15 July 2021
Should law firms aim to have a bit more distinctive personality or does bland discretion appeal more to clients?
I was reading a review of the performance of Coldplay at this year’s remote Glastonbury. Not for the first time the critique was that they were competent, energetic, tuneful but ever so slightly bland. It’s a challenge also laid at the door of Sir Keir Starmer. Listen to him on Desert Island Discs and you find yourself yearning for just a bit more Tim Minchin (not that he would be an ideal leader of the Labour Party).
So what about Big Law? Commercial law firms are not generally in the business of being noisy. Discretion is a quality that would often be seen as desirable and it is not a good day at the office for the managing partner when the firm becomes the story.
But are law firms too willing, in 2021, to be a bit grey, to fight shy of primary colours? The remote working driven by the pandemic has tugged at culture and loosened bonds of friendship and loyalty. With vaccination thankfully beginning to have an impact and return to office initiatives gathering pace, might now be a good moment for law firm leaders think hard about culture and challenge themselves to articulate and drive the personality of the firm?
A few strands to this thought:
It has been striking to me to see how corporates which have set out a clear and inspiring purpose, and then been led by that purpose, have made progress over the last couple of years. Examples include Anglo American, NatWest and Reckitt - “We exist to protect, heal and nurture in the relentless pursuit of a cleaner and healthier world. We fearlessly innovate in this pursuit across our Hygiene, Health and Nutrition businesses”. Commentary from internal and external stakeholders suggests that purpose has driven real cultural change at Reckitt.
In these businesses, purpose is shaping strategy and capital allocation, motivating employees to stretch, engaging customers and suppliers and resonating with investors.
Many law firms have, of course, appreciated the importance of purpose both to clients and to employees and have worked (with surveys and focus groups) to articulate values and give authentic expression to them. There must be more to purpose than maximising profits - right?
There are challenges:
But you do see law firm leaders talking more about values and there are increasingly punchy purpose statements on websites. For example, there is “Navigate uncertainty with authority” at Davis Polk and “Delivering legal certainty in a changing world” at Linklaters.
This is all good stuff, but is it enough? Themes of integrity, excellence, innovation and collegiality are key of course but can firms go the extra yard and express a purpose that is genuinely distinctive and then be led by that purpose? Meaning that the conduct and development of the business, and its interaction with key stakeholders, is really seen through that prism.
You’ll tell me that this is all a bit fluffy and woke, but take a look at what Pinsent Masons have been doing. It’s bold and it’s interesting. They explain how they are transitioning from being “an expertise-based law firm” to being “a purpose-led professional services business, with law at the core” pursuing a purpose of “making business work better for people”. As part of this, their results announcement last year included three, statistics based, metrics of success other than financial performance being:
This kind of approach won’t be for all firms but, particularly in a Covid world where an adrenaline shot to culture could be of real value, it is worth asking the hard questions - “What is our firm for?” “Does it have soul?”
Talk of purpose naturally leads us to ESG. This is, of course, the topic du jour for many clients and will be front of mind for law firm leaders. But how should a law firm’s approach to ESG - essentially sustainability - be framed so that it is resonant, coherent and (ideally) exciting?
Core building blocks might be:
The client advisory proposition. Recent Thomson Reuters data suggests that 42% of its Large Law clients have ESG practices advising on ESG compliance and ESG “opportunity”. Clients can really benefit from sage and proportionate advice about how to bring order to reporting against differing ESG standards and frameworks and how to think most creatively about, for example, sustainable financing structures. This area can, of course, yield consultancy opportunities outside the purely legal. But the proposition has to have shape and edge. So, here at Wasser, Saul and Kane we are developing the offering for our sustainability practice on one side of paper. It has three areas of focus - climate, finance and people. We are then going to road test it with five clients and five prospective clients, sand it down in light of feedback and roll it out;
I have been reading No Rules Rules by Reed Hastings (Netflix co-founder and CEO) and Erin Meyer (Business School professor) which was kindly sent to me by a friend.
One of the key themes is that candid and constructive feedback improves performance although it needs to be given and received in the right way. It should be given with intent to assist (not, for example, to hurt the other person), actionable (what can the recipient do differently?) and genuinely appreciated by the recipient who can decide whether to accept or discard it. And various examples are given of senior people in Netflix being pulled up on bad behaviour enabling “high performers to become outstanding performers”.
A few years ago, I gave a talk to a group of senior associates at a law firm. I went out to dinner afterwards with three of the partners.
One of the partners said, over the starters, “Can I give you some feedback on your talk?”.
“Sure” I said, bracing myself.
“Well, a couple of the associates thought that it was meant for a more junior group and was a bit basic.”
I thanked the person and reflected, stomach churning, that I had indeed probably misjudged my audience.
That wasn’t a great moment. But it was really valuable as I now take extra care to check that, when giving a talk, I have a clear idea of the seniority and expectations of my audience.
