As Freshfields mulls more low-cost bases, why are firms increasingly keen to set up multiple hubs?
Providing inexpensive support to all jurisdictions and timezones is moving up the agenda for law firms
June 21, 2015 at 07:04 PM
4 minute read
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer's plans to add a second and third low-cost support hub to its new Manchester base are nothing if not ambitious.
Before Manchester has even opened for business the firm this week confirmed it is already planning to create two further support centres in the US and Asia-Pacific.
Numerous firms have set up nearshoring centres for support functions in recent years, but the number with multiple offices spanning different timezones is still relatively small, making Freshfields' decision from the outset to open in a trio of locations a brave move.
The list is growing though, and now includes Latham & Watkins, whose new Manchester base comes on top of an existing hub in Los Angeles; Baker & McKenzie, which recently opened in Belfast after nearly 15 years in Manila; White & Case, which has a legal support centre in Tampa and back-office support in Manila; and Linklaters, which opened in Warsaw last year, adding to its long-established centre in Colchester.
Clifford Chance (CC) meanwhile has put finding at least one more base to add to its Delhi shared service centre firmly on the table as part of its new strategy, with Herbert Smith Freehills also looking to build on its Belfast centre elsewhere.
The reasons for adopting a multi-centre model are compelling, according to partners. As global law firms get ever larger, providing low-cost support for all jurisdictions and timezones is moving up the agenda.
"Rather than employing people on the graveyard shift, we can find good people in the European timezone to work proper business hours over here," says Rod Harrington, Latham's chief administrative officer for Europe and the Middle East. "We worked hard to provide coverage by employing people in the middle of the night, but that's not an efficient or sustainable model. People who work those late shifts don't hang around for long."
Time differences are not the only factors in setting up a support service that straddles jurisdictions though. Language skills also play a large part, with CC, for example, keen to fill this gap in support.
Jason Marty, global director of operations at Bakers, explains the firm's decision to have more than one support centre: "It's not just timezones. We are a global firm and like our global clients we need to be focused on the right people doing the right
work in the right places [to achieve] the best service and financial outcomes."
So why have more firms not gone down this route before? "Larger firms generally still have a headquarters, most of their revenue comes from a small number of countries and smaller competitors probably just don't need multiple centres," Marty points out.
The investment costs relating to each centre mean there are risks involved. Bakers, for instance, expects its Belfast office to cost £8m a year to run by 2017, a not insignificant sum of money.
Certainly, in the US, where wages and rents are often higher than in developing nations, a service centre is not likely to come cheap. Particularly as, unlike the handful of firms listed above with multiple bases, Freshfields is planning to offer both legal and back-office support at all three proposed sites.
One UK-based support centre head says they are surprised at Freshfields' decision to target the US in particular because they "can't see where the cost saving is".
With the firm yet to reveal a timescale, staffing levels or precise locations for the two new hubs, the success of the venture will probably come down to the details. Regardless of success, it is increasingly likely that other firms will follow Freshfields' move as the market becomes ever-more global.
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 AllKPMG's Bid To Practice Law in US On Hold As Arizona Court Exercises Caution
Combative Arguments at EU's Highest Court Over Google's €4.13B Antitrust Fine Emphasize High Stakes and Invoke Trump
4 minute readLaw Firms 'Struggling' With Partner Pay Segmentation, as Top Rainmakers Bring In More Revenue
5 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