services you perceive
to be most valuable. On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 designating "very
high value," the following earned scores in the "high value"
to "very high value" range among residents: CLE seminars (4.28),
CLE books (4.27), Wisconsin Lawyer magazine (4.15), Wisconsin
Lawyer Directory (4.10), and CLE seminar written materials (4.08). Close
behind was the Ethics Hotline (3.98). Nonresident members gave highest ratings
to Wisconsin Lawyer (4.07) and CLE seminars (4.06). (See Figure 6: Offerings Members Value.)
Another approach to evaluating the Bar's offerings was to ask respondents
if they actually use or participate in various products or services. More
than 95 percent of residents and nearly 90 percent of nonresidents say they
use the Wisconsin Lawyer. Also coming in with high usage/participation
rates among residents are CLE seminars (94.4 percent), the State Bar Newsletter
(91.6 percent), CLE books (90.5 percent), CLE seminar written materials
(89.9 percent), and the Wisconsin Lawyer Directory (87.4 percent).
The same products and services ranked highest for nonresidents, but in different
proportions and order. (See Figure 7: Offerings
Members Use or Participate In.)
Career satisfaction
How happy are you about being a lawyer? Roughly 70 percent of all respondents
say that if they had to select a career all over again, law would be their
choice. Another quarter of respondents say they're considering leaving the
legal profession within the next five years.
While many of those planning to leave the legal profession are retiring,
others are abandoning law practice for other reasons. In some cases, it's
simply a matter of moving on to more appealing endeavors. But of respondents
who gave reasons for wanting to leave law behind, many (75.5 percent of
residents and 63.6 percent of nonresidents) say they're frustrated and disillusioned.
One respondent summed up typical sentiments of the disenchanted as follows:
"I do not find (law practice) fulfilling. Clients are never happy with
their experience with the legal system and blame you. Society views us with
complete disdain and 'we eat our own young' - that is, [there's] very little
loyalty or civility among attorneys."
When asked how the Bar could help them make the transition to a new career,
most respondents indicated they didn't know, while others felt the Bar shouldn't
be involved in such an activity. But some had specific suggestions for ways
the Bar could help: offer an outplacement service, maintain job listings,
or provide information on how attorneys can use their law degrees in other
lines of work. One respondent suggested the Bar should "encourage a
different, less 'macho' attitude" to help make the practice of law
more rewarding and enjoyable.
Identifying unmet needs
The last section of the survey asked respondents to answer four open-ended
questions. The first of these was, "What do you need from the State
Bar that is currently not being provided?" Of the 700-plus survey participants,
145 resident members wrote in comments on this question. Responses covered
the full gamut, from "get out of our way" to wishes for "more
opportunities to become involved."
Comments tended to cluster around a few key issues. Nineteen lawyers
wanted lower costs for everything from Bar dues to convention and seminar
registration fees. Some suggested the Bar give price breaks on dues and
CLE fees, in recognition of the fact that lawyers' salaries vary greatly.
Another suggestion that surfaced frequently was that the Bar should be
more involved in improving the public image of lawyers. Comments to that
effect appeared in 15 responses. And nine attorneys indicated they'd like
to see the Bar do more to meet the needs of government lawyers. One respondent
called for "better facilitation of interaction between government and
private lawyers. There's a huge wall and nobody seems to care."
Among the 63 nonresident members who wrote in comments on unmet needs,
a dozen mentioned they wanted better local access to Bar services. Some
asked for CLE classes to be offered locally; some requested more seminars
available through teleconferences or the Internet. Others would like to
see regional programs or classes convened near state borders, such as in
St. Paul, Hudson, or Beloit.
The worst and the best
Two other open-ended questions asked attorneys to describe their "worst"
and "best" experiences with the State Bar. The first question
drew 170 responses, covering wildly divergent issues that are difficult
to categorize overall. Seventeen attorneys mentioned bad experiences with
ethics complaints or fee arbitration, described by one respondent as "an
onus against the attorney" and by another as a "witch hunt against
me."
Several commented on lack of parking at the Bar Center. Others complained
about "political squabbles," an "overload of junk mail,"
the "old boys' network in the State Bar leadership," and "a
poorly planned seminar." A handful of participants also voiced their
dismay about the Bar getting involved in highly controversial political
issues, such as gun control and abortion.
Among all respondents, 259 commented on "best experiences."
Here many members listed their involvement in the Mock Trial Program for
high schools. CLE seminars (both teaching and attending), CLE publications,
the Wisconsin Lawyer, and WisBar - the Bar's Web site - also drew
compliments from respondents. The Ethics Hotline gained multiple mentions,
with one respondent writing, "Keith Kaap alone is worth my Bar dues."
Several attorneys said their best experience was working in Bar sections
or on committees, or simply being able to build relationships with colleagues.
One attorney's most positive memory was described as "meeting a lawyer
with 50-plus years of practice experience - a quiet, dignified man who made
me proud to be in the profession." This, the respondent noted, helped
offset the negative impact of the "ego displays" at Bar gatherings
listed as the respondent's worst experience under the preceding question.
Looking ahead
The last open-ended question of the survey asked, "How can the State
Bar help you prepare for practicing law in the 21st century?" Among
resident respondents, 185 entered comments in this section, and nearly a
third of those dealt with technology issues. (About one-fourth of the 74
nonresidents who wrote comments listed technology needs.) Members asked
for more computer training, software reviews, technology updates, and continued
improvements on the Bar's Web site. "Continue to help small/nonurban
attorneys accept and adopt technology," wrote one lawyer. "It
will improve the practice for all."
A few, however, warned against too much zeal for technology. Said one
respondent, "Technology, though wonderful in many ways, has sped up
the pace of society to the point where quality legal services are becoming
threatened." Said another, "Continue to provide the technical
help ... but not at the cost of our humanity."
Other requests ranged from lower fees and costs, to efforts to improve
civility and collegiality among lawyers, to "keep providing quality
CLE at convenient locations for a reasonable price." And one lawyer's
philosophical response suggested that for the Bar to prepare its members
for the future, it should "make the profession more fun ... more ethical
... [and] more worthwhile in terms of presenting opportunities to achieve
positive change in the lives of those we touch."
Acting on the data
The data are in. The comments have been noted. But that's just the beginning.
State Bar leaders and staff face the task of sifting through the information
and advice, as contradictory as it sometimes may be. We asked the questions;
now we will listen to the answers. This survey's results will help in reshaping
existing programs and in designing new ones to meet members' needs.
As useful as a survey like this is, it's only one tool for monitoring
members' attitudes toward the Bar. You don't need to wait to receive a survey
to tell us what you're thinking. Write us a letter, send an email, call
the 24-hour memberline at (800) 444-9404, ext. 6000, to leave a message,
contact a staff member, or talk to one of the Bar's leaders ... because
in reality surveying members is a never-ending process, not just a periodic
ritual. The only way for us to know what the Bar is doing right or where
we're missing the mark is for you, the members, to tell us.
Dianne Molvig operates Access Information Service,
a Madison research, writing, and editing service. She is a frequent contributor
to area publications.
© State Bar of Wisconsin
Wisconsin Lawyer Main
WisBar Main
|