Earlier this week I asked US lawyers to see if their firm was on the list below. The purpose was to show that there is a huge, untapped value base within each of these firms that can easily be turned into a profit centre (after so many years in the US, I should really know to spell it “Center”). What is more, that profit centre/center will have a value that is currently not recognised on the balance sheet of any law firm.
Today, fresh from Lawyers Weekly in Australia is fresh evidence of Australian LAW FIRMS (not just GCs) receptiveness to alternative delivery models. All this does is make US law firms look less innovative than those in other parts of the English-speaking world. While law is insulated in significant ways from international competition, a legal structure that adds costs to their national economy is a drag on the energies and opportunities created by their compatriots.
Have a look at the list below. If your firm’s name is on it then you should seriously be working on a model that isolates transactional from value-add activities, putting those lower-value (but probably high profitability) areas into a stand-alone entity, and managing it as a growth engine, perhaps even under a different brand. LPOs are nibbling at your lunch and they are only going to get bigger bits of your sandwich unless you have a Strategic LPO strategy.
Here’s the Lawyers Weekly article http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/news/lpo-on-the-up and the list again.
Are you on this list?
Latham and Watkins,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom,
White and Case,
Kirkland and Ellis,
Morgan, Lewis and Bockius,
Weil, Gotshal and Manges,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen and Hamilton,
Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe,
Ropes and Gray,
Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher,
Morrison and Foerster,
Holland and Knight,
McDermott Will and Emery,
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky and Walker,
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr,
Winston and Strawn,
Foley and Lardner,
Melveny and Myers,
Fulbright and Jaworski,
Hunton and Williams,
Simpson Thacher and Bartlett,
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer and Feld,
Covington and Burling,
Shearman and Sterling,
King and Spalding,
Alston and Bird,
Sullivan and Cromwell,
Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard and Smith,
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison,
Squire, Sanders and Dempsey,
Debevoise and Plimpton,
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman and Dicker,
Davis Polk and Wardwell,