General Counsel Panelists to Legal Marketers: 'You Have to Find Ways to Change With Us'
Three top in-house lawyers told attendees of the Legal Marketing Association's annual conference in Atlanta that firms must take more initiative in learning their clients' business.
April 10, 2019 at 05:47 PM
4 minute read
Mark Smolik, general counsel and chief compliance officer at DHL Supply Chain Americas, says the average cost of a senior member of his in-house legal team is $174 an hour. Thus, his message to hundreds of legal marketing professionals gathered Wednesday in Atlanta for their annual conference was loud and clear: “I can't afford to pay you $800 an hour.”
Dubbed “An Inside View: General Counsel Perspectives on the Use of Alternative Legal Service Providers and Artificial Intelligence,” the panel discussion featuring Smolik and other top in-house lawyers was a plea to law firms to remain relevant amid the trend of more work becoming commoditized and going in-house. Corporate Counsel parent company ALM Media sponsored the panel, which was moderated by Richard Caruso, ALM Media vice president and general manager for legal media.
“With the incredible amount of innovation and change we're seeing in our industry, this is resulting in fundamental business model changes for us, which should be impacting you,” said Alexia Maas, senior vice president and GC at Volvo Financial Services. At least in the compliance area, “it is no longer good enough for us and thus for you to be just a support function. We are changing so you have to find ways to change with us.”
While implementing technology and using outside vendors are a large part of the modern legal department's evolution, all of DHL's customer contracts are handled by trained nonlawyers, and Maas says her department is “embracing” legal tech disrupters to help with the legal compliance function. For example, the panelists echoed a familiar refrain: Take more initiative in learning our business.
“We will continue to look for [alternatives] in discrete areas like technology or document review, but the real threat for firms are other firms that become better partners with their clients than your firms,” said Will Barnette, associate general counsel at The Home Depot.
As an example, Smolik cited the firm that pitched him when a major suit was filed against Ohio-based DHL in federal court. That firm, which sent a two-page analysis of the case—covering the judge, opposing counsel, a proposed strategy as well as a budget—got the work. The document, Smolik said, was drafted by a young associate.
“That approach was very, very entrepreneurial,” he said. “That was six years ago, and I still turn to [that firm].”
To Maas, a firm's ability to understand the business on an operational level is “what is going to differentiate the [alternative legal service providers] from the firms.”
“I feel this is where we're still missing, where we're not connecting on the level we should be,” she said. “Help us help you operationalize your expertise because we need that quick fast executive guidance.”
In addition to learning their clients' business on a deeper level, Maas said firms also would be well-served to “mirror what we are doing.”
“We are embracing disrupters and working with them to find a new way forward in this new world, and I would suggest you do the same: 'Is there something you can do together to offer to us?'”
Smolik pointed out that, even though he is DHL's top lawyer, he is far from the only person involved in major buying decisions on behalf of his department. In fact, the new entrants in the market, Deloitte and PwC, for example, are approaching companies' chief financial officers, whom they have known and worked with for several years first, he added.
“You're failing to recognize that the company behind us is run by entrepreneurs, and they're expecting us to act that way, and we're expecting you to act that way,” Smolik said. “The law firm that speaks as a businessperson first and lawyer second is going to get more and more of our business.”
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 All'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
How Marsh & McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
Trump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means for Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
After Mysterious Parting With Last GC, Photronics Fills Vacancy
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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