Full text of my Australian Financial Review opinion piece first published on 11 September 2020.
In April, I made three predictions about a post-Covid19 legal world – there would be deeper relationships between staff and clients, less paper and more flexible work arrangements. Five months on, it’s worth revisiting these predictions and to ask what else might change?
The argument for deeper relationships was based on the notion that people going through acute stress together come out at the other end with greater trust, understanding and connection. Given that we’re still living through the pandemic, it’s probably too soon to tell for sure whether this prediction will come true or not.
It appears the sense of a life-threatening emergency is being replaced by a collective consciousness of fatigue and despair. In Victoria, tempers seem to be a bit shorter and patience a little thinner. This trend doesn’t augur well for a future of more kindness and mutual support.
The predictions around less paper and more flexible work arrangements are looking rock solid. Many firms have eased into hybrid operating models and have hardly skipped a beat. Some have already publicly stated that this model is permanent.
But there are some emerging trends that justify three new predictions.
#1 Fewer legal secretaries and assistants
Over the past few months, some firms have reported increases in overall production but lower productivity amongst legal secretaries and assistants. Lawyer self-sufficiency and the move to working from home have been the primary reasons cited for this shift.
It’s not too much of a leap to suggest many firms will look to reduce secretarial support ratios by a combination of redundancies and retraining of some assistants as paralegals.
One of the possible consequences of reducing secretarial numbers is a more fragmented work culture. Secretaries often provide a bridge between people and practices by sharing news and gossip, fostering relationships and retelling stories.
They offer a valuable pastoral care role, especially when the senior legal practitioners are EQ-deprived. Without this cultural glue, firms run the risk of being more productive but less human.
#2 Renewed respect for HR
In many firms, the HR team has kept the ship sailing. This is no mean feat given the speed, scale and scope of change required, and the fact they operate with little formal authority within a partnership structure.
There is always extreme sensitivity around changes in people’s pay, promotions, leave entitlements, workloads and future job prospects. HR practitioners have advised on these issues as well as resource strategy, communication, mental health, resilience and fostering a strong team vibe.
Pre-Covid19, it was not uncommon for firms to suffer from the “HR standoff’. In one corner, the HR team members would complain about the firm’s partners being disrespectful and disempowering. In the opposite corner, the firm’s partners would regard HR as being process, not outcome-driven and uncommercial.
I think this standoff will be mostly a thing of the past, especially in firms where HR has risen to the challenge.
#3 Reset in decision-making
To deal with the government-imposed lockdown in March 2020, firms needed to make big decisions quickly. Managing partners were given the authority by the broader partnership to address the crisis. It appears many of these senior leaders accepted this mandate and blossomed with their increased power and autonomy.
Five months on and many firms have not shifted significantly away from the March model. With relentless partner workloads and no in-person partner meetings, the firm’s executives have largely kept their decision rights.
I expect that post-corona the pendulum will swing back slightly, but this recent experience reveals that the firm can still prosper without every partner having a say on everything.
#growth, #leadership, #legal, #professional service firms, #strategy
Firms face danger if they stray too far from the core
In Articles, Commentary on 10 October 2020 at 12:24 pmFull text of my opinion piece first published in the Australian Financial Review on 9 October 2020.
Establishing non-legal businesses seems to be back in favour among Australia’s larger law firms.
Minter Ellison was an early mover with acquisitions of an IT consultancy firm and an executive remuneration practice in 2017. Others include Corrs Cyber (data breach and crisis management), G+T (Gilbert + Tobin) Innovate (in-house legal transformation), Ashurst Consulting (board risk and governance), TG (Thomson Geer) Endeavour (public affairs), McCullough Robertson’s Allegiant (insurance broking) and Hall & Wilcox’s Global Mobility Services (migration, tax and relocation).
The rationale for these new non-law ventures is mostly centred on strengthening or defending the core business and making significant client relationships stickier. Some firms pursue these adjacencies to deliver new sources of profitable growth or to provide a hedge in the event of industry disruption.
To increase the chances of success of these new ventures and others seeking adjacent opportunities, there are four key strategies to consider.
#Reinforce the core
Many adjacency failures can be put down to firms straying too far from their core business.
Woolworths’ foray into the retail hardware sector via its Masters business was an unmitigated failure. Masters did not reinforce Woolworths’ core grocery business or leverage existing customer and supplier relationships. While its retailing and property management capabilities were strong, they couldn’t outmuscle a formidable incumbent (Bunnings).
Success comes from investing in areas where there are substantial, measurable and mutually reinforcing economies between the current and the new.
#2 Align financial expectations
One of the main reasons law firms have not persisted with non-law businesses in the past is that they have simply not made enough money.
Well-run premium law firms are very profitable. Despite intense competition, the market price for specialised legal advice has increased significantly over the past 20 years.
Many of the new ventures compete in market segments where the price point for partner-level advice is 30 per cent to 40 per cent lower than law firms. Others are pitched at the ‘brain-surgery’ end of the market with relatively low leverage and utilisation.
The upshot is there is a significant risk regarding profit expectations. My advice is to ensure everyone is 100 per cent on the same page early on – and if there are irreconcilable gaps, walk away!
#3 Pre-empt cultural clashes
While great strides have been made in recent years on using the talents of those without legal qualifications, the lawyers still market – and see – themselves as the smartest people in the room.
So, it is vital that your cultural due diligence cover over things like common aspirations, values and standards. When it comes to adding advisors from non-law disciplines, there is an added risk of professional arrogance.
One of the keys to success is to pre-empt and address any cultural differences between the lawyers and those other idiots. Only joking!
#4 Ensure a founder’s mentality
Why is profitable growth so hard to achieve and sustain?
Chris Zook from Bain & Company researched this question and found that when firms fail to achieve their growth targets, 90 per cent of the time the root causes are internal and not market related.
He also found that firms experience a set of predictable internal crises, at predictable stages, as they grow.
Zook suggests that managing these choke points requires a “founder’s mentality”— someone with fire in the belly who is relentless in pursuing the business’ mission, adept at leading others through change and imbuing the firm with a strong client focus.
So, in summary, all it takes to succeed is to have a driven intrapreneur leading a new venture that is deeply connected to the core business – from a market, financial and cultural perspective.
It sounds easy. Until you try.
Share this:
Like this: