I ask people all the time if they read the Dilbert comic strip. Invariably the answer is no. I love Dilbert. Although the strip is set in a corporate office setting, lawyers who have worked in big firms will get many of the jokes because big firms operate like big corporations. After all, who likes an unproductive meeting more than a big law firm? And don’t all big firms have dead weight partners like the pointy hair boss in Dilbert? But Dilbert is not just for defense lawyers. Both plaintiff and defense lawyers can learn something by reading Dilbert. Here is a link to the Dilbert website, where you can review the strips. The strip from Sunday September 6, 2009 is a great example of what I love about Dilbert.

The fact that individuals in big corporations do not want to make decisions is a recurring theme in Dilbert. And it’s often true. How many defense lawyers have waited months to get a decision from their client? The bigger the decision, the less one person wants to make it. As a general rule, plaintiff lawyers have no concept that this is how insurance companies and other corporations operate. Plaintiff lawyers assume that the defense lawyer can make one phone call and get a million dollars in settlement authority for a mediation tomorrow. That’s not how it works, even in cases with clear liability and large damages.

In big corporations one person does not want to be held accountable for making a big decision–like paying a lot of the company’s money to settle the case. They don’t want to have to defend the decision when someone up the food chain questions it. In big cases this can lead to a couple of things. First, delay. With delay maybe the case is assigned to someone else or an unlikely defense is spotted. Regardless, for many individuals managing litigation in a big corporation the pros of delay far outweigh the cons.

A second thing that indecision leads to is group think. Many times it takes a meeting to make a big decision. That way, no one person can be held responsible for the decision. Who should participate in the meeting? As many people as possible, since no one who was in the meeting can criticize the decision. But it takes time to schedule the meeting, leading to more delay. Delay and group think are big reasons that trial dates drive settlements. Sometimes everyone on the defense side will know that the company is going to settle the case, but the process has to run its course. With a trial date approaching, the decision can’t be delayed any longer.

The fact that defense costs and expenses can reach six figures usually does not outweigh the factors that cause delay. Defense costs are a cost of doing business. They are bills that have to be paid. For corporations with a lot of litigation, one case will not significantly affect the yearly defense costs. One reason for this is that many defense lawyers are going to bill their eight hours every day. If the company settles this case, then the lawyer is just going to work a different file. Corporations don’t like to talk about this, but I think they know it.

In contrast to defense costs, a settlement is a voluntary payment to a plaintiff. Settlements do not have to be made. High defense costs can be blamed on the plaintiff lawyer for filing a frivolous case, the defense lawyer for over-billing, or even the judge for making bad rulings. Paying too much to settle a case, however, is more likely to be blamed on the person in the company who made the decision.

Ironically, the stars in the corporate world are the employees who are willing to speak out and make big decisions. You would think that all the employees would recognize this fact and act accordingly, but they don’t. Most act like scared sheep. In just a few panes, Dilbert captures the essence of these principles.