Legal's End-of-Year Check-Up and a Plan for 2019 Improvements
The final weeks of the year are a time to reflect and prepare for what is to come. For general counsel, it's no different as they take stock of legal department performance and set a direction for 2019.
December 26, 2018 at 11:17 AM
6 minute read
The final weeks of the year are a time to reflect and prepare for what is to come. For general counsel, it's no different as they take stock of legal department performance and set a direction for 2019.
The Year Ahead
Facing competitive threats, most companies are rapidly undertaking digital transformation projects, expanding into new sectors and markets and revamping business strategies. The political, regulatory and social landscape remains volatile. At the same time, legal departments possess relatively flat budgets with growing expectations while facing increased scrutiny to quantify their contributions to the company.
Despite this backdrop, legal's core mandate remains unchanged. Legal must support the achievement of business objectives by informing and enhancing the company's strategic position, reducing and managing legal and compliance risk, and efficiently executing business priorities. That translates into the following department goals:
- Enhance Strategic Position. Protect and extend legal assets (e.g., IP, reputation, market position/regulatory rights) and provide strategic clarity.
- Execute Business Strategy. Reduce legal cost/revenue and both execute work and provide advice in a timely manner.
- Reduce Risk. Manage legal and compliance risk appetite, and efficiently transfer or mitigate unnecessary risk.
In short, legal departments must support the company's competitive position, improve corporate decision-making and ensure the most efficient allocation and production with lean resources.
2018 Report Card
On the above goals, legal departments demonstrated mixed performance in 2018.
The good news is that 80 percent of general counsel and legal operations officers rate their departments as “effective.” Moreover, 88 percent believe their department manages the company's legal and compliance risks to the appropriate level.
But this confidence belies some less favorable indicators. Only 30 percent of legal departments have successfully reduced the cost of legal services to their company over the past three years. And just 9 percent of all legal departments believe that the entire department understands the firm's strategic objectives and maintains processes to help individual lawyers appropriately prioritize work.
And if anything, business clients are even more uncertain of legal department efficacy. In a survey of more than 1,700 senior executives and middle managers across the globe, legal's support led to appropriate legal and compliance risk-taking on less than 60 percent of projects. Worse, direct legal support led to on-time delivery of projects less than half the time.
Clearly there is room for improvement.
Planning for 2019: The Drivers of Department Effectiveness
How can legal departments improve in 2019? As a starting point, most general counsel set goals that directly link to business objectives (reduce legal spend by a certain percent, execute a merger, enter a high-growth market, etc.). But to build the capabilities for long-term success, legal departments should focus on the drivers behind the desired outcomes. That is, legal departments should focus on the capabilities that drive goal achievement. To that end, Gartner has identified four drivers of department effectiveness:
- Strategic Alignment. The extent to which legal department structure and services are in line with business objectives.
- Quality of Legal Work. The production of legal work that is fit-for-business-purpose.
- The conversion of legal resources into business throughput (used legal guidance).
- Legal Acumen. The business' capacity to make legally-informed decisions.
Fortunately, clear management focus and prioritization can help departments improve performance across these dimensions of effectiveness. Heading into next year, general counsel and heads of legal operations should ask themselves a few critical questions:
Strategic Alignment
General counsel should ensure that the legal department and legal staff focus on the highest-value work. Lawyers must assess and prioritize the work they take on by identifying high-value projects and offloading lower-value projects.
- Looking at the next two-three years, how do you expect the nature of your work to change?
- What work is most strategically important to the company?
- Does this work require legal supervision at all and, if not, what nonlegal actor is best positioned to execute it?
Quality of Legal Work
General counsel should build processes that guide important work quality trade-offs as they occur by identifying critical decision points in workflows where legal staff or outside counsel tend to make the costliest choices.
- What aspects of legal work quality (accurate, comprehensive, timely, actionable, etc.) is most important to the business client?
- For this work, are there material costs to additional legal accuracy or risk management?
Department Productivity
Heads of legal operations should reduce legal department time spent on unnecessary or redundant work, enable internal and external partners to handle discrete legal tasks, and improve department processes to minimize business delays.
- How do we identify and eliminate work without a clear legal purpose?
- What sets of legal work can be codified to help business owners' access critical legal knowledge or independently execute work?
- What legal processes can be owned by paralegals, legal process outsourcers, or software automation?
Legal Acumen
Legal acumen is the business client's ability and desire to involve Legal when uncertain and appropriate adopt Legal guidance. Increasing legal acumen helps legal department improve the ratio of “good” clients with whom you have a strong working relationship. A few core questions can help assess the level of acumen across your business.
- Do business partners believe the law is important to company success?
- Are business partners able to apply legal advice and act on it to reduce compliance risks without seriously disrupting work processes?
- Do business partners understand the ways in which work processes deal with legal and compliance risk?
- Is managing legal and compliance risk seen as a critical part of work responsibilities?
Future department success will be measured by the speed and cost with which a legal department transforms new conditions—i.e., changing laws, regulations and interpretations— into strategic insight and standardized guidance embedded in operations to increase the company's capacity to make better decisions. Answering these critical questions will highlight places for the legal department to focus investment and create new processes that drive performance. It is only with this focus on the drivers of effectiveness that legal departments will be able to support business at necessary speed and cost while reducing the operational friction that limits corporate productivity.
Abbott Martin is VP of legal team research at Gartner, a research and advisory company headquartered in Stamford, Connecticut.
|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 AllA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readThree Legal Technology Trends That Can Maximize Legal Team Efficiency and Productivity
Corporate Confidentiality Unlocked: Leveraging Common Interest Privilege for Effective Collaboration
11 minute readTrending 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