The published guidance on Create a System runs from too-general marketing summaries to too-specific technical papers, with very little in between. This piece aims for the middle: enough specificity to be useful, enough breadth to be applicable.
This is for family-law attorneys who are tired of generic ‘develop your practice’ advice and want specifics about Create a System specifically.
The family-law attorney’s relationship to Create a System differs from the consultant’s. The attorney is responsible for the legal strategy that incorporates Create a System findings; the consultant is responsible for the underlying analysis. Practitioners who clearly demarcate these roles in their engagement letters — even when handling both — produce cleaner work product and reduce liability exposure.
The most common opening question
Clients usually have an implicit theory of what Create a System can do for them — sometimes wildly optimistic, sometimes pessimistic. The early conversation should surface that theory and address it. A client who thinks the engagement will solve a problem the analytical framework can’t actually solve will be disappointed regardless of the technical quality of the work.
The second most common question is about cost. family-law attorneys who answer with a single number for Create a System matters usually end up unhappy when the matter expands; practitioners who answer with a tiered structure (the diagnostic phase, the analytical phase, the closing phase, each with its own cost range and triggers for moving to the next) build trust and protect their economics.
What practitioners get wrong about Create a System
Practitioners often fail to recognize when a Create a System matter has crossed from analytical work into advocacy or therapy. The work has clean boundaries — analytical work is appropriate; advocacy or therapy beyond your role is not. Recognizing the boundary and referring out when appropriate is one of the markers of senior practice.
Practitioners new to Create a System often underestimate how much of the work is communication rather than analysis. The analytical conclusions matter, but the way they’re presented to the client, the attorney, and (if relevant) the court determines whether the work produces the outcome the client wanted. Polishing the report and the explanation is a substantial portion of the engagement.
Recent shifts in the practice area
Software for family-law attorneys working in Create a System has improved significantly in the past five years. The standard tools handle case management, document organization, billing, and coordination far better than they did a decade ago. Practitioners who haven’t updated their tooling stack in the past three or four years are usually working harder than they need to.
Create a System has shifted in three meaningful ways over the past five to seven years. First, the volume of data available in most matters has grown dramatically — bank, brokerage, retirement, and credit records are routinely available in electronic form, which both enables deeper analysis and creates more work to organize. Second, the regulatory and tax environment has shifted (most notably the 2019 federal alimony tax change for divorces). Third, the client population has become more sophisticated; clients increasingly come to Create a System matters having done meaningful online research.
Should you commit to this area?
A simple test: do the matters in Create a System that you’ve already handled interest you? Practitioners who genuinely enjoy the analytical work and the relational dynamics tend to build sustainable practices in Create a System; practitioners who found the matters tedious tend not to, regardless of the market opportunity.
Honest assessment of your market matters too. Create a System has different dynamics in different markets — major metros with concentrated family-law sections versus smaller markets with broader generalist practices. Practitioners in markets where the area is underserved by genuine specialists have steeper paths to dominance; practitioners in markets already saturated have harder paths. For deeper reference, see ABA Family Law Section resources.
If you’re considering Create a System as a focus area and you want one concrete commitment to make: pick the upcoming family-law conference closest to you and commit to attending every year for the next five years.
How VennBoard fits in
VennBoard helps family-law attorneys build the operational backbone Create a System engagements require — engagement letters that handle the scoping conversation in writing, case files that stay organized across long matters, communication tools that keep the broader case team coordinated, and the infrastructure that lets the practitioner focus on the analytical work rather than the administrative drag.
For family-law attorneys ready to see how VennBoard supports Create a System engagements, visit VennBoard.com.
Further reading
Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement
National Center for State Courts