About Bruce
Search this site:


Subscribe to E-Mail Updates
About the SiteAbout Adam Smith Adam Smith, Esq. Newsletter Adam Smith, Esq. Newsletter

January 31, 2005

The Market's Competitive. Which Market?

"Law firms are being forced to run themselves along more 'corporate' lines than ever before," reports the FT, summarizing a PwC report on the top 50 UK firms during 2004.  This new "strategic approach" may represent a departure from how things were done, but if nothing else it also constitutes resounding confirmation of the fact that capitalism, and the competition it entails, have come to the elite end of the legal market.  Consider:

  • Of the firms whose partnership agreements permit partners to be "de-equitised" or even dismissed, 80% invoked those powers.
  • Of the top 25 firms, 56% reported cutting "junior lawyers" as well.
  • And 61% cut support staff.

Promiscuous expansion abroad is also being dialled back.  More than half the firms reported earning less than 10% of their profits abroad, and the consensus seemed to be that global expansion has not lived up to expectations.

Lastly, the UK's common "lockstep" model is becoming increasingly precarious, "as high-performing partners resent large payouts to their less effective colleagues," as the report puts it.

When I say capitalism has invaded the elite end, let me be precise about exactly which market I'm talking about:  It is not, as one would instinctively have it, the marketplace for FTSE 100 firms buying high-end legal services; although that marketplace is surely evolving, with "beauty contests" and "panels" becoming more common, those trends are not driving the changes PwC reports.   Rather, the market that matters here is the marketplace where partners (and associates) choose law firms.  Take away that market—that is to say, take away lateral mobility—and none of this would be occurring. 

So, draconian and inhumane as some of these developments may seem, consider the alternative:  Do you really want a world where choosing a firm out of law school amounts to indentured servitude with a lifelong term?  Because if lawyers can move between firms, firms have to compete to recruit and retain them.  That is precisely what PwC reports is happening.

Published by Bruce at January 31, 2005 3:23 PM | TrackBack
Published to Compensation | Finance | Globalization | Leadership | Partnership Structures | Strategy

Comments
I work in a firm that, like many, started off fairly small, when through mergers in the 1980s, saw big growth in the 1990s and is now quite large. We still have quite a number of partners from way back when, 30 years ago. They are highly respected and I know many of them have been approached by other firms and companies offering more money. However,none have gone due to loyalty with what they still regard as 'their' firm, even though there are hundreds of other partners now (I dont mean that in terms of controlling the firm, only in terms of loyalty). The younger partners are completely different - lateral hires and departures are common, almost always just for more money (since the work and client base is usually just the same). Very few people being made partners now days have worked for the firm since they started (if any). Obviously this loss of life long loyalty thing is not just with law firms. But the business side of the law firms has ended up creating a rod for their own backs. Successful partners are unhappy at not making enough money, unsuccessful ones are stressed and know there they can be kicked out, junior lawyers arent being made partner and know that moving increases their chances (you always move 'up'). I guess that is the way of capitalism and I can't really complain. Until I become a partner, whether successful or not.

Published by: ctd Author Profile Page at February 1, 2005 8:42 PM

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?


Law Firm Finance 101 Seminar

People Are Talking

"Adam Smith, Esq. is, and will remain, the definitive voice on law firm strategy."
David Jabbari, Global Head of Know-How, Allen & Overy

"I just don't know what the profession would do without you."
—Chairman, AmLaw 25 firm

“Constantly stunning.’—Managing Partner

"I read three things:  The Wall Street Journal, The Economist, and Adam Smith, Esq.—and I tell my partners to do the same."
—Managing Partner, AmLaw 50 firm

“You have a fascinating niche which you cover ever so much better than does the conventional legal press.”
—Walter Olson of Overlawyered

“Required reading: Amazing.”—Venture Capitalist

"You're the brand name in law firm economics. There is no one out there—repeat, no one—who covers this business better, or thinks about it more creatively, than you. I tell people this guy is really, really good."
—Chair/Managing Partner, AmLaw 50 firm

Links: law
Links: corporate law
10b-5 Daily
Business Pundit
CorporateCounsel.Net Blog
Conglomerate

links: economics
Atlantic Blog
BusFilm by Larry Ribstein
Business Pundit
Carnival of the Capitalists
Chicago Boyz
Ensight
Marginal Revolution
Ronald Coase Institute
Stephen Bainbridge
Links: tech & culture

"Adam Smith, Esq.,"® an inquiry into the economics of law firms, and the maroon banner, are a federally registered trademark belonging to Adam Smith, Esq., LLC, which is partially owned and controlled by Bruce MacEwen.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.