Having a global reach across multiple jurisdictions is something clients have sought from their law firms for generations. Previously, clients would hire firms in each jurisdiction where they needed advice; now, they can hire one law firm, which can lead on the work and coordinate advice from different jurisdictions.
For organisations operating across multiple markets and jurisdictions, an international law firm is often the first port of call, says Mark Smith, director of strategic markets at UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥.
"It's not just detailed knowledge of local law that these firms offer. It's the ‘boots on the ground’ insight, connections, influence, and deep understanding that a locally qualified lawyer practising remotely may lack."
Download our free report: the pros and cons of the global law firm
Whilst clients are still seeking global reach across different jurisdictions, they have also become more strategic in seeking legal advice – with a growing number reaching out for the niche knowledge they cannot source internally. Law firms are expected to house a host of sector and practice area-specific specialists.
Whilst this is achievable for some global firms, it is not for all.
Besides global reach and a more strategic approach when seeking legal advice, there has also been a shift in client demand for cultural alignment between them and their law firm. A factor law firms must keep in mind when deciding how they offer international services.
Penelope Warne, senior partner at the UK office of international law firm CMS, which has 78 offices spread across 40 countries, says, "Clients are also making more complex reporting requests, especially in regards to diversity and inclusion."
"We have seen a shift in clients wishing to ensure there is cultural alignment between them and their law firms," she says. "Many clients are deeply engaged in tackling the inequality of diversity and inclusion that might exist within their businesses."
Some law firms can provide access to top lawyers and legal tools across all practice areas and jurisdictions; others coordinate their advice through networks, such as the 'Best Friends’ networks, to offer their clients the best international legal expertise.
A recent article explains how law firms have responded differently to clients' globalisation demands.
On the one end, law firms join together in a network; on the other end, we have a global law firm - one firm aiming to provide global coverage by having offices in various jurisdictions. And then, we have the ‘Best Friends’ network option somewhere in between.
Examples of law networks include Interlaw, "a long-established elite global network of pre-eminent independent law firms". Interlaw has 7000+ lawyers in 140 cities around the world. A client will instruct the local firm in their jurisdiction, who will then work with another Interlaw network firm.
Some networks prioritise working with member firms, while others are non-binding networks. TeraLex is an example of a ‘voluntary association of independent law firms’. Each member firm can work with any other law firm or client.
Conversely, we have global law firms such as Clifford Chance, with 17 European offices in 13 countries, eight in five countries in the Asia Pacific region, and offices in North America, South America, and the Middle East.
In a broad sense, it is an exceptionally tight form of international networking. Typically, it involves market-leading firms that decided not to expand to a global law firm.
Slaughter and May is a leading example with its European ‘Best Friends’ group. The network is made up of five top firms in various European countries. Whilst some critics have expressed concern about whether the local firm can prioritise the work of Slaughter and May in London, the network excelled during the pandemic.
Slaughter and May practice partner David Wittmann : "We have significant and long experience of working together with colleagues at our relationship firms. These long-term relationships mean that we have continued to deliver high-quality, efficient deal teams with the right mix of deal skills, country-specific expertise and knowledge of the client [during the pandemic]."
A partner at a large German firm said: "What the network is able to do is show that, in uncertain times, what is valued above all else is expertise."
Travers Smith is another example of a firm that uses ‘Best Friends’ to serve its globalised clients.
The main difference between ‘Best Friends’ and other international networks is that the firm sticks to its specialism and joins forces with similarly positioned firms instead of joining a broader network. It is a collective of smaller, informally linked firms.
recently spoke to legal leaders to get their views on ‘Best Friend’ networks vs working with a global firm.
Natalie Salunke, the general counsel for consumer credit provider Zilch, says the international reach of a global firm appeals to her, and it can make life a lot easier, too. However, it still depends on market factors, says Salunke.
"Just because a law firm has an office somewhere doesn't always mean it has the greatest calibre of people or the breadth of different experiences in that office." She pointed out that lawyers often feel obliged to refer work to colleagues in overseas offices even when they know they're not at the same level. Salunke added," Just because the law firm has a great reputation doesn't always mean every single lawyer is exceptional."
As an alternative, Salunke says many in-house legal teams turn to the so-called ‘Best Friends’ networks when seeking out international legal expertise.
"You've got subject matter experts in the home law firm seeking out people in other countries who they're happy to stake their reputation on."
Mark Smith, who held several private practice and in-house roles before becoming director of strategic markets at UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥, says firms without an extensive global reach wanting to retain the complex, high-stakes cross-jurisdictional work must service client needs through other means such as the ‘Best Friends’ network. "Providing a consistent, high-quality service across multiple offices is not easy, even for a firm with multiple levers of control."
Andrew Levander, chair of Dechert, an international firm with 21 offices worldwide, says," A global platform provides clients with access to teams who possess local knowledge and expertise but who can consult with their counterparts in other parts of the world to most efficiently and effectively support clients."
Dechert takes a strategic approach to the areas of the law and jurisdictions it covers based on client demand, says Levander. "As markets become increasingly complex and inter-connected, clients require the integrated capabilities of highly specialised practices and industry sector expertise," says Levander.
There is no best model.
How firms choose to provide consistent, high-quality expertise across multiple specialised practice areas is not easy. For some, becoming a global firm is the answer; for others, relying on ‘Best Friend’ networks will serve their clients' needs the best.
Read our Global Law Firms for more views on how to deal with increasing globalisation.
* denotes a required field
0330 161 1234