First-Ever Ranking of Alternative Legal Service Provider Brands—and the Big Four Aren't On Top
Thomson Reuters took the No. 1 spot.
October 12, 2017 at 06:30 AM
4 minute read
The Big Four accounting firms
A brand new survey has for the first time ranked the brand strength of alternative legal service providers—and the Big Four accounting firms aren't on top.
The report, by legal market research company Acritas, instead named Thomson Reuters as the legal market's strongest alternative brand, ahead of PricewaterhouseCoopers, EY and Deloitte. The final Big Four member, KPMG, placed sixth, ranking behind Axiom.
Acritas interviewed over 1,000 in-house counsel at billion-dollar organizations across more than 50 countries and asked them to name the most well-known legal service providers, excluding law firms; those that they perceived most favorably; and those that are the most innovative.
Acritas CEO Lisa Hart Shepherd said that while traditional law firms are still “the preferred option” for most in-house counsel, they only have limited time to adapt their businesses in the face of growing competition from alternative service providers.
“It is out of date to consider legal services from lawyers as not competing with those from nonlawyers or through technology solutions,” she said. “There will always be room in the market for boutique high-end advisers, but for the large firms, they need to consider these broader needs and develop smarter, more flexible and cost-effective services, or risk losing market share to a whole host of new competitors they have largely discounted to date.”
The top 10 ranking is rounded out by LexisNexis, which has a strategic partnership with The American Lawyer parent company ALM; flexible resourcing pioneer Lawyers On Demand, which spun out from U.K.-based law firm Berwin Leighton Paisner in 2012; information services company Wolters Kluwer; and intellectual property management company CPA Global.
The Big Four accounting firms have in recent years invested particularly heavily in legal services. The group now collectively employ about 8,500 attorneys globally, while The American Lawyer recently revealed that PwC is launching a U.S. law firm.
PwC actually led the Acritas survey for top-of-mind awareness. Shepherd said that the Big Four's scale and visibility as leading professional services organizations “lends a significant advantage to their brand platform.”
But Thomson Reuters took the top spot overall after being named by clients as their most favored nontraditional legal brand. It also scored three times as high as any other alternative provider for innovation, with LexisNexis a distant second. Nearly three-quarters of clients said that they haven't seen any meaningful innovation from external legal advisers, however. Surprisingly, of those that were recognized as innovative, only one-third were alternative service providers. The rest were traditional law firms.
While this marks the first time that Acritas has measured the brand strength of alternative legal service providers, the company has ranked law firms for more than a decade. Its latest Global Elite brand index, published earlier this week by The American Lawyer, revealed that Baker McKenzie's brand is now twice as strong as any other law firm's.
Baker McKenzie has topped Acritas' Global Elite Brand Index ever since the report's inception in 2010, and this year widened the gap to the rest of the market. Its brand strength is now more than double that of second-placed DLA Piper and five times that of Sidley Austin and White & Case, which both ranked 15th.
Acritas' law firm survey highlighted that while alternative service providers are becoming a more significant part of the market, that has yet to translate into brand strength. EY was the highest-placed alternative legal service provider in the global elite ranking, but was nowhere near the leading law firms, ranking only 77th.
But in another sign that suggests the Big Four will become increasingly serious competitors to Big Law firms, EY would rank among the top 20 elite law firm brands if the responses were limited to in-house lawyers under the age of 40.
Chris Johnson is based in London, where he writes about global law firms and the business of law. Contact him at [email protected]. On Twitter: @chris_t_johnson.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: TLI's Pennsylvania Legal Awards 2025
- 2Florida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
- 3Supreme Court Drops Facebook's Appeal in Securities Case as 'Improvidently Granted'
- 4Newsmakers: Scott Bailey Joins Jones Day’s Corporate Practice in Dallas
- 5The Swinging Pendulum of Title IX Politics
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250