The global model seeks to offer large clients a one-stop shop in a number of key locations around the world. The model depends for its success on each office having a minimum spread of capability and depth of expertise in order to cope with major multi-jurisdictional transactions effectively. The model claims a higher level of consistency among the various offices than offered by independent firms working together. Whether or not this consistency exists in practice will vary from firm to firm and within a firm, from office to office.
On one level, independent firms of sufficient quality working together internationally should, at least in theory, be able to achieve a greater consistency of quality across different practice areas simply by virtue of the fact that no law firm has yet achieved global coverage with their own offices. And most multi-office firms will acknowledge that not all their offices are at the same stage of development or have a narrow focus and expertise.
However, actually achieving this consistency on the ground and convincing clients of the advantages of the model remains a major challenge for independent firms. One important area to consider is the quality of the relationships between the lawyers at the respective firms. Lawyers who know each other well are far more likely to work effectively in a team. Joint training programmes, secondments and joint business development activity can all contribute to better working relationships. Clients notice pretty quickly whether those relationships exist or not.
Independent firms sometimes fall into the trap of blaming the ‘other firm’ for a delay or some other hitch in the process. But clients want to see one team working together efficiently. Good relationships are the key to minimising these problems but require a significant investment of time and resource to develop.
Another area which independent law firms need to improve on is their ability, when working together on a client assignment, to provide advice and documentation of a consistent quality. This is a key aspect of the ‘seamless’ service that the global model claims as a competitive advantage.
Successful independent firms will typically have strong relationships with major companies and financial institutions, especially for domestic work. Developing a strategy with other independent firms to deepen those relationships for international work requires a different approach to relationship-building. Client relationships for international work have to be shared, marketing has to be planned and executed jointly, market intelligence needs to be shared and partners have to develop the confidence to adopt a completely new and collaborative approach to business development.
Independent firms will often enjoy strong name recognition and branding in their home market. But the common international branding that a global model will deploy can be a powerful advantage. Branding carries with it an implied promise to clients of compliance with the characteristic embodied by the brand. It also implies a consistency across different countries. Whether or not that consistency manifests in reality, the brand implies that the different constituents are aiming for consistency in applying a brand value.
Independent firms therefore have to work extra hard at developing and providing a collaborative service that is of very high quality and at promoting that service to clients.
The global model has been carried forward on a wave of confidence, but it has its strengths and weaknesses. Independent firms should invest more resource in ensuring that their joint assignments are well managed and show more confidence in articulating their own competitive advantages. Ultimately, clients are experts at spotting quality advisers and will respond with open minds.
Neville Eisenberg is managing partner of Berwin Leighton Paisner and will be a keynote speaker at the Legal Week Independent Law Firms Forum, which takes place in
