Page 18 - The Handbook - Law Firm Networks 2018
P. 18
The Handbook: Law Firm Networks
member.40 In networks there is collaboration between members and the network’s staff. Personal motivations
move the network development forward.41 However, these same qualities of personal motivations can also
impede development of the network.
Evaluating Networks – The Criteria
Professional services networks are rarely evaluated using measurable terms. There are broad measures such
as the development of the network, the complexity of the network, and the use of the network by its
members. The result is that all networks appear to be the same when there are vast differences. A network
like Deloitte with $35.2 billion in revenue and hundreds of thousands of employees at its member firms is
very different from Integra International with $333 million in revenue and 604 partners.42 They are both
networks and can be evaluated not only by comparison to each other but also by whether each has met its
respective objectives of the members.
In this book, networks will be described using three different measurements: levels, dynamics, and
internalities/externalities.
a. Levels 1-4: describes the complexity and sophistication of a network. The level of the network
will be determinative of the structure, governance, and issues the network faces in operations and
governance.
b. Network dynamics: how the network and members use the network to meet their objectives
(referrals, joint ventures, marketing, etc.). Network dynamics reflect the different projects and
activities of the network that involve the members therein. They are also reflected in the levels.
c. Internalities and Externalities: internally meaning how members perceive the network, and
externally meaning how the network is seen by the market in which it operates. Are its objectives
and priorities the same? What does it do to market itself internally and externally?43
These descriptive terms will be applied to law and multidisciplinary networks. A three-dimensional image of
each network should emerge as these criteria are applied to any network. For example, a new network could
be already be a level 4 network and be well known in the market because it is a merger of two other very
well-known networks.44
Understanding the status of a network demonstrates the potential and possibilities for that network.
Evaluating a network in this way usually demonstrates how most members of networks under-employ the
inherent power of their networks. The measurement of network qualities will also show how the network
itself can increase its value to each member and provide clients seamless global services.
40 Don G. Rushing, Building the Virtual Law Firm through Collaborative Work Teams, ACCA DOCKET (Oct. 2001), kuchlerpolk.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/03/accadocketarticle.pdf.
41 ADAM SMITH, THE WEALTH OF NATIONS (1776): “Man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect
it from their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favor, and show them that it is for their own
advantage to do for him what he requires of them … It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner,
but from their regard to their own interest” (Today this would be called engagement marketing); see also infra Chapter 6, Marketing the Network –
Creating the Brand.
42 Phillip Smith, Top 35 Networks 2013: New Markets, Opportunities, Threats, ACCOUNTANCY AGE (July 2013),
www.accountancyage.com/aa/feature/2280064/top-35-networks-2013-new-markets-opportunities-threats; see a detailed list
at Top International Networks, Associations and Alliances, ACCOUNTANCY AGE,
www.accountancyage.com/digital_assets/6839/All_int_charts_2013_v2.pdf.
43 See infra Chapter 6, Marketing the Network – Creating the Brand.
44 PwC would be such a network. It was formed in 1998 with the merger of Price Waterhouse and Coopers and Lybrand. See PWC, CORPORATE
HISTORY, www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/pwc-corporate-history.jhtml.
-5-
member.40 In networks there is collaboration between members and the network’s staff. Personal motivations
move the network development forward.41 However, these same qualities of personal motivations can also
impede development of the network.
Evaluating Networks – The Criteria
Professional services networks are rarely evaluated using measurable terms. There are broad measures such
as the development of the network, the complexity of the network, and the use of the network by its
members. The result is that all networks appear to be the same when there are vast differences. A network
like Deloitte with $35.2 billion in revenue and hundreds of thousands of employees at its member firms is
very different from Integra International with $333 million in revenue and 604 partners.42 They are both
networks and can be evaluated not only by comparison to each other but also by whether each has met its
respective objectives of the members.
In this book, networks will be described using three different measurements: levels, dynamics, and
internalities/externalities.
a. Levels 1-4: describes the complexity and sophistication of a network. The level of the network
will be determinative of the structure, governance, and issues the network faces in operations and
governance.
b. Network dynamics: how the network and members use the network to meet their objectives
(referrals, joint ventures, marketing, etc.). Network dynamics reflect the different projects and
activities of the network that involve the members therein. They are also reflected in the levels.
c. Internalities and Externalities: internally meaning how members perceive the network, and
externally meaning how the network is seen by the market in which it operates. Are its objectives
and priorities the same? What does it do to market itself internally and externally?43
These descriptive terms will be applied to law and multidisciplinary networks. A three-dimensional image of
each network should emerge as these criteria are applied to any network. For example, a new network could
be already be a level 4 network and be well known in the market because it is a merger of two other very
well-known networks.44
Understanding the status of a network demonstrates the potential and possibilities for that network.
Evaluating a network in this way usually demonstrates how most members of networks under-employ the
inherent power of their networks. The measurement of network qualities will also show how the network
itself can increase its value to each member and provide clients seamless global services.
40 Don G. Rushing, Building the Virtual Law Firm through Collaborative Work Teams, ACCA DOCKET (Oct. 2001), kuchlerpolk.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/03/accadocketarticle.pdf.
41 ADAM SMITH, THE WEALTH OF NATIONS (1776): “Man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect
it from their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favor, and show them that it is for their own
advantage to do for him what he requires of them … It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner,
but from their regard to their own interest” (Today this would be called engagement marketing); see also infra Chapter 6, Marketing the Network –
Creating the Brand.
42 Phillip Smith, Top 35 Networks 2013: New Markets, Opportunities, Threats, ACCOUNTANCY AGE (July 2013),
www.accountancyage.com/aa/feature/2280064/top-35-networks-2013-new-markets-opportunities-threats; see a detailed list
at Top International Networks, Associations and Alliances, ACCOUNTANCY AGE,
www.accountancyage.com/digital_assets/6839/All_int_charts_2013_v2.pdf.
43 See infra Chapter 6, Marketing the Network – Creating the Brand.
44 PwC would be such a network. It was formed in 1998 with the merger of Price Waterhouse and Coopers and Lybrand. See PWC, CORPORATE
HISTORY, www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/pwc-corporate-history.jhtml.
-5-
