Risk and return – can law firms get with the new GC agenda?
"Law firms just don't get it, they spend all their time thinking about transactions and that's so far off the agenda for general counsel right now. What GCs are focused on is risk." So said an old contact of mine who spends much of their time working with senior corporate counsel. It's hard to argue. Everywhere you turn there is risk for large companies.
November 08, 2012 at 07:03 PM
3 minute read
"Law firms just don't get it, they spend all their time thinking about transactions and that's so far off the agenda for general counsel right now. What GCs are focused on is risk."
So said an old contact of mine who spends much of their time working with senior corporate counsel. It's hard to argue. Everywhere you turn there is risk for large companies. This week alone has seen HSBC put a $1.5bn (£934m) price tag on its expected fine after falling foul of US money laundering laws. Standard Chartered and Barclays have likewise had costly brushes with prosecutors this year and the Libor fall-out looks only to be getting started.
And consider the other forces at play for GCs: the global push towards tough enforcement against bribery and competition violations; a swathe of new financial services regulation; and the continued impact of the post-9/11 push towards extra-territorial prosecution.
It's a picture well-illustrated by a report commissioned by the World Law Group network, which we cover this week. The research focuses on the attitudes of GCs across 33 countries. Managing risk; re-engineering the legal function; improving internal tech and training; finding ways to integrate with the business. These are the things engaging the 'multi-polar' GCs of tomorrow – not managing their outside counsel.
Do law firms really get this? Doubtful. Following clients via international expansion is second nature to the modern law firm, but whether they are ready to mirror the shift in mindset towards risk is questionable at best. Global law firms remain to a considerable extent deal machines – nothing wrong with that, but the question is whether that is well suited to the legal industry of the early 21st century.
True, there is a lot more imaginative thinking at elite law firms than five years ago, but progress is probably too slow; because clients have already become some of the most dangerous rivals to external counsel. Many bluechips now spend as much on legal services internally as they do with law firms – a largely unremarked revolution that has swept Western legal markets over the last 25 years. And it's a more immediate threat to law firms than LPOs or Tesco law. At a certain point, multinationals amassing globally diffuse in-house teams the size of large law firms will start forging their own legal production lines in earnest. Judged by this research, that process is accelerating.
Perhaps the biggest warning sign for external law firms is that their response to this risk-heavy, resource-constrained environment is the polar opposite of their largest clients. While law firms long for the deals to return, GCs spy opportunity amid the turbulence. They see a world in which they are more integral to their own employers – and that means law firms have to move down the food chain.
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 AllSetting Standards: Vanguard Australia's Sean Hughes on Moving From Government Regulator to Corporate General Counsel
6 minute readNetflix Offices Raided by Authorities in Paris and Amsterdam
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
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