Law firms can stay independent in a global profession – but they must find their edge
Per Magnusson issues manifesto for independent firms calling on them to embrace new technology and ring-fence talent
February 17, 2015 at 03:40 AM
6 minute read
The legal industry faces many challenges.
I think we all realise by now that things will not automatically go back to the way they were before the worldwide financial tsunami in 2008. The legal industry has undergone, and is undergoing, a fundamental transition and it is up to us if we want to be part of that change or not.
The question regularly comes up: can independent law firms stay independent? The global mega-firms continue to expand. Nothing new under the sun there. Historically those global firms have predominately been rooted in the Anglo-Saxon tradition. However, recently we have seen something new: global mergers between Chinese mega-firms and western firms.
China's King & Wood merged with Australia's Mallesons, and later added UK-based SJ Berwin to the mix. Dacheng is merging with Dentons to create the largest law firm in the world. There is no reason to think that this is the last such union, and there may be firms in other countries that want to be part of the truly global game – in India or Indonesia, for example.
The fall and rise of the accountancy firms
In the late 1990s the big accounting firms made inroads into the legal industry. I remember the concerns that this raised among law firms at the time. Many, including the global firms, feared that the accountants would effectively kill the legal industry as we knew it.
Now that, for various reasons, did not happen. The accounting firms clearly made mistakes and had to pull back or at least regroup. But now, some 15 years later, they are returning. They have licked their wounds and learned their lesson. Obviously, we do not know where all this is going, but we do know that the accounting firms have unparalleled financial muscle and resources and could have any law firm for breakfast if they wanted to – so we had better take their challenge seriously.
Coming back to my question: can we stay independent? Sure we can – there is no 'one size fits all'. The global mega-trends also create opportunities for something different. But if the independent firms just try to be global firms in a smaller format, there is really no point. We will be brutally beaten. If, however, we can capitalise on what makes us not a global firm, there is clearly a competitive edge. What this edge is, every independent firm must define for themselves.
And we need to be creative. Innovation is perhaps not the hallmark of a lawyer, but we all have different skills and we can bring on board people from other professions who are more creative than us. But we need to treat those other professionals, such as economists, IT people, marketing and communication people, as part of the core business, not merely as support staff.
The importance of technology
Take technology. Goldman Sachs is fundamentally an investment bank but it has recognised how instrumental technology is to its business. Now, technology is its largest division with 8,000 of its 32,000 employees. In 2014 six of Goldman Sachs' 78 new partners were software engineers. Why should it be different for law firms? Technology can produce many legal services in a more cost-efficient manner and with better quality than humans can, leaving lawyers to focus on high-end services. In the financial industry there is already a new type of profession, financial engineers, who have both an engineering and economics education. Law firms could benefit from having 'legal engineers'.
Then take fee quotes. We all struggle with our clients' questions about how much a piece of work is going to cost. But it is actually not all that difficult to give a pretty precise estimate or even a fixed price, even for sophisticated and complex services. Law firms have access to the relevant information because they have done numerous transactions or litigation cases before – they just do not have the information processed and readily available. With the right technology they could have.
Independent law firms could also be better at people management. We could make decisions more quickly and we could be more focused on what we are good at. We could be more flexible and adapt more easily.
So yes, there is a place for independent law firms in the future – and it could be a good place. To this end, the Legal Week Global Independent Law Firms Forum is an excellent opportunity to get inspired and exchange views and experiences, with a vision to enhance our own development towards an even brighter future.
Technology is all very well, but still nothing can replace the depth and nuances of face-to-face meetings.
The key to success
Here is some food for thought until we meet in London:
- Implement a strong and effective management
- Remember that it is not the big who beats the small, but the fast who beats the slow
- Embrace technology
- Watch out for commodity services
- Embrace the skills of different professionals
- Appoint some partners who are not lawyers
- Make only new mistakes
- Ring-fence talent
- Remember that everything is not for everyone
- Embrace ideas from everyone in the organisation
- Let go of prestige
- Hire people who are better than you are
Per Magnusson is a managing partner of Swedish firm Magnusson. Magnusson will be chairing the Legal Week Global Independent Law Firms Forum, which takes place in London on 25 March.
Legal Week Global Independent Law Firms Forum – how to book:
- Book online
- Call Paige Howley on +44 (0)20 7316 9766
- Download the booking form
- Email [email protected]
Read more
The future of independent law firms 2014 – online special
Related videos
The biggest tech challenges facing law firms – and their impact on the legal profession
Magnusson: British Legal Awards European Law Firm of the Year
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 AllRosenblatt Breaks Away From RBG, Becomes 40-Strong Standalone Firm
Eversheds Sutherland Outgoing Co-CEO to Move to Dubai to Spur Regional Growth
2 minute readMore than Half of South Australian Lawyers Report Suffering Harassment
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
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