Coming out of the shadows
In-house is finally seen as a credible career alternative to private practice but, says Nick Hedley, anyone looking for a seat on the board of directors should start cultivating a strong relationship with the chief executive, rather than just relying on their legal know-how
February 09, 2000 at 07:03 PM
4 minute read
If the 1990s was the decade of unprecedented change for law firms, then it was a period of revolution for in-house legal departments. With so much focus on the mobility of partners, the on-off mergers of various law firms and the arrival of US firms, little attention has been paid to the 10% of the profession who work in-house.
In 1990, the in-house legal adviser was viewed by private practice as the 'poor cousin'; neither rated for technical ability nor necessarily admired for business acumen. A head of legal was invariably a middle manager with responsibility for instructing the company's lawyers, often the same firm that had been instructed since the mists of time, and passing the resultant advice on to senior management. It was a role with little need for creativity and little scope for promotion. It was also a role that existed in only a handful of companies.
The recession of the early '90s was the catalyst for change. As companies began to pick over their battered balance sheets, chief executives began to question how risk was managed internally. The recession also saw a huge drop in the profitability of City firms, so as legal departments were being restructured, there was a pool of talented lawyers who became open-minded to an in-house career. A recent survey showed that more than 50% of two- to four-year qualified City lawyers see their career developing in-house.
Heads of legal are now invariably called general counsel, to differentiate the post from that of the old-style head of legal. General counsel usually report to the chief executive, and are responsible for managing the entire legal department, maintaining relationships with a panel of law firms and keeping the board briefed on the legal risks that the company is running. The role demands intellect, business acumen and managerial skills.
It is also a role that is highly sought-after – general counsel are not just respected by their private practice cousins but, more importantly, are recognised as the 'drivers of the profession'. Senior in-house lawyers receive healthy base salaries that can be significantly enhanced by a package including share options. This can net an individual the long-term capital appreciation unattainable in a law firm.
New in-house legal departments in the UK have often been built on the 'American model'. US investment banks and corporations have traditionally had legal departments that are closely aligned to the business and staffed by a respected general counsel and well-trained legal advisers.
To predict the trend for the next decade, it is useful to study the US in-house legal department further. US companies often recruit their general counsels directly from the partnership ranks of major law firms, which is increasingly prevalent in the UK. In the US there is a regular flow of lawyers between in-house departments and private practice, and this is becoming more common in the UK.
It seems unlikely, however, that the position of general counsel will commonly become a board-level appointment in the UK. The percentage of legally trained executives sitting on the boards of major companies is far higher in the US than in the UK – chief executive of British Airways, Bob Ayling, is the exception in the UK.
But very few of these board-level executives in the US maintain their legal specialism and even fewer continue to operate as general counsel. The position of general counsel is usually to be found one level away from the board, reporting to the chief executive.
If the role of general counsel is a board-level appointment, it is usually on the basis
of an extremely strong relationship between the incumbent and the chief executive.
The UK in-house legal department will see more change as it continues to respond to the increasing demands of its employer. However, compared to the '90s, there might be a period of consolidation with the main developments of the profession occurring in private practice.
As for those wannabe main board-level general counsel, the challenge will be to build a good relationship with a chief executive.
Nick Hedley is a consultant in Baines Gwinner's legal search practice.
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.
Trending Stories
- 1'I'm Staying Everything': Texas Bankruptcy Judge Halts Talc Trials Against J&J
- 2What We Know About the Kentucky Judge Killed in His Chambers
- 3Judge Blasts Authors' Lawyers in Key AI Suit, Says Case Doomed Without Upgraded Team
- 4Ex-Prosecutor and Judge Fatally Shot During Attempted Arrest on Federal Corruption Charges
- 5Federal Judge Won't Stop Title IX Investigation Into Former GMU Law Professor
Who Got The Work
Burr & Forman partner Garry K. Grooms has entered an appearance for 4M Acquisitions and Wallace D. Tweden in a pending environmental lawsuit. The action, filed July 22 in Tennessee Middle District Court by the McKellar Law Group and Mark E. Martin LLC on behalf of Tennessee Riverkeeper, contends that the defendant's violated the Clean Water Act and Tennessee Water Quality Control Act by allowing for the discharge of pollutants into waters of the U.S. without obtaining a National Pollutant Discharge permit. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Aleta A. Trauger, is 3:24-cv-00886, Tennessee Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Tweden et al.
Who Got The Work
Ramsey M. Al-Salam, Gene W. Lee and Stevan R. Stark of Perkins Coie have entered appearances for R-Pac International in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The case, filed Aug. 12 in New York Southern District Court by PinilisHalpern LLP and Friedman Suder & Cooke on behalf of Adasa Inc, asserts a single patent related to wireless sensors used for tagging products. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, is 1:24-cv-06102, Adasa Inc. v. R-Pac International LLC.
Who Got The Work
Walmart has tapped lawyer Nicole M. Wright of Zausmer PC to defend a pending product liability lawsuit. The action was filed Aug. 12 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Wolfe Trial Lawyers on behalf of a plaintiff claiming burns from a defective propane tank. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Matthew F. Leitman, is 2:24-cv-12100, Hill v. Ferrellgas, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Kevin Simpson and James Randall of Winston & Strawn have stepped in to represent Comcast in a pending consumer class action. The case, filed Aug. 11 in Georgia Northern District Court by Kaufman PA, contends that the defendant placed pre-recorded debt collection phone calls to the plaintiff in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee, is 1:24-cv-03553, Pond v. Comcast Cable Communications LLC.
Who Got The Work
Potter Anderson & Corroon partners Christopher N. Kelly and Kevin R. Shannon have stepped in to represent cloud computing company Fastly and its top executives in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 23 in Delaware District Court by deLeeuw Law and Bragar Eagel & Squire on behalf of Mark Sweitzer, accuses the defendant of failing to disclose that revenue growth in 2023 was primarily driven by a 'consolidation trend' in which companies simplified operations by reducing the number of content delivery network vendors under management, thereby reducing competition and increasing the defendant's market share. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gregory B. Williams, is 1:24-cv-00969, Sweitzer v. Nightingale et al.
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