1,600 polled: bluechip spending plunges as GCs press for value
Bluechip clients aggressively pressed down on legal costs in 2012, according to a major Legal Week research project which shows FTSE 100 clients slashing external spend in response to the uncertain global economy...
November 19, 2012 at 07:12 AM
4 minute read
Bluechip clients aggressively pressed down on legal costs in 2012, according to a major Legal Week research project which shows FTSE 100 clients slashing external spend in response to the uncertain global economy.
The ninth annual Client Satisfaction Report from Legal Week Intelligence found average legal spend across responding FTSE 100 companies fell from £18.7m in 2010 to £12.6m in 2012. Legal spending across the wider companies surveyed fell by almost 50% from £6.2m to £3.2m over the same period. In 2011, FTSE 100 respondents spent an average of £16.1m.
The report is one of the largest research projects ever undertaken among major UK clients. More than 1,650 senior in-house counsel and decision-makers responded to the report, covering 1,204 companies, including 89% of the FTSE 100.
The drop in average legal spend has come alongside an increase in client satisfaction with the cost and billing practices of their external legal advisers, with satisfaction rising from an average of 6.5 out of 10 in 2010 to this year's high of 7.2.
Some of the drop in average external spend over the last two years is likely to have come from the increase in the number of respondents from mid-cap companies and smaller members of the FTSE 100 in the research, due to its expanding respondent base. Legal spending will have also been hit by historically low levels of corporate activity as cash-rich companies put strategic acquisitions on hold amid global uncertainty.
However, the sharp fall in average spending and rising satisfaction with the historic bugbear of value for money, even among bluechip respondents, strongly suggests that clients have moved over the last two years to finally wring substantive concessions from law firms on pricing and value.
National Grid senior counsel, commercial and disputes, Ian Leedham commented: "Our day-to-day budget has remained frozen for a number of years, so in real terms it has gone down, which I suspect is true for many, but the lack of project, M&A and funding becoming difficult to obtain means the more deal-specific legal spend will have dropped off, which probably accounts for the drop."
With multiple respondents completing the survey at many of the companies, the report has generated 3,017 rankings for law firms on a range of different criteria. Respondents include company secretaries and GCs as well as finance directors, chairmen and chief executives. The research is used to rate individual law firms according to a range of benchmarks according to the views of their own clients.
In-house counsel were asked to rate the importance of a range of criteria including cost, service delivery, IT, partner relationships, quality of legal advice and quality of commercial advice. They were then questioned on their satisfaction with each.
BT chief counsel EMEA & Latin America, Liz Walker, believes the improvement in satisfaction results stems from closer working relationships between law firms and clients. "It's probably because law firms and general counsel are working closer together; there's more of an understanding of our needs and that there isn't a bottomless pit when it comes to fees. They're not doing it by osmosis."
The research also illustrates how client satisfaction levels vary substantially across the different criteria, with quality of legal advice rated as the measure on which clients are the most satisfied.
The full 200-page report is due to be published at the beginning of December and will include extended profiles of more than 30 of the largest law firms as well as qualitative client feedback on all 86 law firms ranked.
In addition to UK respondents, Legal Week has undertaken a separate research project on the views and client satisfaction of clients in the Asia-Pacific region. Findings from the Asia report will be published before the end of the year.
Click here for more information on the Client Satisfaction Report or contact Legal Week Intelligence's Paul Birk on 0207 316 9864 or [email protected].
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 AllBroadcom Hires From Nuclear Giant to Appoint French Legal Head
GCs Say They are Getting 'Edged Out' of UK Boardrooms
'I Won’t Name the Firm, But...'—Barratt Redrow's Legal Head on External Counsel Red Flags
Trending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
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