Who leads DLA? Picon exit raises management questions as firm looks to rebuild top team
Senior partner's shock departure prompts debate over firm's European priorities
November 09, 2017 at 10:05 AM
8 minute read
Last week's shock news that DLA Piper senior partner and co-chair Juan Picon is leaving to join Latham & Watkins means the firm is losing arguably its highest-profile partner in continental Europe.
His surprise resignation means DLA's operations outside of the US are currently being led by the London-based duo of co-CEO Simon Levine and disputes partner Janet Legrand, who has stepped in as interim co-chair.
When it comes to finding a permanent replacement for Picon though, former partners say that it would be politically desirable for his successor to also come from the firm's continental European offices, where the civil law system predominates.
One former partner says: "Levine and Picon were a strong team – having the axis of a UK partner and a European partner was important. There has been a concerted effort from DLA to make sure the management team was representative, so you would want someone from the European practice to step forward and keep that balance."
Another says: "You have to look at the fact [former DLA Italy managing partner] Federico Sutti, who was the big civil law practitioner before Juan, left to join Dentons in Milan. It is not a great track record of big-name civil lawyers in the firm leaving for rivals."
I said: 'You are going to destroy what Nigel Knowles has created in 20 years in three years'
Sutti left in 2015 with an eight-strong team to set up a Milan base for Dentons, having missed out on the DLA co-CEO job to Levine.
Speaking to Legal Week following Picon's departure, Sutti had harsh words to say about DLA's approach in Europe under its current management.
"When I had my last conversation with Simon Levine in May 2015, before resigning from the firm, I said: 'You are going to destroy what Nigel Knowles has created in 20 years in three years.'"
"DLA was a combination of very good offices with people working together – that was the vision. The idea of empowering the group heads, verticalising the practices, centralising everything in London – this was a disaster. It has killed the local initiative.
"If you are a Linklaters or Freshfields, you benefit from a strong brand and client base – even if you are in Italy or Spain there are advantages. But if you are at DLA you have very little of this, so every day you have to fight for clients – that is the challenge."
The firm has also closed two European offices this year, in Berlin and Tbilisi, as well as its base in the Australian capital of Canberra, as part of its attempts to boost profitability in the post-Knowles era.
One former partner says: "A lot of the European offices were put together by Nigel; he had a charismatic relationship with a lot of those offices – they liked and trusted him, and when he left that link disappeared. Berlin and Tbilisi have shut – those are small offices, but the fact is Simon was closing European offices and not closing places like Liverpool. In the grand firmament, is Liverpool more important than Berlin?"
Levine (pictured) says the decision to close offices was taken at a local level and was an illustration that the firm's management is responsive to local concerns.
"The suggestion to close Berlin came from the German managing partners, and the idea of closing the Canberra office came from the Australian managing partners. Closing those offices actually proves that we listen to what local management want to do," he argues.
DLA's joint managing director of Europe Olaf Schmidt maintains that the firm is not centralised in London, and that the management of the firm by practice group is a more effective method than through a network of almost independent offices.
"We run our business through the practice groups and not through autonomous offices. I know for some other international firms this is different, and we respect other business models, but it is not our business model."
"We believe that a global law firm has to have internationally operating groups, they need to be cohesive and run vertically, which can sometimes conflict with local decision makers, but we have managed to harmonise the system pretty well. These verticals are not run out of the UK – we have group heads from Paris, from Amsterdam, they are run by the best people. That is the business model which we follow," he says.
Schmidt also argues that the firm has grown its continental European offices in recent years and that the departure of Picon (pictured) was unrelated to the current direction of the firm. It is understood that his decision to leave was motivated in part by family considerations.
"Juan was clear on why it happened and his reasons have to be respected. We are disappointed, but if you knew him, he was tired, he was finding the travelling hard, he couldn't do the job any more. It wasn't that he got frustrated because the firm was run from the UK.
"In fact, the trend is the opposite. Jan [Geert Meents] and I are on the executive, the board is composed of mainly Europeans. The trend is moving towards the mainland European business in terms of people and also in terms of revenue, and moving away from dominance by the UK, which is no longer the majority of our revenue. From a business perspective, mainland Europe counts more and will count more in the future," he says.
In the past five years, DLA's mainland European business has seen revenues rise 34% from £256.9m to £344.8m. The region accounted for 40% of EMEA and Asia-Pacific revenue in 2016-17, up from 33.9% in 2012-13, with the UK accounting for 32.8% of the 2016-17 total.
Fee earner headcount in mainland Europe accounts for 42% of the EMEA and Asia-Pacific group, with the UK standing at 33%.
Levine echoes Schmidt's comments, saying: "As a matter of pure fact, if you look at the senior management and governance team, it is an equal split between the UK and people from civil law jurisdictions who all have big practices and are leaders in their fields."
While Picon's appointment as senior partner was unopposed, it is not clear that this will be the case with his successor. The election, which according to Levine is likely to take place in the new year, is open to any partner that chooses to step forward.
Meents, DLA's managing director of sectors and clients, says: "If you look at our partnership agreement, it is a job which is up for election. If anyone in the partnership decided they want to run for the job, nobody will prevent them from running.
"It was different last time, as it was the first time after Nigel and it was very important for us to show continuity and to make the transition as smooth as possible. There was an agreement among the partnership that Simon and Juan were a good couple; there was no imposed non-election – it was a decision of the partnership to go for one candidate."
One former partner floated London-based DLA board member Jon Hayes and London managing partner Tom Heylen as possible candidates for the role. Neither Meents or Schmidt would comment on whether they are planning on standing.
Another says: "There isn't an obvious replacement from the civil law world and that itself is something of a problem, because what happens? Do you have a contest where the fact the civil law part of the world will never win a ballot means you get another Brit? Or an Australian? And if so, how does that leave the European part of the firm?"
However, Meents argues that DLA has moved on from a stage where it is necessary to have a geographically representative leadership, with the quality of the candidate the most important consideration.
"The firm has grown to the stage of maturity where quality comes first. We need to find the right people who are happy with those roles and drive the firm forward. If that person came from continental Europe, fine; if we found a preferred candidate in the UK, that is also fine. I wouldn't put too much emphasis on their nationality, as long as they were in the position to take the firm forward and fill the space Juan left," he says.
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 AllTrump and Latin America: Lawyers Brace for Hard-Line Approach to Region
BCLP Mulls Merger Prospects as Profitability Lags, Partnership Shrinks
Trending Stories
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