Fronterion is proud to announce the release of the 2010 Global Sourcing Study: A Globalised Profession and Multi-Shore Delivery of Legal Services Study. The complete study is available by contacting the following: GlobalSourcing@fronterion.com
In summary, findings clearly show significant growth in the onshore legal outsourcing delivery market as well as increased interest from law firms and clients.
In undertaking this study we sought to answer two fundamental, but compelling questions regarding onshore legal outsourcing delivery:
1. Is there a new career path available for today’s law graduates outside of pursuing jobs at traditional law firms?
2. What is the viability of the onshore legal outsourcing market?
What we discovered about this small, but fast-growing onshore outsourcing industry – in which law firms and in-house legal departments send work to specialised delivery centers in the United Kingdom or United States, rather than India, South Africa, etc. – is the importance of a compete and thorough review of all legal resources available to law firms today.
For a number of reasons, the study includes a strong focus on onshore UK legal markets. As such, the survey polled executives from 17 of the largest global outsourcing providers, as well as ten of the 20 largest UK law firms.
The results of the 2010 Global Sourcing Study revealed that approximately 300 full-time lawyers and legal professionals are currently at work in delivery centres in Scotland, Wales and the Southwest of England. Of the top 17 global vendors, 10% of their legal delivery staff is based in the UK.
The onshore industry remains a small part of a larger trend toward offshore outsourcing, but it is certainly something that we expect to grow significantly as legal outsourcing continues to attract attention from law firms and large corporations. Consequently, this change will lead to new opportunities for legal professionals in the UK and the US.
Some 75% of outsourcing vendor executives surveyed by Fronterion said at least some of their clients had expressed an interest in onshore delivery, while 24% of vendor respondents reported a significant number of their clients were interested in onshore delivery. A further 82% of outsourcers said their clients were interested in hybrid solutions – a combination of onshore and offshore outsourcing – with over 41% of outsourcers reporting a significant interest in the hybrid-shore delivery model.
More information is available on the Fronterion website at www.Fronterion.com/2010GlobalSourcing
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Magic Circle… [Poof] Gone?
Eversheds recently released study findings that found “over half of all clients think that the magic circle designation is redundant, with 94 per cent of them arguing that the profession should reclassify its peer groups.”
We certainly agree that significant pressure exists on law firms regardless of their designation as “Magic” or not*. As a result, clients are often more prone to “value-shop” law firms, but venerable designations such as the Magic Circle die hard and bet-the-house legal work from large corporates will still typically flow to these major law firms. Are all bets off with the forthcoming implementation of the Legal Services Act? No one knows.
These issues of reputation of law firms are addressed by Larry Ribstien, author of the controversial yet thought-provoking Death of Big Law. Ribstien notes in his recent publication that the only thread of stability binding major law firms together is by their “reputational capital.” Law firms cannot maintain intellectual property, it is no competitive advantage to hold hard assets and human capital can quite literally walk out the door at any time. He purports that the only assets held by large law firms is their reputation or reputational capital.
*Magic Circle law firms in the UK include: Allen & Overy, Clifford Chance, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Linklaters, and
Slaughter & May
We certainly agree that significant pressure exists on law firms regardless of their designation as “Magic” or not*. As a result, clients are often more prone to “value-shop” law firms, but venerable designations such as the Magic Circle die hard and bet-the-house legal work from large corporates will still typically flow to these major law firms. Are all bets off with the forthcoming implementation of the Legal Services Act? No one knows.
These issues of reputation of law firms are addressed by Larry Ribstien, author of the controversial yet thought-provoking Death of Big Law. Ribstien notes in his recent publication that the only thread of stability binding major law firms together is by their “reputational capital.” Law firms cannot maintain intellectual property, it is no competitive advantage to hold hard assets and human capital can quite literally walk out the door at any time. He purports that the only assets held by large law firms is their reputation or reputational capital.
*Magic Circle law firms in the UK include: Allen & Overy, Clifford Chance, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Linklaters, and
Slaughter & May
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Conference Round Up
Legal and legal outsourcing conferences seem to be abounding both in the UK and Stateside.
Georgetown Law School’s Law Firm Evolution: Brave New World or Business as Usual?: Occurring March 21st through March 23rd. The conference features a unique amalgamation of academics, law firm leadership, general counsel and legal industry thought-leaders.
EMRG LPO Masterclass: Hosted in London on March 25th. I will be speaking on a panel dealing with a number of topics including engagement structures, vendor selection and cultural issues as they relate to ensuring successful legal outsourcing engagements. Fellow panelists include Mark Lewis of BLP and Mark Ford of Clifford Chance.
