Barclays to law firms: no more panel reviews
Bank to rate advisers with new 'active relationship management' system following final official review
February 22, 2018 at 08:48 AM
3 minute read
Barclays is set to begin its last-ever conventional panel review, as it aims to move away from "resetting the clock every two years" with a new system that will see external advisers assessed on an ongoing basis.
The bank, which handed two-year panel appointments to 140 firms in its last review in July 2016, will carry out its last official refresh in the coming months, after which it will move to a new system it describes as "active relationship management".
Once the next – and last – review has been completed, firms will be added or removed from the panel on an ad hoc basis.
Following the 2016 review, Barclays implemented a number of changes to how it manages relationships with its law firms. This included the creation of a rating system grading panel firms on a number of metrics, including billing rates, service delivery and alternative fee arrangements, as well as feedback gathered from the bank's in-house lawyers.
Barclays' head of external engagement Stephanie Hamon said: "This is going to be our last official panel refresh, because we have seen and demonstrated how active relationship management is actually delivering far more benefits for both the in-house and external legal teams. Therefore we are going to dispense with a panel process entirely."
If you keep resetting the clock every two years, you can't really build relationships
Chris Grant, the bank's head of relationship management, added: "We are assessing firms against a few metrics. One is looking at their service delivery, such as the way they engage on a regular basis with our lawyers, and the way they interact with Barclays versus the cost element."
The grades – which are currently assessed annually – are not fixed, and firms will be encouraged to take on board feedback to improve their score.
"[The grading system] gives you a point of conversation to develop relationships," said Grant. "If you have firms sitting in one of the lower categories, it won't prevent them from securing work or unnecessarily penalise them. Instead, it is a way of being able to develop and improve the relationship. Ultimately, from our perspective, we would like help all firms become A-rated firms."
Hamon concluded: "Panel refreshes are not supporting what we want to do. What we really want is our relationships to be a win-win partnership and for us all to develop. If you keep resetting the clock every two years, you can't really build those relationships."
Barclays' last panel review saw it cut its panel by around 60% from around 350-400 to 140 firms, with no new firms joining the list.
Ashurst, Hogan Lovells, Simmons & Simmons, Addleshaw Goddard, Eversheds, Bond Dickinson, DWF and Reed Smith were among those retaining spots on the roster, which is split into three tiers – panel firm, core specialist firm and specialist firm.
The bank declined to comment on the likely structure of the next panel.
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 AllCan Labour's New Budget Steady the Ship? Big Moves On UK Tax Reform and Fiscal Stability
5 minute readGreenberg Takes 7-Lawyer Project- and Structured-Finance Team From Dentons in Warsaw
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1When Police Destroy Property, Is It a 'Taking'? Maybe So, Say Sotomayor, Gorsuch
- 2New York Top Court Says Clickwrap Assent Binds Plaintiff's Personal-Injury Claim to Arbitration in Uber Case
- 3'You Can’t Do a First Draft of Common Sense': Microsoft GC Jon Palmer Talks AI, Litigation, and Leadership
- 4About the Awards: Southeastern Legal Awards Q&A with Regional Managing Editor Michael Marciano
- 5Private Credit Boom: Miami’s Role as a Financial and Litigation Hub
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