<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Income Spread</title>
	<link>http://blog.altmanweil.com/2007/10/28/income-spread/</link>
	<description>Lawyer compensation and law firm finance</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 06:27:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://blog.altmanweil.com/2007/10/28/income-spread/#comment-42</link>
		<author>John</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.altmanweil.com/2007/10/28/income-spread/#comment-42</guid>
		<description>The problem with compensation spread lies in how it is used.  In my view, it is an interesting statistic that results from calculations using already set compensation figures.  I certainly don't have the experience level of AW, but, I find it hard to believe there can be any circumstance in which it is appropriate to use spread as a target when determining compensation, unless of course a firm is trying to reduce the number of partners.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem with compensation spread lies in how it is used.  In my view, it is an interesting statistic that results from calculations using already set compensation figures.  I certainly don&#8217;t have the experience level of AW, but, I find it hard to believe there can be any circumstance in which it is appropriate to use spread as a target when determining compensation, unless of course a firm is trying to reduce the number of partners.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
