Editor's letter

In 2003, Managing Partner published its first in-house counsel special issue, with a particular focus on the in-house to external counsel relationship. Since then we have spoken to many in-house lawyers about the challenges of their roles and the quality of service they receive from their private-practice counterparts. Certain trends have been particularly noted. First, the in-house role has changed and developed, presenting law firms with opportunities for better collaboration or, conversely, raising fears that the external lawyers will be disconnected from the core management of the business.

Michael Simmons, for example, describes some of the concerns he experienced when first introduced to the in-house counsel of a longstanding client (page 19). His firm had formerly dealt first-hand with the directors and the arrival of an in-house lawyer was disconcerting, especially when Simmons discovered that the available work would be put out for tender.

From enjoying the assurance of a profitable ongoing partnership, Simmons was suddenly facing the prospect of a competitive pitch process, the outcome of which was far from certain.

It is particularly understandable that lawyers should be unnerved by pitching for work. At Ark Group’s recent ‘Strategic Marketing for the Legal Profession’ conference, a panel session on cross-selling techniques highlighted the problems many lawyers face in selling either themselves or their firm’s capabilities. Lawyers do not generally transfer well into a sales environment, which is based on chasing numerous deals and accepting many failures. To pitch successfully, many lawyers will feel they are climbing an insurmountable learning curve, made worse by a feeling of resentment that their roles now include such duties.

But, while the prospect of increasingly having to pitch for work might unnerve many a law firm, the news is far from all bad. In particular, the role of in-house lawyers has fundamentally changed, with many now enjoying board-level responsibilities. This means that firms dealing with an in-house should not feel they are losing the director-level relationship of earlier years. The in-house lawyer is also in a far better position to understand the work and concerns of external lawyers, meaning that communicating with the client should become far easier for external counsel. In addition, there is a distinct trend among in-house to take responsibility for making the relationship work, by clearly defining the client’s expectations and regularly informing and updating their external lawyers on developments.

And, structural/business developments aside, a good or bad in-house to external relationship will often come down to a simple fact: it’s the personalities that count. One lawyer may get on famously with an in-house lawyer that another lawyer finds intolerable to work with. Perhaps the most important skill in all of this is the ability to be open and honest and admit when there’s a clash. For a law firm, the solution might simply be finding another lawyer for the job. After all, where the only alternative may be losing the client altogether, there is little room for sensitivities to get in the way.

For those firms that can make the most of the opportunities to better collaborate with in-house counsel, there is every prospect that client relationships will continue to prosper. It will require flexibility on both sides, but there is every sign that in-house lawyers are prepared to meet their external counsel half way.

Caroline Poynton
Editor

Features

Masterclass: Financial management for profit Free
Financial reporting can be divided into statutory reporting (annual accounts) and management reporting (monthly accounts). Both sets of reports are derived from the same data: the ledgers and chart of accounts. Both are for the most part concerned with money and finance. Both are usually produced by accountants. However, the two sets of information are generated for different purposes and shouldn’t be confused.

Masterclass: The golden rules of pitching Free
Pitching for work does not come naturally to many lawyers, whose success lies in a combination of technical expertise and the ability to build long-term one-to-one relationships with clients. A good pitch, however, relies on the skills of the lawyer or lawyer team to sell themselves and the firm.

Interview: Allen & Overy, Shanghai Free
Reflecting burgeoning business opportunities in China, Ark Group is to hold its first ‘Building a profitable legal business in China’ conference in Shanghai on 1-2 December 2005. Caroline Poynton talks to one of the event’s key speakers Simon Black, managing partner of Allen & Overy’s Shanghai office, about his experiences in the Chinese market.

Case study: Atteys Free
For many solicitors, the issue of client care is one that can all too often be overlooked. Over the past decade the profession has gone through a radical period of change, not only in terms of the way that every solicitor conducts their day-to-day business, but also, and perhaps more importantly, the way in which a firm keeps in touch with its clients.

Case study: Finers Stephens Innocent Free
I was extremely upset the first time that a long-standing, corporate client engaged an in-house lawyer. I viewed it as a betrayal and denial of the closeness of our relationship. Until that time, I had enjoyed unlimited access to the directors, as they had to me.

Case study: Carillion Free
Carillion carried out a root-and-branch review of its legal work in early 2002, identifying that we used nearly 50 different law firms in the UK. Our legal work is complex and, in many cases, novel, and our legal spend represents a significant cost. We identified that our use of lawyers needed to change, and that it was difficult to manage both the cost and logistics of such a diverse panel.

Cover story: The in-house equation Free
Law firms are striving to become more sophisticated in the way they deliver their legal services, as they face fierce competition and ever tighter legal budgets among clients. Proof of this could be seen at Ark Group’s ‘Strategic Marketing for the Legal Profession’ conference of 26-27 September 2005.

Profile: Richard Wiseman Free
Two years ago, Richard Wiseman controversially told Managing Partner that most law firms’ marketing efforts are wasted. Caroline Poynton now talks to him about his career development as general counsel at Shell, and asks him a little more on his views of external counsel.

Opinion: How was it for you? Free
You have the technical expertise to satisfy the fussiest board of directors, excellent information systems and a very sharp marketing department. But then again, so do most of your competitors. So what are the more equivocal factors that sway those responsible for making the buying decisions and how can you influence this from the very first pitch to the completion of your umpteenth deal?

Regulars

Thought leader Free
When it comes to knowledge management (KM), there are trailblazers who do the risky work and followers who can see the vision but want to lessen the risks and avoid the pitfalls. The legal profession, however, has been accused of being absent from both these groups by both industry analysts and the profession’s own press.