Managing a global legal department: Collaborating within a global legal department
If you are lucky enough to work in a global legal department, you will have the opportunity to work with people from other countries and tackle complex and novel issues from many parts of the world.
February 21, 2013 at 04:15 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
This is the second in a four-part series in which Oracle Associate General Counsel Suchitra Narayen, QuisLex CEO Ram Vasudevan and consultant Rees Morrison will discuss the opportunities and challenges facing a global legal department. Read part one here.
If you are lucky enough to work in a global legal department, you will have the opportunity to work with people from other countries and tackle complex and novel issues from many parts of the world. However, for the global legal department to be successful, it will be as important to focus on how you work as it is to define what you do.
Organize legal teams across rather than within geographical regions: While there is an instinctive preference to co-locate legal teams in physical proximity to each other, organizing functional legal teams across geographical regions increases knowledge sharing, and leverages local legal expertise efficiently. Organizing legal teams across regions also facilitates implementation of a “follow the sun” model, to optimize legal support for the company.
Invest in building relationships and trust within the department: Lawyers, like everyone else, have their own comfort zones and trusted relationships based on physical proximity and a sense of similarity or familiarity. To be successful, a global legal department must foster the same sense of camaraderie and trust across a distributed and diverse organization. Periodic in-person meetings can help build and strengthen internal cohesion and collaboration. However, regional or international legal meetings are expensive and infrequent. Between these in-person meetings, video conferencing, which is readily available at relatively modest prices, can go a long way to personalize and build rapport between legal colleagues. If video conferencing is not readily available, periodic phone calls are preferable to communicating only via email.
Balance centralized consistency and localization: A point of tension may arise between centralized headquarters-based legal groups who wish to deploy a single consistent global template, program or process, and attorneys elsewhere who press to localize everything to their country-specific requirements, on the basis that their particular country or region is “different” and therefore needs special accommodation. The right answer of course, lies somewhere in between. It may be critical to meet local product compliance requirements. It may be less important to localize and translate a contract for a 1-2 week equipment loan a few times each year. However, compromise may be difficult to achieve without a pre-existing relationship and trust that allows the attorneys to discuss issues frankly and agree on what is critical and what is a personal preference or “nice to have.”
Deploy common technology platforms and provide equal access to data: Unless checked, a global legal department can quickly degenerate to isolated local pockets with inconsistent policies, practices and tools. Common policies, technology platforms and access to centralized data not only improve efficiency but also enhance alignment and collaboration across a global legal department.
Be open to new perspectives and approaches: Many lawyers have practiced only in one country. In some cases, due to licensing restrictions, lawyers have spent their entire careers in a single state in a single country—perhaps practicing in a single area of the law. Rather than assume that your way is the only correct way, accept that wherever you are, and however long you have practiced, there are several hundred jurisdictions where the laws and legal approaches may differ. Indulge your curiosity and take advantage of these opportunities to learn and leverage new approaches, without falling into the quagmire of endless localization.
Working within a global legal department can be an enriching and rewarding experience, provided that the department invests consciously in the relationships, tools and perspectives that foster effective collaboration across a distributed and diverse legal organization.
Questions about this article may be addressed to Mr. Vasudevan at [email protected].
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 AllBallooning Workloads, Dearth of Advancement Opportunities Prime In-House Attorneys to Pull Exit Hatch
The Reason a GC Abruptly Departs May Not Be What You Think
Trending Stories
- 1The Moving Goalposts of Overtime Exemption: Texas Judge Invalidates 2024 Salary Threshold Rule
- 2New Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
- 3Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Office & Dragons
- 4Patent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
- 5Transforming Dispute Processes in Law: The Impact of Large Language Models
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