Camerons set to outsource entire back office with Integreon deal

So - they're selling all their staff to every other mid-tier law firm out there... will redundancies follow? Meanwhile, a cunning way to boost partner profits...

Starsky -14 May 2010 | 12:03

All support functions? Just shows how much business support is seen as a commodity by Camerons. Yes, some functions can be done by outside suppliers well. But how will Camerons ensure strategic alignment in key areas like business development?

Anon -14 May 2010 | 12:45

More agony

Do Camerons know what they are letting themselves in for? I think this is a very short-term view which will come back to bite them in a BIG way. At least the other firms (like mine) will benefit from their loss!!

HUTCH -14 May 2010 | 14:28

Seen this happen before - woe to cmck

I think this will be good news for other firms as this will ensure CMS-CMCK will fall into decline. I have seen this at another firm and if they do not keep in-house such services as HR and IT then it will affect them in the long term and they will lose some of their status. When this happened to a friend of mine they outsourced everything and the company never bounced back to their former glory.

SnrP -14 May 2010 | 15:18

Bold move by Camerons.

Bold move by Camerons. Too early to say whether it is a good move. Although most support services are commoditised the reality is that each firm does things slightly differently which will increase the pain involved transferring to a third party vendor. Outsourcing (or setting up an internal shared service centre) is inevitable for large firms - the question for management is whether to jump now when the market is immature and vendors are relatively inexperienced or wait until the competition have taught them how to transition through trial and error. Outsourcing can save money but it can also be a major distraction and disruption to the business when implemented poorly.

Anon -14 May 2010 | 15:43

"We are not anticipating any redundancies at the moment."

The left jab.

"We want this to be seen as something which will be positive for the career development of our business support staff with the opportunities that they will have at Integreon."

The right hook.

Big Dave -14 May 2010 | 15:58

are they kidding?

So the affected staff will see this as an opportunity to progress their careers? How very silly. They will see their hard work, commitment and loyalty being thrown back in their faces. Let's just for a moment deal in reality rather than spin.

Mature reflector -14 May 2010 | 16:12

Positive?

How can anyone who currently works in a support function at Camerons see this as a positive move. Who would you rather work for an international law firm or an outsourcing company? It makes a mockery of any qualifications that individuals might have that are relevant to their job. I really feel for anyone who is currently working in a support function - the next three months are going to present some challenges, that's for sure.

Ex-camerons -14 May 2010 | 18:54

Better late than never

I can’t see a single reason as to how this move can be avoided. It is perfectly wise of Camerons to take this initiative and I would encourage firms alike to follow soon. The issue is survival through profit by incurring fewer expenses. The move will have its teething problems but it needs to be supported by the legal community. One must keep in view the emerging economic blocks. in view of this, redundancies are an important issue but a secondary one...

saqib shah -15 May 2010 | 18:15

Speaking as someone who was outsourced from Osborne Clarke to Integreon, I have to say a lot of the negativity in these comments is unfounded. The service we provide has been completely restructured making for much quicker response times and first time fix for OC's fee earners, which of course allows them to concentrate on what they do best. The feedback we have had from them has been very positive.

The opportunities for us as Integreon employees are looking good too, as this CMS deal highlights. Of course morale took a hit when we first heard the news that we were transferring from OC, but as time has passed most of us have settled well into our roles with Integreon and there is a great deal of optimism about that future holds.

An Osborne Clarke employee outsourced to Integreon -17 May 2010 | 12:26

Outsourcing, not offshoring

Even though I do not agree with outsourcing, from a personal point of view, at least this is not offshoring and so does give a chance of more people keeping their jobs (when redundancies do start happening).

Integreon are the people who helped Clifford Chance offshore - so that could happen for CMS in the near/distant future!!

Not Hopeful -17 May 2010 | 13:36

Where's the point?

First, they made 80 redundant, put the remaining lot on flex. They trained lawyers to do the research and pitching which proved terribly ineffective. Now they outsource those few who were ever qualified to do the support functions. Where's this supposed to lead?

Anonymous -17 May 2010 | 14:27

Call me cynical, but is the above comment really from someone formerly at Osborne Clarke, or some spin put out by Integreon? The exact same comment has been posted on The Lawyer too. Because of this, it doesn't come across as a heartfelt comment, but more as a strategic damage limitation exercise.

Anonymous -17 May 2010 | 14:43

If the OC/Integreon post is really from someone who used to work at OC, then I'm Nigel Knowles' lovechild.

Hmmm -17 May 2010 | 15:04

Future shock

Camerons are not being quixotic. They are simply reflecting the world as it is, right of wrong. Ten years from now very few mid-sized businesses will run their own back offices. How is it efficent for hundreds of businesses individually to reinvent what is essentially an identical wheel. That will make no more sense than it currently does for a farmer to bring in the harvest with 20 people instead of a combine. And soon the combine won't even need a driver. Maybe it is time to start re-training!

Cassandra -17 May 2010 | 16:34

Loyalty?

