As Freshfields plots two more low-cost offices, what's drawing firms to set up multiple support centres?
With the magic circle firm planning US and Asian support offices, why do firms need centres in more than one time zone?
June 21, 2015 at 07:03 PM
4 minute read
Say what you will about Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer in 2015, but you can hardly fault its ambition. Not content with opening just one low-cost support hub in Manchester this summer, the magic circle firm now has its eyes set on another two service centres: one in the US and one in the Asia- Pacific region.
While many firms have 'nearshored' over the last couple of years, few have set up multiple support offices that span different time zones. (Latham and Watkin's plans for Manchester, adding to an existing Los Angeles hub, and Baker and McKenzie's decision to set up shop in Belfast after nearly 15 years using a Manilla back office are notable exceptions.)
Clifford Chance (CC) put adding capability in other regions, on top of its Delhi shared service centre, firmly on the table as part of consultations on a new strategy earlier this year. Having also previously discussed the possibility of opening another base adding to its Belfast office, Herbert Smith Freehills recently brought together that Northern Ireland service centre with its Australian information logistics team and its London-based disputes data management service in an attempt to create a more global 'alternative legal services' business.
Nearshoring has been debated on an almost interminable basis over the last few years, but does having support centres in multiple jurisdictions represent the next evolution in the rush towards low-cost service provision?
The reasons for running a multi-centre model are becoming more compelling. As global law firms get ever larger, spreading the support capacity to adequately cater for all jurisdictions has started moving up the agenda.
For Latham, the firm decided it needed to service increasing demand for support services from its European offices in a more effective way than having staff in the US work unsavoury hours.
"Rather than employing people on the graveyard shift, we can find good people in the European time zone to work proper business hours over here," said 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 difference is not the only factor in setting up a support service that straddles jurisdictions though. When it comes to CC's view to set up more low-cost bases, a compelling factor is wanting to limit the language barriers to work. Regardless of location, support staff need to be able to communicate with fee earners across Asia, Africa and Europe, which might not be so easy when the majority of their Delhi staff will be English speakers.
"It's not just timezones," says Jason Marty, global director of operations at Baker & McKenzie, justifying the firm's decision to have more than one support centre. "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 for the best service and financial outcomes. Having more options for these decisions is a benefit for us and our clients."
So why have few others looked to follow in similar directions until now then? "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," points out Marty.
With Freshfields' Manchester office still yet to open, it does seem that launching not just one but potentially three new support centres is a leap into the unknown for the firm.
It's certainly not without its risks – Bakers for instance expects its Belfast office to cost it £8m a year by 2017, a not insignificant sum of money. In the US in particular, a Freshfields legal and business service centre isn't likely to come cheap.
One UK based support centre head said they were "surprised" at Freshfields' decision to target the States because they "couldn't see where the cost saving is there."
"Freshfields do know what they're doing," they added. "There's clearly a plan there but I can't see why you would need three back offices…It must be something to do with how their systems work."
With the firm yet to reveal a timescale, staffing levels or a precise location for the two new business and legal support hubs, the success of the venture will likely be down to the detail to come. Nonetheless, chances are other firms will look to follow where Freshfields are leading.
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 AllSingapore Litigators Shift Competitive Landscape as Another Senior Duo Sets Up Own Shop
Will a Market Dominated by Small- to Mid-Cap Deals Give Rise to This Dark Horse US Firm in China?
Big Law Sidelined as Asian IPOs in New York Dominated by Small Cap Listings
Long Hours, Lack Of Boundaries: Associates In India Are Leaving Their Firms
Trending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
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