Global Law Firm Network Report Suggests Tougher Competition for Big Law
The report said the results “reaffirm the widely held belief that today's GCs are continuing their quest to find a panacea for the provision of their global legal services–a provider that combines high quality service, a global footprint, local insight and cultural awareness."
March 13, 2018 at 05:13 PM
4 minute read
Photo credit: ALM
Big global law firms are increasingly feeling the competition from independent or boutique law firm networks, as nearly half of the in-house counsel in a recent survey said they use or intend to use such a network.
The report, “Global Legal Services in a Disruptive World,” was published by ALM/Legal Week in partnership with Interlaw, itself a global law firm network. It was published this February after surveying more than 100 general counsel and senior in-house lawyers across 41 countries. The British publication Legal Week is part of ALM, which also publishes Corporate Counsel.
The report said the results “reaffirm the widely held belief that today's GCs are continuing their quest to find a panacea for the provision of their global legal services—a provider that combines high quality service, a global footprint, local insight and cultural awareness.”
Some 77 percent of the in-house lawyers surveyed described their experience of using law firm networks as “excellent” or “good.” And 87 percent said they either “strongly agreed” or “agreed” with the statement “I'm increasingly more focused on ensuring I receive a quality service in each jurisdiction in which my organization operates, than [on] the structure of my legal services provider.”
While respondents used words such as “convenient,” “professional” and “reliable” to describe the networks, not everyone was so positive. Some said they found the networks “complicated,” “confusing,” “impractical” and “inflexible.”
As some major law firms have been retreating from international jurisdictions, the research found that 83 percent of international firms' lawyers are based in the U.K., Europe or North America. The report said this raises “legitimate questions about whether such firms do indeed have a truly global presence.”
The report quoted one general counsel, Tom Flynn, of the U.S. tech company Tangoe Inc. in Parsippany, New Jersey, as saying he typically receives a better, more responsive experience when using global referral networks.
“On one occasion when I ventured out and used a large international law firm for advice on data privacy, I had the worst experience I have had since using outside counsel,” Flynn was quoted as saying in the report. “They basically gave me a collection of comments on things from all of their local offices. There was no practical advice. I had a junior person, and it cost me a fortune.”
Other general counsel talked about some Big Law firms not always having a lawyer with the needed expertise in the right location.
Vincent Cordo Jr., global sourcing officer for the legal department at the Shell Oil Co. in Houston, said networks have been “extremely useful when we need to source local counsel in areas where we might not have that thumbprint available.”
Along similar lines, Jordan Kanfer, executive vice president and general counsel of NTT America Inc. in New York, told Corporate Counsel in a recent interview that he often prefers boutique law firms when looking globally.
“A boutique firm that is highly specialized, local to a particular jurisdiction or has significant experience with a particular issue is generally a better fit than a big firm that may, or may not, have someone with the right expertise,” Kanfer said. “And it's always going to be more cost-effective.”
The ALM report concluded: “In the end, the geographic arms race to create a global platform that offers clients rapid access to top quality and seamless legal advice, regardless of where in the world they are headquartered or operate, rages on.”
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
© 2025 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 All'Be Comfortable Being Uncomfortable': Pearls of Wisdom From 2024 GC Q&As
Trending Stories
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