Outsourcing all back room support staff is done to maximise profits so that those in the senior roles can reward themselves financially from cost savings. This all done in a time when there is a downward pressure on legal fees from business clients who have found business tougher in recent times.

Rather than accept that during these difficult times legal fees may need to adjust downwards accordingly and profits per partner may reduce as a result also, the solution is to knock down the costs of the less skilled and lower paid support staff who have worked loyally for that firm.

Will Integreon reward those staff transferred to them if Integreon are paid bonus payments from Camerons for a job well done or will it be bonuses all round for the senior management at Integreon? With the staff off Camerons' payroll and conscience so much easier to keep all of the profits to the partners. Depressing.

In house lawyer -17 May 2010 | 17:03

To Cassandra, I'd say: "Nonsense". The case for outsourcing is far less clear than its proponents make out. Indeed, its advocates tend to refer to its rise as some kind of evolutionary inevitability, when actually the track record of companies that have outsourced as been mixed. Certainly, there have been some successes, but there have been failures too. All in, is it worth the risk? I'm unconvinced.

Hmmm -17 May 2010 | 17:35

What next

Cassandra's right - as the same can be said for law firms, why have a hundred churning out the same knowledge when five would be better? Bye bye lawyers.

shocked -17 May 2010 | 19:02

I really did work for OC. Just trying to give some hope to those at CMS who may be worried about their future. I posted it here and on The Lawyer as those are the two places I saw so many negative comments.

An Osborne Clarke employee outsourced to Integreon -17 May 2010 | 20:04

Sceptical

To the person who used to work at OC and now at Integreon: we had the sales pitch yesterday. How much do you enjoy the daily 'water-cooler moments' and the 'touching of rocks' that the sales guy mentioned you have? The support staff are being asked to transfer to an alien American-style firm that spouts this gibberish and I wonder how many will have sought alternative employment before that time? I certainly won't be joining it. Spreading Magic and Love Everywhere ("Smile") - my butt cheeks.

Sceptical -18 May 2010 | 10:10

BD professional

Having read the Integreon brochure relating to business development, they provide research, marketing materials and database services. If that's all you want your BD function to be - good luck to you Camerons. I'd suggest up-skilling your associates pdq.

Clare Adshead-Grant -18 May 2010 | 13:40

Pipe down

Don't you just love the way lawyers try to mask their conservatism with cynicism, and how willing they are to hold strong views based on minimal information or experience? CMS is not known as a bellwether law firm but this could mark a new departure. There are parts of HR and BD this deal should leave well alone, though.

Reserved judgment -18 May 2010 | 16:26

£583m or £58.3m per year?

Is Camerons spending £58m every year on back office? The number seems out of whack...

Anonymous -18 May 2010 | 16:49

Get used to it..

..it's the shape of things to come, so suck it up back office! Shape up or ship out.

Ham -18 May 2010 | 17:19

Last one out please close the door.........

I've already received 15 calls from some of Cameron's best accounts staff. Do they really think that a vastly experienced qualified accountant is going to want to work for a US outsourcing firm?!

Great news for their competitors as they can only benefit from the inevitable drain of talent. Very short-sighted from the management, loyalty is out of the window and it looks like they will have massive fall-out from both a staff and service delivery perspective over the next few years before those cost savings actually materialise.

Finance Recruiter -19 May 2010 | 11:00

Integreon supplied the wrong web site

I read the press release about this today at Integreon's web site and then I thought to read what Camerons had to say by going to their web site. But the link that Integreon supplied in their press release was www.cmslegal.com which goes to CMS Cameron McKenna's network on Europe, which has no mention of this in their news items. The correct web site should have been www.cms-cmck.com. Am I the only one that sees the irony in this?

Jeffrey Forbes -19 May 2010 | 14:34

Chip Butty

Legal support staff of all people should be open minded about this innovative experiment.

Other firms are doing this as well. WilmerHale have outsourced many of their support functions to a centre in Ohio, Orrick have used a place in Virgina for many years, some of White & Case's support functions are run through an Indian outsourcing company.

You will find that on a day-to-day level, not much changes, and may even improve as you develop a more robust service culture.

Support staff in law firms have always been treated like second-class citizens. You know that when you join up but you take the money and bite your lip. This is just a formalisation of what partners in all firms think anyway.

In any case, just pack it in and join another firm if it bothers you. If you're half-decent, there's always a similar job at another firm around the corner.

Kevin Webster -19 May 2010 | 17:23

shape of things to come

Jeffrey - no, I think many see the irony in that. Not a bad way to impress your future clients by getting the very first thing so wrong.

Still, maybe Camerons should get used to slapdash approach that they appear to be paying a high premium for, not just in money but lost pride and vast experience of the current support staff that they undoubtedly have.

Anonymous -19 May 2010 | 20:15

record losses

Revenue has been hit and now they want to water down the services they will have even further? This company is definitely on the downward spiral, if I had any shares I would sell sell sell!

human -07 Jun 2010 | 14:55