All big law firms, of course, have regular review processes for partners, legal staff and business services staff. But structures tend to be quite hierarchical so that tough (but important) messages for seniors can remain undelivered. 360-degree feedback processes help to address this somewhat, but you do find that junior team members will hold back for fear that the process is not as anonymous as billed.
So, the challenge for law firm leaders is to find ways of encouraging more regular candid (but never unkind) feedback. A few ideas on the how:
Law firms, and their leaders, are naturally wary of expressing a view on big issues of the day, particularly where there is a political dimension. Inevitably not all partners would subscribe to the same view and nor would all clients. You hesitate to pin your colours to a mast that would offend some part of the client base.
Brexit is a classic case in point here and, cards on the table, I was part of the group at my former firm which decided back in 2016 that whilst each partner would have their own (strongly held) views we were not in a position to have a view as a firm.
But I find myself wondering whether times have changed and whether law firms should be more willing to get off the fence. Law and regulation keep getting more complicated as globalisation cedes ground to nationalism (USA/China, Brexit), the business of law continues to grow in success and influence and ESG themes are ever-more resonant. Many law firm leaders spoke out in relation to the Black Lives Matter movement and Paul Weiss have recently gathered an impressive group of law firm leaders in issuing a statement denouncing anti-semitism. Does this signal the beginning of a step change in law firm engagement?
I think that it does. Particularly against a backdrop of much greater focus by business on ESG and on the interests and needs of stakeholders other than shareholders and owners, it will be increasingly hard for law firms and their leaders to say “no comment” when asked about environmental, social and governance issues of moment. Does the firm, for example, support the lifting of nearly all Covid restrictions in the UK on 19 July?
And I believe that this change will help to bring more texture to the personality of law firms.
Which said, the area remains delicate and complicated:
You are the managing partner standing, hopefully physically, in front of a group of vacation students. They look expectant. How do you describe the firm? How, without in any way disrespecting the (annoyingly good) competition, do you explain in three crisp points how the firm is different?
It might be best to go easy on expressions like “high quality” and “solutions-driven” and reflect on the DNA of the organisation. How has it been built up, what does its legacy say about its future, how is it structured, what do clients say when they meet the team on reception, “what three words?” would your spouse or partner use to describe the firm?
Thinking about Purpose is helpful of course.
I used to find motor car analogies helpful but one could equally go for guitars - are we a Fender Stratocaster, a Gibson Les Paul or a Jackson Pro Series Jeff Loomis Kelly? Or we could go for bands - the Cardigans, the Rolling Stones, Coldplay…?
31 August 2023
For some days in July the business world was transfixed by the NatWest Saga...
18 July 2023
Things we are never gonna not do again. In the hope that vou will forgive the indulgence here are eight ideas.
12 June 2023
It does seem to be a good moment for public companies and other business organisations to take stock and ask themselves a few questions.
03 May 2023
Whilst the deal environment is stirring, it is not yet buzzing and the world out there is in a fragile state.
29 March 2023
There is a sense of fragility out there and it might be worth looking to see if there are useful takeaways
17 February 2023
We take our seats “in the round” and a man casually wanders on stage, sits at a piano and starts a gentle refrain.
12 January 2023
One well-informed Russia observer told me confidently recently that this would be Putin’s last winter in power. I’m not so sure...
12 December 2022
The baby boomers amongst us will remember Ian Dury. His big hit was essentially a list of quirky reasons to be cheerful. It resonates with me now because 2022 has been such a difficult year. So, it behoves us to celebrate the “good bits” of the year.
03 November 2022
“We prefer Global Elite”, he explained with a wry smile, “Magic Circle is a bit too UK centric”. What’s going on?
28 September 2022
She reigned for 70 years and 214 days, 7 years more than Queen Victoria, and has been the very embodiment of constancy.
26 July 2022
Some rhythms just happen (breathing) and some are created, like music and regular behavioural ways of doing or saying things.
21 April 2022
After the largesse of 2021, what are the levers needing to be pulled ahead of 2022
15 March 2022
What we are all seeing unfold as Russia pounds Ukraine is heart breaking, humbling and, for many, simply incomprehensible.
11 January 2022
7 Themes which I believe will be relevant for PLC Directors to keep in mind in 2022
22 November 2021
Inspired by the exciting nip and tuck of a TV story to get our board and pieces out
05 October 2021
The need to balance pragmatism with positivity.
23 August 2021
Will we look back on the Summer of '21 as a 'Key Moment'?
09 June 2021
Are we all guilty of over-reaction to events or just the lack of the will to make things simple?
12 May 2021
What causes us to 'keep up' with those who are moving faster than we are?
19 April 2021
With its 230 pages and 98 consultation questions
22 February 2021
Do you buy the 4-pack of standard Magnum Almond or the 6-pack of Mini-Magnum Almond?