The first point to make regarding CMS Cameron McKenna's plans for a hugely ambitious outsourcing project with Integreon is that it deserves the benefit of the doubt. It will be a complex project and has understandably been touted as a landmark deal for the legal services market.

While I have some reservations, the firm, which spent months conducting due diligence on the deal and appointed a 10-partner panel chaired by Ed Benzecry to stress-test the proposed model, cannot be accused of rushing in. The firm argues that the ultimate prize of better quality systems and a lower cost back-office operation is considerable, despite short-term disruption. In this regard, I'll reserve judgement.

But what is interesting about the reaction to the Integreon deal at this stage is the extent to which it has appeared to be an assessment of 'brand Camerons'. The firm has committed to the kind of business model overhaul that many law firm leaders have been touting for months but few have had the gumption to do much about. But I suspect there are some other firms out there that could have announced something similar and received rather more garlands and far fewer brickbats.

Much of that can be chalked up to the relentless sniping of the City market, but not all. Camerons is a good law firm with many good partners and practice areas. But questions remain about whether the firm is committed in too many directions and where it intends to position itself in the global legal market.

The firm in recent years has floated some very promising ideas, notably the notion of building CMS into a big four-style global brand. There has also been welcome evidence of Camerons looking to harness the growing power of in-house legal teams through a more proactive client-service culture and a more innovative approach to billing. But these are a long way from being properly developed.

The firm also has an extremely broad business, both in terms of practices and target sectors. The danger of a project the size of the Integreon deal is that it will soak up attention at a time when the firm should be finding a clearer space. Critics will also contend that Camerons still has a partnership of uneven quality – at least it does if it wants to compete at the highest level of the market.

And it remains debatable whether the firm has enough business-winning partners, though Camerons can point to some unquestionably high-profile appointments in recent months, among them National Grid, BG Group, Royal Mail, Colgate-Palmolive and United Technologies Corporation.

There are many promising avenues down which Camerons could proceed, but it must at some point make more of those choices. Whatever else might be said of its current outsourcing, I'd advise it doesn't get in the way of those judgement calls.