Will the credit crunch prove to be a great stride forward for those lobbying for lawyers to take a more central role in commercial life?
You might think so given this week’s nomination of UBS general counsel Peter Kurer to replace Marcel Ospel as the bank’s chairman as the sub-prime-hit institution fights to placate investors. It’s a highly unusual appointment as general counsel virtually never rise to the level of chairman, no matter how embattled their employer. After all, many believe that general counsel shouldn’t even sit on boards.
And it also appears that the recent drive to improve governance in law firms has contributed to this state of affairs since firms increasingly frown on partners taking non-executive roles for fear of triggering conflicts.
There are perfectly credible reasons for supporting the above prohibitions but it has contributed to the near-invisibility of lawyers in the European business community.
One concrete measure that the profession could take is to explicitly combat the prejudice against lawyers sitting on boards, which Nabarro senior partner Simon Johnston highlights in this week’s comment piece (page 23).
It is, of course, nonsense to suggest that a substantial portion of commercial lawyers wouldn’t make decent board members, especially judged against the incestuous and over-fished pool that supplies many British boards. And it’s obviously going to become a big issue for senior City lawyers at a time when many are looking for career opportunities after retiring from law.
But here’s the thing: change isn’t just going to happen. So if the profession is going to get any movement on this issue, or indeed the wider point of the substantial contribution lawyers now make to business, it is going to have to make the point forcefully and repeatedly. And on current showing, the Law Society and the City of London Law Society, while both making more effort in recent years, have yet to resolve what role, if any, they should play here.
In the meantime it is likely that the crunch will thrust lawyers further towards the centre stage. But taking the lead in risky times could be a poisoned chalice, reinforcing the sense that this is a profession you call for damage limitation, not unlocking opportunity. Consider the Financial Times’ verdict on Kurer’s nomination: “[It] indicates a failure to find a more suitable replacement”.
That’s what you’re up against.
