What Makes a Law Firm Innovative? For GCs, It's About Size
The “Global Trends in Hiring Outside Counsel” report found that legal departments regard small law firms as more innovative than their larger counterparts, and are more satisfied with their service.
January 19, 2018 at 01:35 PM
4 minute read
There are several reasons legal departments may look beyond well known, large law firms when choosing their outside counsel. Cost concerns, for example, or wanting local expertise. But according to the “Global Trends in Hiring Outside Counsel” report, many often turn to smaller firms because they believe they are more innovative than their larger counterparts.
The report, a survey of over 300 general counsel and senior in-house lawyers, was commissioned by startup Globality and conducted by The Lawyer Research Service. It found that more legal departments, 19 percent, were dissatisfied with their larger law firm counsel than they were with their smaller ones, 6 percent.
What's more, half of the respondents said they work with smaller firms because they are more innovative, while 63 percent also said they do the same because small firms provide better client services. The survey defined small firms as those with “500 or less lawyers,” said Alex Reynolds, director of legal practice at Globality.
Like larger firms, small firms may likely have introduced things like case, matter, or project management, as well as e-billing or e-discovery technology in-house, Reynolds said.
But unlike larger firms, small firms have a relatively easy time of implementing these technologies, and adjusting to the operational changes they require. “There are less levels of bureaucracy in these firms, they tend to be more agile,” Reynolds said. “So what this means is that they are able to introduce change quicker and implement this change much more effectively.”
What's more, smaller firms are more open to implementing technology and internal changes because “they tend to be less siloed than some of the larger international law firms,” he noted. “There is more of a collaborative function established in these law firms, which makes their ability to innovate much easier and makes access to ideas and the sharing of ideas a lot easier.”
So while larger firms may have more capital to purchase and implement legal technologies, smaller firms are more receptive and able to bring such changes in-house in the first place.
But finding such smaller law firms can be difficult for legal departments, who often do not know where to begin looking. Forty-four percent said they primarily rely on pre-existing relationships in their established personal network to source legal service providers, while 16 percent primarily rely on referrals from their network.
Most legal departments, 86 percent, however, expressed excitement for technologies that allowed them to source and communicate with legal providers outside their network.
Such technologies are already becoming available for corporate legal departments. Globality's core offering, for example, is using a combination of artificial intelligence and in-house experts to match multinational companies with small and midsized firms globally. In November 2017, the startup announced it had raised $25 million from a handful of investors.
But Globality is far from the only outside counsel matching service on the market.
Vendor performance assessment startup Qualmet, for instance, launched in April 2017. The company created a system to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate law firms and other third-party services, and compare them against one another.
Meanwhile, global law firm Dentons has also entered the fold by launching “Nextlaw In-House Solutions,” a consultancy program aimed at helping legal departments select outside counsel, adopt technology and implement project management, among other things.
Other companies, such as Select Counsel, have also sprung up in the industry with the goal of connecting clients to more boutique firms across the United States.
And among calls for more data sharing among corporate legal departments, there may be more outside counsel matching services launching up in the near future. Consultancy AdvanceLaw, for example, is the midst of 18-month project, to determine how best to leverage data on outside counsel to inform spending decisions, such as whether to use preferred provider panels or charge a flat fee. The project, which began in early 2017, is being done with participation from more than 25 general counsel from companies such as MasterCard and Sony Electronics.
The growing development of technology and services may very well be in response to the demand from in-house legal departments. Which means it may only be a matter of time before many legal departments are able to more easily select outside counsel from a broader base— and before small law firms potentially see their client base expand.
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Courts Demonstrate Growing Willingness to Sanction Courtroom Misuse of AI
- 2The New Rules of AI: Part 1—Managing Risk
- 3Change Is Coming to the EEOC—But Not Overnight
- 4Med Mal Defense Win Stands as State Appeals Court Rejects Arguments Over Blocked Cross-Examination
- 5Rejecting 'Blind Adherence to Outdated Precedent,’ US Judge Goes His Own Way on Attorney Fees
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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