The Lawyer Conference: In a yet to be confirmed location in London on June 17th. The Lawyer Conference always draws strong interest, particularly amoungst the major city firms.
C5’s Conference Legal Process Outsourcing – The Latest Drivers, Issues and Solutions Considering LPO as Part of Your Wider Legal Costs Management: Hosted June 29th and 30th at the Sofitel St. James Hotel in London.
I have also been invited to present on a host of issues that relate to legal outsourcing at the C5 conference which include but are not limited to managing legal outsourcing vendor relationships, recognizing legal outsourcing opportunities, and ensuring quality of the legal deliverable. The conference has quite an impressive cadre of speakers (myself excluded) from both major City firms and UK corporates.
Georgetown Law School’s Law Firm Evolution: Brave New World or Business as Usual?: Occurring March 21st through March 23rd. The conference features a unique amalgamation of academics, law firm leadership, general counsel and legal industry thought-leaders.
EMRG LPO Masterclass: Hosted in London on March 25th. I will be speaking on a panel dealing with a number of topics including engagement structures, vendor selection and cultural issues as they relate to ensuring successful legal outsourcing engagements. Fellow panelists include Mark Lewis of BLP and Mark Ford of Clifford Chance.
The Lawyer Conference: In a yet to be confirmed location in London on June 17th. The Lawyer Conference always draws strong interest, particularly amoungst the major city firms.
C5’s Conference Legal Process Outsourcing – The Latest Drivers, Issues and Solutions Considering LPO as Part of Your Wider Legal Costs Management: Hosted June 29th and 30th at the Sofitel St. James Hotel in London.
I have also been invited to present on a host of issues that relate to legal outsourcing at the C5 conference which include but are not limited to managing legal outsourcing vendor relationships, recognizing legal outsourcing opportunities, and ensuring quality of the legal deliverable. The conference has quite an impressive cadre of speakers (myself excluded) from both major City firms and UK corporates.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Aussie’s Outsourced Outback
A recent article in The Times outlines the future growth prospects of the Australian legal market as demonstrated by A&O expansion as well as the Norton Rose merger with Deacons.
One interesting bit about the article includes the inference of Australia as a “ rival” to India as a “cost effective location for outsourcing international legal work”
While to date there has not been a significant push for outsourced legal services from Australia, it does appear to be geography of growing interest for UK and US firms facing downward pressure on their pricing structures.
At the very least, it remains just another sign of the increasingly globalised nature of legal services.
One interesting bit about the article includes the inference of Australia as a “ rival” to India as a “cost effective location for outsourcing international legal work”
While to date there has not been a significant push for outsourced legal services from Australia, it does appear to be geography of growing interest for UK and US firms facing downward pressure on their pricing structures.
At the very least, it remains just another sign of the increasingly globalised nature of legal services.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The “Process” in Legal Process
A recent blog post by general counsel legal consultant Rees Morrison outlines an insightful definition of “process” in legal process outsourcing.
The original reference was a quote by the general counsel of GenPact featured in the European Lawyer Issue 92, Jan. 2010. Per Morrison’s post and the European Lawyer regarding the definition of process when delivering legal services, “[t]here needs to be a process, it should be routine and people should be able to use a set of rules and guidelines in dealing with the work.”
We certainly agree that outsourcing legal services should not be delivered in the same manner as legal work performed by domestically qualified legal professionals.
Ensuring appropriate amount of structure or “process” surrounding a legal outsourcing engagement allows the firm to leverage economies of scale as well as ensure adherence to appropriate ethical standards when sourcing to non-domestically qualified personnel.
Furthermore, only leveraging labor arbitrage without the help of a supporting process is often unsustainable and leaves a significant amount of value on the table for the contracting law firm or general counsel.
The original reference was a quote by the general counsel of GenPact featured in the European Lawyer Issue 92, Jan. 2010. Per Morrison’s post and the European Lawyer regarding the definition of process when delivering legal services, “[t]here needs to be a process, it should be routine and people should be able to use a set of rules and guidelines in dealing with the work.”
We certainly agree that outsourcing legal services should not be delivered in the same manner as legal work performed by domestically qualified legal professionals.
Ensuring appropriate amount of structure or “process” surrounding a legal outsourcing engagement allows the firm to leverage economies of scale as well as ensure adherence to appropriate ethical standards when sourcing to non-domestically qualified personnel.
Furthermore, only leveraging labor arbitrage without the help of a supporting process is often unsustainable and leaves a significant amount of value on the table for the contracting law firm or general counsel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
