Independence doesn't mean going it alone: the smaller contenders holding their own against global giants
The continued globalisation of the legal industry has made the independent firm an increasingly rare breed
April 10, 2017 at 07:32 AM
4 minute read
There has never been a more challenging time to be an independent law firm. The continued globalisation of the legal industry has made the independent firm – by which I mean those with practices that are largely or entirely situated in a single office or market – an increasingly rare breed. This is particularly true for those targeting high-end work in developed markets, where firms that have eschewed international expansion are swimming against a strengthening tide of consolidation.
Later this month, a group of these stubborn holdouts is set to meet in London to discuss how to remain competitive in a fast-changing market. The event, hosted by Legal Week and The American Lawyer, will see law firm partners, general counsel and industry experts chew the fat on a wide range of subjects, from tackling emerging jurisdictions to adopting new technology and retaining talent.
It will be a timely gathering. The trend in recent years has been for clients to trim their external adviser relationships and move toward working with fewer firms globally, often via formal panels. This has made the already formidable task of competing against international rivals even tougher. When pitching for cross-border matters, independent firms can't just be as good as global firms – they have to be better. Or, at least, cheaper. The former is no mean feat; the latter is hardly an ideal long-term strategy.
Smaller firms may also have less buying power when it comes to making investments in technology and other areas that improve efficiency and client service. This will become increasingly pertinent as technology continues its gradual shift from back-office to front-office: artificial intelligence is currently one of the hottest topics in Big Law.
That's not to say such investments are out of reach. Slaughter and May last year signed a deal with AI software provider Luminance – but Slaughters has resources that few other independent firms can match.
Similarly, many independent firms would be unable to afford – or generate enough work – to justify running legal and business services support centres in lower-cost jurisdictions, an increasingly widespread practice among global firms. An independent firm in the UK or the US could send commoditised work to a referral partner in another market where the rates are lower, of course. This practice would generate savings for clients, but it would not make the same contribution to the firm's own bottom line.
It isn't all doom and gloom, however. Opportunities remain – for firms with the right strategic discipline. The independent firms that succeed are generally those that specialise and excel in a limited number of practice areas. Avoiding mission creep, if you'll forgive the jargon, is key. That will on occasion mean having to tell clients that there may be another firm better placed to handle a particular matter. So be it.
As the legal market continues to consolidate, the value associated with independence increases. Every time an independent practice combines with a global firm – in March, for instance, 70-lawyer Dutch firm Boekel agreed to join Dentons – the remaining independent firms in that market have one less competitor for referrals. This also shows the inherent risk with the independent law firm model, however: firms that previously worked with Boekel may now have a Netherlands-shaped hole in their network.
One thing is certain: independent firms live and die on the strength of their relationships – with clients and, just as importantly, with other law firms. It is absolutely critical for firms to invest in managing and developing these ties. Independence doesn't mean going it alone.
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 AllNuix Discover Named a Leader in SoftwareReview's eDiscovery Solutions Data Quadrant for the Second Consecutive Year
Trending Stories
- 1Courts Grapple With The Corporate Transparency Act
- 2FTC Chair Lina Khan Sues John Deere Over 'Right to Repair,' Infuriates Successor
- 3‘Facebook’s Descent Into Toxic Masculinity’ Prompts Stanford Professor to Drop Meta as Client
- 4Pa. Superior Court: Sorority's Interview Notes Not Shielded From Discovery in Lawsuit Over Student's Death
- 5Kraken’s Chief Legal Officer Exits, Eyes Role in Trump Administration
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