The end of panels? Barclays adviser shake-up provides vision of RFP-free client relationship
City partners welcome Barclays shift away from traditional panel review process as bank targets "redundancy" of hourly rate
March 02, 2018 at 09:43 AM
5 minute read
"Anything that leads to the end of panel processes – and more supportive relationships on both sides – can only be a good thing," says one City banking partner, of the news revealed by Legal Week last week that Barclays is calling time on traditional panel reviews.
The bank yesterday (1 March) begun the last ever formal review of its global legal panel, with the new line-up set to come into effect on 1 July.
That roster will be in place for three years, but the bank has already put in place new systems which will enable it to evaluate external advisers on an ongoing basis. When the latest panel appointments come to an end in 2021, Barclays will fully move over to the new model, with lengthy panel reviews – and the laborious RFPs they entail – becoming a thing of the past.
The new set-up, dubbed 'active relationship management', will give the bank more flexibility to manage the size and composition of the panel, with law firms added and removed from the line-up on an ad hoc basis.
Barclays argues that this model will help it to develop deeper relationships with its long-term advisers, while the bank is also looking to increase its use of alternative fee arrangements and move towards the "redundancy" of the hourly rate.
Attention will now turn to whether other major clients will also be inspired to ditch panel reviews in favour of a similar system, and many City lawyers are convinced of the benefits of Barclays' new approach.
One London banking partner says: "Poor service is often down to someone being overworked, or that it is not clear what is expected. You might have a feedback meeting in December, at which the client complains about something that happened in January. If you are told at the time that the client is unhappy, then you can act to try to sort it out immediately. This kind of continuous feedback is a really positive step."
The new system, which will see law firms graded on a number of metrics – including billing rates, service delivery and alternative fee arrangements – will also help the bank's in-house team and its external advisers to get clarity on "what good looks like", according to head of external engagement Stephanie Hamon, who has led the overhaul since joining from King & Wood Mallesons in December 2015.
"We have found that our in-house lawyers often only have a handful of law firms that they regularly deal with, and so it can be hard to know what good looks like," says Hamon. "By giving people a benchmark across a number of firms, this has helped our lawyers' understanding of what external firms should be aiming for."
Chris Grant, the bank's head of relationship management, adds: "It's an educational tool for both sides – the law firm side and us. Our lawyers might think the firm they are engaging with is doing well, but the metrics allow them to compare what they could be getting if the law firm was more engaged."
The reaction from private practice suggests that this process will help advisers to provide a better service and avoid unwittingly upsetting clients.
Another banking partner comments: "If I was the client, I would want my in-house lawyers to be rating the service of their law firms. The relationship between a law firm and client can often be quite hard to quantify, and the in-house lawyers are best placed to understand exactly what is going on."
Barclays' last panel review in 2016 saw it cut the number of law firms it works with by about 60% to 140, with Ashurst, Hogan Lovells, Simmons & Simmons, Addleshaw Goddard, Eversheds, Bond Dickinson, DWF and Reed Smith among those appointed.
Making sure that Barclays' law firms understand exactly what the bank wants from them is also crucial to the new system, and fits in with its aim to provide clarity and transparency for its firms. "If we sit down with firms and tell them what we want and then they develop and improve, then certainly they would move up through the ratings," says Grant.
Caroline O'Grady, a partner at legal spend management consultancy Coote O'Grady, believes that a focus on performance and value for money, rather than panel appointments based purely on cost, is "the only way" to effectively buy and manage legal services, but that for now, traditional RFP-led panel reviews will remain standard practice as clients take the time to adapt to new ways of thinking.
"Barclays has made this investment of time and energy to refocus on value, rather than simply cost. It will take time for mainstream legal procurement to catch up to the reality of buying legal services, and therefore lengthy RFPs will still be commonplace.
"Too often, organisations do not invest in understanding how their firms perform once appointed to a panel – this is the key to driving real value."
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 AllTo Thrive in Central and Eastern Europe, Law Firms Need to 'Know the Rules of the Game'
7 minute readGOP's Washington Trifecta Could Put Litigation Finance Industry Under Pressure
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