President's Perspective

Waking from Success

By David A. Saichek

We need to reexamine and reform our methods for delivering continuing legal education. Seminars, books, tapes - everything!

Why? Our CLE efforts have been a spectacular success. In times of financial success it is challenging to envision anything other than dollar signs. For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1996, our CLE seminars revenue was $1.82 million. Direct expenses were $1.14 million. Gross operating profit was $680,000. Even after "charging" that department $347,000 worth of general overhead (governance and administration), the net operating profit was $333,000.

CLE books took in $1.35 million and had direct expenses of $957,000 for a gross operating profit of $396,000. After being charged with governance and administration the net operating profit was $105,000. So far in FY 1997 we are on a pace to beat last year, according to our director of finances, Geoff McCloskey.

Our CLE departments have delivered excellent products, competitive prices, and some measure of general satisfaction. This kind of profit allows the Bar to use nondues revenue to fund the work of commissions and committees concerned with delivery of legal services, independence of the judiciary, ethics, consumer protection, defense of indigents, lawyer referral, law-related education, outreach to media and other professions, and studies in diversity, professionalism, technology, fee disputes, local bar relations, and assistance to solo and small firm practitioners. Profitable CLE also helps to fund publications that do not make a profit such as our monthly newsletter and the Wisconsin Lawyer.

For FY 1996 our revenue from dues accounted for only 28.88 percent of total revenue. Our total revenue in FY 1996 was $7.75 million.

The problem? If CLE revenues go down by as much as 35 percent we would need to make drastic decisions concerning dues increases, staff layoffs, pricing of services, and wholesale reductions of our efforts under SCR 10.02 in "improving the administration of justice" and "to promote the innovation, development and improvement of means to deliver legal services to the people of Wisconsin." In FY 1996 dues alone were not even enough to fund staff salaries of $2.37 million plus benefits for a total of more than $3 million.

Staff has grown in the last 15 years from 35 to 80. This could mean we have failed to control costs and increase efficiency. The Bar Center's lower level was renovated recently to add workstations and reduce meeting space. We could "improve" ourselves into needing a new bar center which, even if not luxurious, could be very expensive. If the idea of a new bar center is questionable at the moment, just think how downright disagreeable it could be if our nondues revenue went down!

We need to rethink our organizational structure, delivery of services, and efficiency of staff and management. For something so important as CLE and its attendant revenues the time for reexamination is now.¹ There are a fair number of members who feel that our CLE offerings are:

• too expensive
• too inflexible
• too inconvenient
• too theoretical
• too time-consuming

How can we improve our methods of delivery? We should consider:

• doing more than scratching the surface of desktop delivery
• self-study methods
• auditing without credit at lower prices
• videotape rental
• CLE on the Internet (some courses are already available in California and other states)
• searchable CD-ROMs containing all outlines for the previous year
• dial-up specific parts of seminars allowing the viewer or listener to select the portions as she wants them, which has come to be known as a "salad bar" approach
• reciprocal acceptance of CLE credits among states

Consideration of these approaches could improve our services to members and give us a chance to preserve some profitability as we embrace the future. Delays which might seem prudent in times of high profitability could spell disaster when the world of online CLE passes us by.

In December your Executive Committee convened State Bar 2000, a kind of "technology summit" facilitated by consultants with expertise in organizational matters for nonprofit corporations and governmental units. How might decision-making be restructured for an electronic age to deliver services to our members more efficiently at lower cost? The Board of Governors should assure follow-up to this conference to coordinate the necessary planning and possible rule changes required to replace contentment with rapid progress.

This question needs to be asked of our officers, governors, Standing Committee on CLE, Wisconsin Board of Bar Examiners, all segments of the Bar, and you the member: Shall we actually plan for the future? Or perhaps we prefer to take a nap.

Endnotes