Date: April 12, 2013 Topic: The Shrinking ... - Georgetown Law

More documents

Recommendations

Info

General Counsel with Power? 2011 The second cluster (see red legends in Figure 6) concerns Internalizers. They rely heavily on internal legal resources, are most systematic in implementing the production-‐line approach, and view themselves as legal strategists in charge of managing legal projects and process flows. This study attempted to provide a systematic analysis of current trends and possible future directions in legal services. We conclude by summarizing a set of key factors that will influence who drives power in legal service global value chains in the future. It is often argued that corporate clients are becoming a force for change in legal services. However, the general counsel’s power to drive change in a sustainable manner depends on the sources of power. The most temporary of GC power lies in the buyer’s market during the post-‐financial crisis recession. Much of the bargaining power resulting from the economic climate is likely to erode when the economy picks up. By contrast, the general counsel will remain a more sustainable force for change if they proactively invest in new capabilities such as project management, as Internalizer GCs are doing. So, law firms, beware of Internalizers amongst the general counsel. However, GCs with a power base in corporate managerial hierarchy may not necessarily regard efficient legal service delivery on a strategic par with legal risk management. If such GCs dominate the in-‐house legal function, power does not equate to an appetite for change. It is, therefore, equally possible that we are heading for a supply side revolution with new entrants – legal services providers – driving discrete and disruptive changes in the way legal services are delivered. 25 Said Business School | University of Oxford
General Counsel with Power? 2011 Afterword: The Future for General Counsel Richard Susskind It was fascinating to be in regular dialogue with Professor Sako during the project discussed in this report. Rarely have I had the chance to hold in-‐depth discussions about the legal market with someone who is not a lawyer. And here is one of the main contributions that Professor Sako makes – she does not have the limited perspective of a practising or academic lawyer, she has no legal axe to grind, no legal business to sustain or disrupt, nor any legal overlord to appease. Rather, she brings the expertise and experience of an economist and management theorist, someone who understands economic forces, business strategy, industry upheaval, and organizational change. And she applies this knowledge to the law, as part of her growing interest in the professions more generally. The legal world should warmly welcome the objective insights of an expert outsider who is looking afresh at its marketplace. Methodologically, this report is different from much that is held out as research into the legal industry. I had anticipated a document that was brimming with data, diagrams, tables, and percentages; and maybe even a formula or two. But I now see this would be pseudo-‐science. This research shows us that General Counsel are a grouping of lawyers that are too diverse in the nature of their work, in the size of their teams and broader organizations, in their industries and markets, and in their geographical presence, for it to be sound to claim that x% of GCs believe this or Y% prefer that. These statistical claims are the stuff of the transient PR-‐based research that surfaces every few weeks whose aim is to secure a headline in the trade press. I see more clearly now that these superficially plausible pie charts and bar graphs do not in fact improve our understanding. Trends What the Oxford research instead provides is a snapshot of the central trends in the buyer’s side of the legal market. Its scope is limited, though, because the focus is on the in-‐house functions of very large organizations. As the list in the Appendix shows, most of the businesses involved in the study are major household names (it is unusual in itself, incidentally, in the world of research into the legal market to be able to see who has actually been consulted). 26 Said Business School | University of Oxford
Page 1 and 2:
Date: April 12, 2013 Topic: The Shr
Page 4 and 5:
PROGRAM AGENDA & ROOM LOCATIONS The
Page 6 and 7:
Things to do in Washington, D.C. Wa
Page 9 and 10:
The Shrinking Pyramid: Implications
Page 11 and 12:
III
Page 13 and 14:
DRAFT IN PROGRESS—PLEASE DO NOT C
Page 15 and 16:
legal services based upon data aggr
Page 17 and 18:
on a consistent, sustained basis. T
Page 19 and 20:
the marketing concept or market(ing
Page 21 and 22:
Technology and online access democr
Page 23 and 24:
portion of their curated informatio
Page 25 and 26:
in the United States and Britain, a
Page 27 and 28:
whether some activities traditional
Page 29 and 30:
Without the necessary systems or pr
Page 31 and 32:
While net promoter score is not a p
Page 33 and 34:
Today, LegalZoom offers a broad por
Page 35 and 36:
4Q09 1Q10 2Q10 3Q10 4Q10 1Q11 2Q11
Page 37 and 38:
Clementi submitted his report in De
Page 39 and 40:
experience, skills and competencies
Page 41 and 42:
away disk drive space. The question
Page 43 and 44:
Riverview’s high-end services are
Page 45 and 46:
need of an overhaul. These “new k
Page 47 and 48:
These are exciting times for those
Page 49 and 50: The introduction of a new technolog
Page 51 and 52: Before turning to our main quantita
Page 53 and 54: H2: Wider document download pattern
Page 55 and 56: Independent variables Technology us
Page 57 and 58: Our research reconciles these two d
Page 59 and 60: REFERENCES Alavi, M., Leidner, D. E
Page 61 and 62: Table 1: Representative Excerpts fr
Page 63 and 64: Table 2: Descriptive Statistics Var
Page 65: Table 4: Results of Individual Fixe
Page 68: There are no materials for this ses
Page 71 and 72: 1 DECONSTRUCTING BIG LAW The Future
Page 73 and 74: The Stanford Law School Research Pr
Page 75 and 76: 2011 General Counsel with Power
Page 77 and 78: Executive Summary of Key Findin
Page 79 and 80: General Counsel with Power? 201
Page 99: General Counsel with Power? 201
Page 107 and 108: Resource Co-Specialization and Supp
Page 109 and 110: al., 2009), plural sourcing (Bradac
Page 111 and 112: ely more on R&D resources, advertis
Page 113 and 114: and from transferring best practice
Page 115 and 116: specialized tasks such as complex a
Page 117 and 118: also distinct from economies of sco
Page 119 and 120: In case studies of innovating firms
Page 121 and 122: knowledge. This translates into a r
Page 123 and 124: To be included in our sample, we re
Page 125 and 126: Law firms. In order to measure the
Page 127 and 128: More specifically, we estimate a st
Page 129 and 130: of sample means indicate more in-ho
Page 131 and 132: services. The coefficient for selli
Page 133 and 134: study design and accounted explicit
Page 135 and 136: These in-house legal departments ca
Page 137 and 138: usiness benefits only if resource c
Page 139 and 140: Dick the Butcher, wishes for lawyer
Page 141 and 142: Gulati R, Puranam P. 2006. Compleme
Page 143 and 144: Sako M. 2013. Professionals between
Page 145 and 146: Table 3. Panel data regression mode
Page 148 and 149: The Shrinking Pyramid: Implications
Page 150 and 151:
Limiting the Damage of Lateral Part
show all

Date: April 12, 2013 Topic: The Shrinking ... - Georgetown Law

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?