It is interesting to watch the growing success of
non-traditional law firms, which have fee earners working on a dispersed basis
(either from home or from client offices).
The advantages for lawyers are clear to see – working essentially as freelancer
for a firm with an established brand name gives a reputable source of work
referral, the back-up resources of a large organization, but with a great deal
more flexibility and quality of life that is unattainable in most traditional,
centralized firms. It is to be expected
that the model would appeal particularly to women who may be trying to balance
a career with motherhood, but actually the attractions of the model from an
employee perspective are likely to appeal to a much wider demographic – there
can’t be many lawyers who would not be attracted to the opportunity to continue
to do high quality work for a top salary, but to avoid a daily commute,
punishing billing targets, office politics and limited holiday time? It has
long been acknowledged that there is an issue with retaining lawyers in the
long term, as they become disillusioned with punishingly-long working days and needless
travelling, so it should come as no surprise that they are looking for
alternatives which take advantage of technological advances and an enlightened
approach to working arrangements.
From the client perspective, the clearest upside is
lower cost – achievable because of the very low fixed overhead associated with
such business models. They get
essentially the same service (and the same indemnity policy comfort) without
having to pay the cost of keeping lawyers housed in expensive City locations,
or, if they are taking lawyers on secondment, without the long-term costs
associated with making them permanent members of staff.
Many sceptics said that the model would not work
well, as lawyers like working best in a community environment with their peers,
where they have the opportunity to interact with others face to face. That is probably true for junior lawyers who
are still learning their craft, but many of the dispersed law firms are staffed
exclusively with lawyers of 10+ years experience, where this is much less of an
issue. Add to that the increasing ease
with which lawyers can communicate freely electronically with a network of
like-minded professionals, and there is no need for a lawyer working on a
dispersed basis to feel unsupported or isolated. These sceptics also fall into the error of
thinking that how the market will evolve will depend upon what lawyers would
like or not like, when in reality it is the demand of clients that will dictate
the future shape of legal services – time and time again lawyers look at the
issue through the wrong end of the telescope, and this seems to be no exception.
In any event, the volume of entrants into this
market would seem to suggest that the sceptics may have called this one wrong.
Many firms have been successfully developing this
way of working for some time - Axiom now has over 300 lawyers on its books,
Berwin Leighton Paisner’s Lawyers on Demand initiative seems to have been a
success with over 80 lawyers now working for it, and a plethora of other
similar businesses having been established.
The numbers may yet be small in the context of the overall legal market,
but they are not insignificant and they are growing rapidly.
Eversheds are the latest major firm to confirm
their permanent offering in the market.
Since September of last year, Eversheds has been piloting a service under
the name “Eversheds Agile” - a pool of lawyers that the firm will second to
clients for temporary assignments across Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle
East. The lawyers work in the clients’
offices or remotely, and have access to Eversheds’ resources and network of
offices.
Its aim had been to have between 10 and 15 lawyers in
the programme in the first year, but after only 7 months the number of lawyers
on the roster had grown to almost 80 and the firm has confirmed that the new
business line will become a permanent arrangement. That is quite an impressive
growth by any standards, and proof that there is a clear market demand for this
type of arrangement.
No comments:
Post a Comment