Then I tried to do an analysis of the book collection based on practice area. What i wanted the management to compare was what the practice group brought in to the bottom line, compared to their book collection, since in a couple of instances their view of their place in the firm universe differed from the overall picture of their contribution, if you catch my drift. That's the behavior i wanted to change. Just in case - most law firms just simply cannot afford that philosophy any more. I think cost recovery is not widespread because I think there's a disconnect about the cost it takes to have an information resource.
Clients ddon't want to pay for research.
I have no idea if there is common wisdom about this aspect of legal practice, or what. It is even harder when various formats are involved, since in any mid sized to large firm, there is such spectrum as to tolerance for electronic formats. I did figure out after a time that , in the last analysis, it is a law firm partnership business decision whether to recover the costs for research and resources, period, regardless of format, through the hourly rate, a research fee, or whatever. Once i figured that out, I sort of let my self off the hook. I felt I had fulfilled my obligation to thoroughly present the costs of various formats, various titles, offer suggestions as to rebalancing issues, but it's their business to make the ultimate decision.