Partners seek new models but wary of LPOs

UK law firms have to re-examine their business model. Why should UK clients be expected to pay UK rates for a piece of due diligence or verification if they can buy in the services of a well educated law graduate from the University of Bangalore at a fraction of the cost of a UK 2PQE trainee?

Anon -06 Nov 2009 | 16:34

In a large firm there is not much difference in sending work to some faceless person in a department in another building (or even country) and sending it to an outside organisation. What is hardest is dealing with day-to-day matters which need a good interface between the decision-maker and those who implement (or even just type).

Anonymous -06 Nov 2009 | 16:42

I do not believe that any work should be outsourced abroad.

Anonymous -06 Nov 2009 | 16:58

The quality of LPOs varies enormously within countries, but generally native English and local common law systems work best, even where expat UK lawyers are being relied on.

As with all legal work the test is whether quality and appropriate supervision can be controlled and monitored. It is those difficulties which will always restrict the growth of outsourcing of this type.

Partner -06 Nov 2009 | 17:19

Interesting findings. How about next time you survey the people whose views actually count, though? Like client GCs? To be honest most City partners live in a box, with their heads down churning documents. While their views on a trend affecting their business are interesting, most of them have neither the vision or skills to appreciate and understand a business trend, nor any real influence over whether it takes off or not.

LPO will be forced on the profession whether we like it or not because in certain circumstances it just makes sense. That 53% of the supposed leaders of our industry see little or no potential for further growth of a service - outsourcing - which has taken practically every other sector by storm, makes me want to work in a different business, led by more informed people who are better equipped to steer a sensible course through choppy waters.

Mutton Jeff -09 Nov 2009 | 10:25

Commercial firms need to be open to working differently. There's room here for some more innovative offerings in the market.

Anon -09 Nov 2009 | 12:23

At the low end of the value-scale, it might assist to keep costs down. However, for bet-the-company work, how could any prudent decision-maker bet the company on an unknown cheap and cheerful backroom option, no matter how cheap and cheerful?

Partner -09 Nov 2009 | 12:24

We may as well outsource the repetitive work such as simple due diligence, form filling etc that does not require a legally qualified person sitting in an a city centre office, as it's both expensive and unnecessary, certainly from a client's perspective.

Anonymous -09 Nov 2009 | 17:31

High Quality Outsourcing

I think much of this misses the point. Yes, it is possible to outsource low grade work to India (though it is a moot point as to how muh of this is required), but it is much more interesting (and profitable) to outsource high quality work to high quality lawyers. Some of the consultants we use are ex practice heads at top ten firms that cost us less than our trainee rates. This market will surely grow. What we need is more legal consultants in the UK, not more low grade lawyers in India.

US Partner -11 Nov 2009 | 19:05

Clients will require considerable reassurance before we can outsource legal work which would, in any event, have implications under the SRA Code of Conduct. However, they will expect us to run our businesses in a way which delivers economies of rates, hence the need to re-engineer our businesses. Also there will be substantial competition from new entrants into the market as the full extent of the Legal Services Act is realised. Current models of business for legal service delivery must be reviewed by law firms otherwise they will face serious, potentially grave, threats to their practices.

Anon -13 Nov 2009 | 11:36

Outsourcing is more of the same - buy cheap, sell expensive. Probably still by the hour.

Anonymous -05 Jan 2010 | 10:40