“I refuse to pay for information I already have,”
exclaims the General Counsel of an energy company when asked about his top criteria for appointing external law firms.
“This is a simplistic view and certainly no solid basis for building a long-term, fruitful relationship with panel law firms,” retorts the GC of a multinational corporation, responsible for managing the legal functions of over 15 different countries. “If you expect a law firm to add value and provide actionable business advice, in-house lawyers and external counsels must share knowledge and build common ground. This requires investment and trust from both sides.”
“Trusting is not the first adjective that comes to mind when describing lawyers – they have been educated to be on their guard and skeptical to better protect their clients. Making the switch does not come easy,” responds a LegalInnovation officer at a corporate law firm.
“They must understand that General Counsels do not always expect guaranteed correctness; receiving their best-informed opinion in urgent matters is the priority, and forecasts that turn out to be wrong are part of business life. Providing clear guidance to your panel law firms about the type and amount of work they can expect from your company also helps build trust: if the lawyers can invest enough in understanding your company and expectations, they will proactively suggest efficiency-boosting solutions.”
“When working with GCs, our lawyers’ objective is to act as their extended arm,” confirms the Head of Innovation at a continental law firm. “Our first focus when onboarding a new client is to find counterparts that match the GC’s working and communication style. To tackle each of their issues, we then set up ad hoc teams with the right mix of field expertise, educational background, and levels of seniority.”
“In addition to the right team, data-driven process analysis is key to efficient delivery of legal services,” adds Jordan Lee, Chief Strategy Officer of a collective redress law firm, Pogust Goodhead. “Once you identify a step that can be automated or repetitive patterns that can be streamlined, the tech team can step in and capture even the smallest marginal gains. These quickly add up to substantial cost efficiencies and quality increases.”
“There is a clear tendency for clients to expect their lawyers to also act as tech advisors whenever legal process optimization is possible. E.g., in NEUR.ON’s field of expertise, any client facing major translation challenges in a legal case expects lawyers to have a cost-efficient and secure solution ready. The testing, benchmarking, and co-creation of LegalTech tools have become part of the law firm’s deliverables.”

Here are a few takeaways from the conference.
Mark your calendars for next year’s edition!
A big thank you to Bradley Collins, Charlotte Johnstone, and Merlin Beyts for the brilliant organization.