Page 37 - The Handbook - Law Firm Networks 2018
P. 37
The Handbook: Law Firm Networks
The second movers are those that have seen what their competitors are doing. Because the first mover
network is exclusive (i.e., only one member in each jurisdiction), there is no opportunity for other firms to
join. The only alternative is to start another network that, as is the case with a first mover, has its advantages
and disadvantages. The advantage is that the idea has been developed and proven by other networks. This
reduces the cost to organize because the example has already been established. The disadvantage is that the
pool of potential members has been reduced. This makes it much more difficult to organize the network.
Second movers attract a different type of organizer. For example, some of the second mover initiators were
consultants who started networks as commercial operations.183 These groups generally have not been
successful as independent member-focused networks for the reasons set out in the discussion of
operations.184 Other second mover networks have been organized by firms in a manner similar to the
accounting networks. This fact has implications in its operations and governance.185
The third type of non-mover networks is established by firms that are unable to join another network, have
not been invited to join one, or simply feel that they would prefer doing it themselves.
In each profession there are those who do not join. Some literature has dealt with the fate of non-movers in
the accounting profession in New Zealand.186 The non-mover networks find it difficult to recruit members.
Many of the firms that did not join networks simply went out of business.
Organizing a successful network can take up to six years from startup to full operations. It generally takes
about two years to organize the first members. The next two years are spent refining the group and adding
new members, and the following two years are spent implementing the basic plan. When the initial
organizers are no longer in leadership positions, the network can be determined to be operational. The
members will ultimately determine whether the venture was a success.
Organizing a Network – Preliminary Plans and Considerations
Developing a network has four phases: (1) pre-organizational plan; (2) implementation of the plan; (3) start-
up; and (4) enhancement and refinement.187 Developing the checklist for organizing a network is not
particularly complex. However, going from Phase 1 to Phase 4 can take tens of thousands of hours and
millions of dollars.
Phase 1 begins the process with the pre-organizational plan. The organizer(s) needs to get as much
information as possible about potential members and their existing arrangements. This information may be
very difficult to obtain if the network is to be global. One method of collecting information may be to do a
survey of potential members related to the network.188 The survey results will not only assist with the needs
of potential members but also identify possible people to participate in the organization process.
The plan must clearly define the purpose of the network. While one person or company189 is usually
responsible for taking the initiative, ultimately a network can only be established by a committee of potential
members. Each member of the organizing committee needs to be an individual who believes in the
183 PRIMERUS, www.primerus.com (last visited Feb. 2, 2016); see also Advisory Board Members, TAGLAW,
www.taglaw.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1330&Itemid=100009 (There is no board of directors but an advisory group).
184 See infra Chapter 5, Governance of Networks and Operations.
185 See supra Chapter 3, History of Professional Services Networks – Why Do They Matter?.
186 Rachel Baskerville & David Hay, Globalization of Professional Accounting: The Big 8 Entering New Zealand, (University of Exeter, Working
Paper, June 2007) http://hdl.handle.net/10036/29637.
187 At this stage a long-term strategic plan would be developed to move the network ahead. The issue is that the network may have institutionalized to
such a degree that a strategic plan is disruptive.
188 This technique was used in organizing World Services Group. A survey was conducted of 300 law firm managing partners’ attitudes toward
multidisciplinary practice.
189 Rushin, supra note 150.
- 24 -
The second movers are those that have seen what their competitors are doing. Because the first mover
network is exclusive (i.e., only one member in each jurisdiction), there is no opportunity for other firms to
join. The only alternative is to start another network that, as is the case with a first mover, has its advantages
and disadvantages. The advantage is that the idea has been developed and proven by other networks. This
reduces the cost to organize because the example has already been established. The disadvantage is that the
pool of potential members has been reduced. This makes it much more difficult to organize the network.
Second movers attract a different type of organizer. For example, some of the second mover initiators were
consultants who started networks as commercial operations.183 These groups generally have not been
successful as independent member-focused networks for the reasons set out in the discussion of
operations.184 Other second mover networks have been organized by firms in a manner similar to the
accounting networks. This fact has implications in its operations and governance.185
The third type of non-mover networks is established by firms that are unable to join another network, have
not been invited to join one, or simply feel that they would prefer doing it themselves.
In each profession there are those who do not join. Some literature has dealt with the fate of non-movers in
the accounting profession in New Zealand.186 The non-mover networks find it difficult to recruit members.
Many of the firms that did not join networks simply went out of business.
Organizing a successful network can take up to six years from startup to full operations. It generally takes
about two years to organize the first members. The next two years are spent refining the group and adding
new members, and the following two years are spent implementing the basic plan. When the initial
organizers are no longer in leadership positions, the network can be determined to be operational. The
members will ultimately determine whether the venture was a success.
Organizing a Network – Preliminary Plans and Considerations
Developing a network has four phases: (1) pre-organizational plan; (2) implementation of the plan; (3) start-
up; and (4) enhancement and refinement.187 Developing the checklist for organizing a network is not
particularly complex. However, going from Phase 1 to Phase 4 can take tens of thousands of hours and
millions of dollars.
Phase 1 begins the process with the pre-organizational plan. The organizer(s) needs to get as much
information as possible about potential members and their existing arrangements. This information may be
very difficult to obtain if the network is to be global. One method of collecting information may be to do a
survey of potential members related to the network.188 The survey results will not only assist with the needs
of potential members but also identify possible people to participate in the organization process.
The plan must clearly define the purpose of the network. While one person or company189 is usually
responsible for taking the initiative, ultimately a network can only be established by a committee of potential
members. Each member of the organizing committee needs to be an individual who believes in the
183 PRIMERUS, www.primerus.com (last visited Feb. 2, 2016); see also Advisory Board Members, TAGLAW,
www.taglaw.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1330&Itemid=100009 (There is no board of directors but an advisory group).
184 See infra Chapter 5, Governance of Networks and Operations.
185 See supra Chapter 3, History of Professional Services Networks – Why Do They Matter?.
186 Rachel Baskerville & David Hay, Globalization of Professional Accounting: The Big 8 Entering New Zealand, (University of Exeter, Working
Paper, June 2007) http://hdl.handle.net/10036/29637.
187 At this stage a long-term strategic plan would be developed to move the network ahead. The issue is that the network may have institutionalized to
such a degree that a strategic plan is disruptive.
188 This technique was used in organizing World Services Group. A survey was conducted of 300 law firm managing partners’ attitudes toward
multidisciplinary practice.
189 Rushin, supra note 150.
- 24 -
