Marketing for Attorneys through Abandoning Billable Hours

The September 2008 edition of Corporate Counsel contains an article about Pfizer that has important implications in the marketing for attorneys world.  The article mentions how as of January 1, 2008, Pfizer is directing practically all of its labor and employment matters to the law firm of Jackson Lewis for a period of two years.  Rather than using billable hours or flat fees for each case or matter, Pfizer and Jackson Lewis have agreed that there will be a yearly cap on legal fees.

From my discussion with Cisco a couple of years ago, the arrangement between Pfizer and Jackson Lewis appears to be similar to an arrangement that Cisco has used with outside counsel for certain categories of legal work.  The Corporate Counsel article also notes that Tyco International has used a one-firm arrangement for product liability work with Shook, Hardy & Bacon, for corporate matters with White & Case, and for European work with Eversheds.  The article mentions other companies that have adopted a single-firm approach, but notes that the number of such firms is relatively small and that the idea of capping fees on a yearly basis is rare.

Lawyers who are creative in their billing arrangements will have a competitive advantage over those who cling strictly to billable hours.  A campaign involving internet marketing for attorneys should include references to the attorneys' willingness to implement alternative billing methods.  Why are such references attractive to clients and potential clients?  Clients can benefit from the predictability of a cap on fees, and from the more congruent alignment between the interests of clients and outside law firms when alternative billing is used.

Any comments on the relevance of alternative billing to internet marketing for lawyers?