What does it mean to be a "national" law firm?

Dentons global chairman Joe Andrew and Greenberg Traurig executive chairman Richard Rosenbaum have been hashing out the question in dueling letters published in The American Lawyer this week, each leader implicitly—or not-so-implicitly—critiquing the other.

The claim that no truly "national" U.S. law firms yet exist was central to Dentons' splashy announcement two weeks ago unveiling its latest growth strategy. The global giant is targeting combinations with existing firms all across the U.S. to dramatically increase its American footprint.

Rosenbaum—whose firm already boasts 31 U.S. offices, more than any of its rivals—disagreed. He described Greenberg Traurig's "march" from Miami, through Florida, to New York and then across the rest of the nation that started in 1984.

"We have done it as one unified firm," he said in his letter Tuesday, which did not name Dentons but left no doubt as to whom he was referring.

Dentons leadership has been explicit about its "dual partnership" model for adding new constituent firms in the U.S. Stopping short of full integration, Dentons argues, avoids the risk and time expenditures that lateral growth or complete mergers would entail.

"Lawyers are able to protect and promote the culture of their firms while also becoming partners in a national partnership that incentivizes them to work collaboratively and has a single global conflict policy, national training and recruiting programs, one set of engagement terms, one know-your-client policy and one bill, all while partners share a commitment to quality and ethics that puts clients first," Andrew said in his response to Rosenbaum.

Andrew added that it has taken 35 years for Greenberg to assume its current geographic profile, suggesting that his firm's current and future clients want wider coverage across the country now. He cited the Russell 3000, the index of the 3,000 largest publicly traded companies in the U.S., the vast majority of which sit outside the country's 10 largest law markets.

While the Big Four, which all have at least 79 offices across the country, are serving these countries on a truly national scale, no law firm is doing so, at least not yet, Andrew argued.

In stating that Greenberg is a "unified" firm, Rosenbaum implicitly took aim at the perceived looseness of the Dentons model.

"This is a 'people' profession. We are not selling cars or software," he said. "People must be carefully selected and make their selections, know and trust each other and become well-integrated and aligned. These things don't happen overnight."

Andrew's answer: "People are different in different cultures and places."

"Trying to do the 'hard work' of making every office the same is like setting up a franchise where you want the hamburger to always be the same, rather than providing the best local cuisine that is appropriate for the place," he added.

While defending a more traditional growth model, Rosenbaum is hardly a hidebound traditionalist. Earlier this year, when Greenberg announced its own innovation-focused subsidiary, he likened the new venture, Recurve, to Uber and Airbnb, describing it as a platform where law firms and their clients can come together with providers of legal tech services, nimble staffing and real estate experts, artificial intelligence purveyors, and more.

And in a letter to The American Lawyer on Thursday night that began "Don't shoot the messenger," he said it was time to end the discussion.

"As we are all seeing enough politics on television (are you or are you not going to raise taxes on the middle class?), we have now presented the facts, enough said. Clients and talent can determine which ring true," Rosenbaum wrote. "But let's stay cool and avoid the personal attacks, they are beneath you, even when you have no other answers. I wish you well."

|

Read More

Greenberg Traurig Chair Takes Aim at What Makes a Truly National Firm