Page 47 - The Handbook - Legal and Accounting Networks 81
P. 47
Law and Accounting Networks and Associations
nominate board members, and organize the meeting. At each step of the process, the potential members were
asked to participate.
The six organizing committee members had to select the specific terms of directorship, ranging from one to
four years. Officers would be from among the organizing committee. Lex Mundi from the beginning was to
have a full-time president who was also the CEO. The officers elected for a one-year term were chairman of
the board, chair-elect, secretary, and treasurer. While there could have been some dispute, everything worked
out.
Nominating 10 new members of the board who had not previously been on the committee was more difficult.
Selecting these members who were completely new to the organization would shape the organization over the
next four years and beyond. Careful consideration had to be given to each person, the firms of which they were
members, and their term of office. It was firmly decided that future board members must come from members
who had not already been represented on the board.
Having members from prestigious firms worked in two different and opposite ways. The prestige of the firm
would attract new members. On the other hand, these firms were the most reluctant to either join or create a
strong organization. The solution was to appoint members from the prestigious firms for short terms. This
allowed them to have in the following year’s board members who wanted to be more proactive.
As a new network, the first annual meeting and first board meeting were approaching in September of 1989.
The decision had to be made for the locations. The meeting itself was held in a castle 40 miles outside of
Strasbourg where the International Bar Association was also meeting. The location was chosen because the
Europeans were concerned that someone would find out they had joined a network. While not a governance
issue per se, it was the type of issue the organization’s governing body had to regularly confront as the
organization went from a startup to Level 3 network.
Developing the final governance structure will continue for the life of the network. A network will continually
amend policies and procedures as it grows. Responsibilities will be assigned and reassigned depending upon
external factors. Bylaws will be clarified as they are applied to actual situations that arise in all networks. The
board will confront issues of network transparency.
Governance can also enhance the network’s reputation. Formation of an advisory committee of general counsel
members will help to introduce new ideas to the network. Lex Mundi, for example, began this in 2002 and has
had more than 15 general counsels participate; they attend the Lex Mundi meeting and board meetings and are
typically effective speakers.212 These contacts can lead to other resources, such as the Lex Mundi
Foundation,213 that are supported by the corporations of the advisory board. It may also lead to opportunities
with other associations, such as ACC, where the advisory members also serve.
Level 3 accounting networks are far more developed than Level 3 legal networks because many accounting
networks have as their objective to compete with the Big 4 for upper-end mid-market clients. They also must
comply with regulations to which law firms are not subject. Legal networks, therefore, may have adopted many
of the structures found in accounting networks but have not advanced as far.
In the case of Levels 2 and 3 multidisciplinary networks, governance poses distinct issues because of the
different services that are involved in the organization. While lawyers and accountants may have the same
clients and similar operational and marketing issues, their approaches are very much different. Accountants
212 Advisory Council, LEX MUNDI, www.lexmundi.com/lexmundi/Client_Advisory_Council.asp (Meritas has a similar board). See Meritas, supra note
159.
213 LEX MUNDI PRO BONO FOUNDATION, www.lexmundiprobono.org/lexmundiprobono/default.asp.
35
nominate board members, and organize the meeting. At each step of the process, the potential members were
asked to participate.
The six organizing committee members had to select the specific terms of directorship, ranging from one to
four years. Officers would be from among the organizing committee. Lex Mundi from the beginning was to
have a full-time president who was also the CEO. The officers elected for a one-year term were chairman of
the board, chair-elect, secretary, and treasurer. While there could have been some dispute, everything worked
out.
Nominating 10 new members of the board who had not previously been on the committee was more difficult.
Selecting these members who were completely new to the organization would shape the organization over the
next four years and beyond. Careful consideration had to be given to each person, the firms of which they were
members, and their term of office. It was firmly decided that future board members must come from members
who had not already been represented on the board.
Having members from prestigious firms worked in two different and opposite ways. The prestige of the firm
would attract new members. On the other hand, these firms were the most reluctant to either join or create a
strong organization. The solution was to appoint members from the prestigious firms for short terms. This
allowed them to have in the following year’s board members who wanted to be more proactive.
As a new network, the first annual meeting and first board meeting were approaching in September of 1989.
The decision had to be made for the locations. The meeting itself was held in a castle 40 miles outside of
Strasbourg where the International Bar Association was also meeting. The location was chosen because the
Europeans were concerned that someone would find out they had joined a network. While not a governance
issue per se, it was the type of issue the organization’s governing body had to regularly confront as the
organization went from a startup to Level 3 network.
Developing the final governance structure will continue for the life of the network. A network will continually
amend policies and procedures as it grows. Responsibilities will be assigned and reassigned depending upon
external factors. Bylaws will be clarified as they are applied to actual situations that arise in all networks. The
board will confront issues of network transparency.
Governance can also enhance the network’s reputation. Formation of an advisory committee of general counsel
members will help to introduce new ideas to the network. Lex Mundi, for example, began this in 2002 and has
had more than 15 general counsels participate; they attend the Lex Mundi meeting and board meetings and are
typically effective speakers.212 These contacts can lead to other resources, such as the Lex Mundi
Foundation,213 that are supported by the corporations of the advisory board. It may also lead to opportunities
with other associations, such as ACC, where the advisory members also serve.
Level 3 accounting networks are far more developed than Level 3 legal networks because many accounting
networks have as their objective to compete with the Big 4 for upper-end mid-market clients. They also must
comply with regulations to which law firms are not subject. Legal networks, therefore, may have adopted many
of the structures found in accounting networks but have not advanced as far.
In the case of Levels 2 and 3 multidisciplinary networks, governance poses distinct issues because of the
different services that are involved in the organization. While lawyers and accountants may have the same
clients and similar operational and marketing issues, their approaches are very much different. Accountants
212 Advisory Council, LEX MUNDI, www.lexmundi.com/lexmundi/Client_Advisory_Council.asp (Meritas has a similar board). See Meritas, supra note
159.
213 LEX MUNDI PRO BONO FOUNDATION, www.lexmundiprobono.org/lexmundiprobono/default.asp.
35
