EY Leads as Big Four Top Brand Rankings for Alternative Legal Services
Boosted by several recent acquisitions, EY bumped PwC from the No. 1 spot on Acritas' list.
October 09, 2019 at 03:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
For the second year in a row, the Big Four accounting firms took four of the five top spots in Acritas's ranking of the brand strength of alternative legal service providers, with EY displacing PwC at the top of the list.
EY jumped up 24 points in the index, vaulting from the fourth spot in 2018, on the heels of several significant acquisitions in recent years. In January, the company closed on the purchase of the Panagea3 legal managed services business from Thomson Reuters – itself ranked third on the list – after adding Riverview Law last August.
"There's a correlation between increased market awareness and the acquisitions they made," said Acritas director Jo Summers.
EY's global co-leader for law Cornelius Grossmann said the organisation was thrilled that the marketplace was responding to its multidisciplinary approach.
"The combination of global domain knowledge and scale with process rigour and technology-enabled service delivery helps EY clients achieve better business outcomes," he said in a statement.
Last year's leader PwC placed second on the list, two points behind PwC. Thompson Reuters, while gaining 12 points in the index, dropped one place to third. KPMG moved up one rank to fourth but held steady on points. Deloitte, meanwhile dropped two ranks and 22 points, into a tie for fifth place with legal staffing and services provider Axiom.
Axiom has also been in the public eye during the last year, proposing an IPO in February and scrapping it last month in favour of an investment from European private equity firm Permira.
The top 10 featured one new name this year, Elevate. Like EY, the business made a series of acquisitions during the last year, with three corporate purchases in February alone. As a consequence, the firm rose 17 points in the index, jumping up 13 places.
"Our acquisitions in the past 12 months have added management talent, extended our consulting and global services capabilities, and added AI to our software offerings," Elevate chairman and CEO Liam Brown said in a statement. "As the legal market embraces new ways of working, we see growing demand for our multidisciplinary solutions for legal and business teams, reflecting improving awareness of our brand as the law company."
The report was based on a survey of more than 1,100 general counsel or their equivalents in $1 billion+ revenue organisations across the world. Acritas probes respondents on three points: which organisations are top-of-mind for legal services, which organisations they feel most favourably towards, and which are at the forefront of innovation.
Acritas also collected data on these companies' legal spending during the last five years, which indicates that alternative providers are increasing their market penetration.
"The share of spending is remaining the same, but the proportion who are using alternative providers is increasing," Summers said.
Nearly half of legal departments are using alternative providers in 2019, up from less than one third in 2014. The average user of alternative providers puts $1.7 million of their budget towards them, up from $1.5 million, a figure that's in line with the general increase in legal budgets. The overall market share of the alternative providers, meanwhile, increased from five percent to nine percent.
While Acritas does not provide full details on the organisations ranked out of the top 10, it did flag several fast-risers: Consilio Managed Services, UnitedLex and Lumen Legal.
And, although respondents were specifically told not to name law firms, several global firms did land on the list, likely because of their efforts to build their own bespoke legaltech offerings. Baker McKenzie, Clifford Chance and Allen & Overy all tied for 23rd place in the rankings.
"There's still a lot for organisations to do as they develop their alternative brand strategy," Summers said. "Some of them, as we know, have their own branded service, but as yet we're seeing very low levels of awareness."
|Read more:
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 All‘Are You Not Profiting From Postmasters’ Misery?’—Politicians Grill HSF, Dentons on Post Office Conduct
'Not a Good Look'—FCA Fines Barclays £40M But Accused of Incompetence
Gibson Dunn Sued by Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Australian Corporations More Concerned About Class Actions Risk, HSF Report Finds
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
- 2Warner Bros. Accused of Misleading Investors on NBA Talks
- 3FTC Settles With Security Firm Over AI Claims Under Agency's Compliance Program
- 4'Water Cooler Discussions': US Judge Questions DOJ Request in Google Search Case
- 5Court rejects request to sideline San Jose State volleyball player on grounds she’s transgender
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