Your Law Firm’s “Normal” May Just Be a Collection of Workarounds

Your law firm probably has a long list of things that are simply considered “normal.” Someone always checks the final document. A particular attorney approves certain decisions. One person knows how to handle a specific type of issue.

Everyone has their own way of completing the same task. When something goes wrong, the team knows who to ask. None of these things may have been formally designed. But over time, they can become the way the firm operates. And that is where workarounds become interesting.

A workaround is not necessarily a problem

Every organization needs to adapt. A client has an unusual request. A deadline moves. A new employee needs help. A software system does not quite do what the team needs it to do. Someone finds a solution.

That is not inherently a problem.

In fact, the ability to adapt is part of running a law firm. The problem begins when the temporary solution becomes the permanent one without anyone deciding whether it should. A person starts handling a task because they were the first person who figured it out. A partner begins approving something because it seemed easier than explaining the decision to someone else. An employee creates a spreadsheet to compensate for a limitation in the firm's process. The team develops a verbal reminder system because nothing else exists.

Eventually, nobody thinks of these things as workarounds anymore. They are just “how we do it.”

Repetition turns adaptation into structure

This is one of the easiest ways an operational structure develops without intentional design.

Something happens repeatedly. People adjust. The adjustment works well enough. So they keep doing it.

Eventually, the behavior becomes predictable. Once it becomes predictable, other people begin relying on it. And once people rely on it, changing it becomes difficult.

That is how an informal practice can become an operational dependency. The important distinction is not whether the process was documented.

It is whether the firm has begun depending on it. A process does not become structural only after someone puts it into a manual. If your team knows that a certain question always goes to one person, that is part of your structure. If a particular attorney is always the final decision-maker, that is part of your structure. If everyone knows that a certain task requires asking someone who “knows how to do it,” that is part of your structure.

The structure exists whether or not you formally designed it.

The danger is not that your team found a workaround

The more important question is:

What happened after the workaround worked?

Did anyone eventually step back and ask whether it should become the permanent process?

Did the responsibility get intentionally assigned?

Did the decision-making authority become clear?

Did the process get transferred to someone else?

Did the firm remove the original problem?

Or did everyone simply keep working around it?

This is where a functioning firm can develop structural friction without realizing it. The workaround solved the immediate problem. But it may have created a new dependency.

Consider a simple example.

A managing partner is frequently asked to review outgoing client communications.

Initially, this makes sense.

The firm is small. The partner wants to maintain quality. The team is still learning.

But months later, the same approval process remains. The team still waits for the partner. The partner still reviews the same types of communications. Everyone has become accustomed to it. Nothing is technically broken. But the firm has created a structure in which the managing partner remains necessary for a task that may no longer require their involvement.

The original workaround has become part of the operating model.

“It works” is not the same as “it works well”

This distinction matters because law firms often evaluate their processes based on whether the work eventually gets completed. And understandably so.

Deadlines are met. Clients receive their documents. Cases move forward. Bills get sent. Problems get resolved.

From the outside, everything may appear to be working.

But a process can produce the expected result while still creating unnecessary dependency, inconsistency, or leadership involvement.

The better question is not simply:

Does this work?

Ask:

What does it require in order to work?

Does it require one particular person?

Does it require someone remembering a step?

Does it require an attorney to intervene?

Does it require an employee to ask someone else every time?

Does it require everyone to use their own judgment because there is no shared standard?

Does it require a workaround that has been in place for so long that nobody remembers what problem it was originally solving?

Those questions tell you much more about the structure of the firm.

Your workarounds are telling you something

A workaround is information.

It tells you that somewhere in the firm's structure, the existing approach did not fully meet the need. That does not automatically mean the process is bad. It means there is something worth understanding.

For example:

If people repeatedly ask the same person for help:
You may have an ownership or authority gap.

If everyone completes the same task differently:
You may have a process or standardization gap.

If attorneys repeatedly step into employee-level decisions:
You may have a delegation or decision-ownership gap.

If people maintain their own spreadsheets or tracking systems:
You may have an information or workflow gap.

If the team relies heavily on memory:
You may have a documentation or visibility gap.

The workaround itself is not necessarily the problem. It is the clue.

Before you eliminate the workaround, understand why it exists

There is also a temptation to respond to operational problems by immediately creating a new procedure.

That is not always the answer.

If your team created a workaround, there was probably a reason.

Maybe the existing process is too slow.

Maybe the software does not support the workflow.

Maybe nobody actually owns the decision.

Maybe the written procedure does not reflect what happens in practice.

Maybe the firm grew, but the original process never changed with it.

If you remove the workaround without addressing the reason it developed, your team may simply create another one. That is why operational improvement should begin with understanding rather than immediately imposing more structure.

Ask:

What problem was this workaround solving?

Who depends on it now?

What would happen if we removed it?

Does the underlying problem still exist?

Should this workaround become a formal part of the process—or should we design something better?

Those questions turn an annoyance into useful operational information.

From default to designed

This is the difference between a firm that is adapting its structure and a firm that is intentionally designing it.

You will always have unexpected situations.

You will always need judgment.

You will always have moments where someone finds a faster or better way to accomplish something.

The goal is not to eliminate flexibility. The goal is to recognize when flexibility has quietly become dependency. A workaround can be appropriate for a day, a week, or even a season. But if your firm has been relying on the same workaround for years, it deserves a closer look. Not because something is necessarily wrong. Because something has become part of the way your firm works. And once you can see it, you have a choice. You can continue operating around it because it is familiar. Or you can decide whether it belongs in the firm you are intentionally building.

That is where operational design begins.

Is Your Firm Running on Workarounds?

If the way your firm operates has evolved through years of adaptations, habits, and informal processes, it may be time to look at the structure underneath them.

The Firm Structure Assessment helps you identify where responsibility, decision-making, workflows, and leadership involvement are creating unnecessary friction—and gives you a clearer picture of what your firm needs to operate intentionally.

90-minute assessment + customized operational blueprint + 20-minute follow-up call. Ready to look beneath the workarounds?

Book Your Firm Structure Assessment → https://legacycontractsllc.setmore.com/services/b92de36d-63f6-4c8d-906e-5a9bca6c38f0