Why “It’s Always Been Done This Way” Is Costing Your Firm More Than You Think

In most law firms, administrative processes are not designed from scratch. They are built over time.

One change leads to another. Responsibilities shift. Workarounds are introduced. Over time, those adjustments form a process that works well enough to continue.

But working does not mean efficient.

Many firms are operating on processes that reflect decisions made years ago, not how work should be done today.

How Legacy Processes Take Hold

Most administrative workflows exist because they solved a problem at a specific point in time. A task was assigned to a certain role because it made sense then. A process was created to address a temporary need that quietly became permanent.

These decisions are rarely revisited. They accumulate.

Over time, layers of adjustments build on top of each other. What started as a practical solution becomes a fixed part of the operation, even if the original need no longer exists.

The result is a system that reflects history, not current reality.

Why These Processes Go Unchallenged

If work is getting done, there is little incentive to question how it is being done. Attorneys receive what they need. Staff complete their tasks. From the outside, the system appears functional.

But that view is limited.

Without visibility into how work flows, firms do not see the inefficiencies embedded in those processes. They do not see where time is being lost, where roles are misaligned, or where unnecessary steps still exist.

So the process continues, largely unchanged.

Where the Cost Shows Up

The cost of legacy processes is rarely obvious. It shows up in small, consistent inefficiencies.

Tasks are handled by higher-cost roles than necessary. Steps that no longer serve a purpose remain in place. Work moves through multiple people when it could be completed by one.

Individually, these issues are easy to overlook. Collectively, they increase cost, slow down service, and limit the firm’s ability to scale.

This is where we often see the biggest opportunity. Not in fixing something broken, but in improving something that has simply been accepted.

Why Incremental Fixes Fall Short

Most firms try to improve processes through small adjustments. A task is reassigned. A step is removed. A new tool is introduced.

These changes can help, but they rarely go far enough.

If the underlying process is outdated, incremental fixes only improve the margins. They do not address whether the process itself still makes sense.

We've witnessed that meaningful improvement requires a different approach.

Rethinking the Work, Not Just the Process

Real improvement starts by stepping back and asking a more fundamental question. If we were designing this today, would we do it this way?

That shift in perspective changes the conversation. It moves the focus away from maintaining existing processes and toward building ones that align with current needs.

This often leads to simpler workflows, better role alignment, and fewer unnecessary steps.

What This Looks Like in Practice

We worked with a regional law firm that had developed its administrative workflows over many years. Like most firms, nothing appeared to be broken. Work was getting done, and there were no major complaints from attorneys.

However, when we evaluated how work was actually being performed, it became clear that many processes no longer reflected the firm’s current structure. Tasks were being handled by higher-cost roles, workflows included unnecessary steps, and responsibilities had shifted without being formally realigned.

We approached the engagement by rethinking the work from the ground up. Instead of making incremental adjustments, we evaluated which tasks were necessary, who should be performing them, and how they should flow through the organization.

From there, we helped the firm redesign key workflows, realign responsibilities, and eliminate steps that no longer added value.

The result was a more efficient operating model with reduced administrative effort, improved turnaround times, and better alignment between roles and responsibilities.

This is a common outcome. Once firms move beyond legacy assumptions, the path to improvement becomes much clearer.

The Mattern Perspective

Efficiency is not just about improving what exists. It is about questioning whether it should exist at all.

Many firms are operating within structures that made sense at one point but have never been revisited. Almost any service model can perform well if it is designed intentionally and managed with clear expectations and accountability.

The challenge is taking the time to step back and evaluate it objectively.

If your firm has not revisited its administrative workflows in several years, there is a strong likelihood that inefficiencies are built into the process. That is typically where we see the most meaningful opportunities for improvement.

If you would like to discuss what this could look like in your environment, feel free to reach out to us at info@matternassoc.com.