Page 91 - MASTER COPY LEADERS BOOK 9editedJKK (24)_Neat
P. 91
Leaders in Legal Business
citizens and to be admitted to the bar where they practiced. Naturally, when foreign firms began to meet these
criteria, local firms became concerned. The result was a need for local firms to band together, and networks
became tools to compete against the much larger intruders to address this expansion. In fact, the first network of
local firms came about primarily as a result of the invasion by London and New York firms.
Networks can be evaluated at differnent by the level of organization and activities persued by the network.
There are four levels. In the legal profession there are no Leve 4 networks unless you count the large international
firms now organized as Swiss vereins as networks. A case can be made for this development.
Level 1 international networks, called clubs, generally consisted of 10 firms in different countries.15 The
typical format consisted of holding several meetings a year among managing partners to discuss management and
market-related issues. Secrecy shrouded the networks because the members feared losing business from other
firms if they knew of these networks.16 On the other hand, many did not hesitate to advertise to their clients that
they had foreign connections and correspondents. Today the clubs are commonly known as “best friend’s
networks.” Examples include Leading Counsel Network17 and Slaughter and May.18
Level 2 networks began in the 1980s when the Level 1 clubs evolved intointo networks. By that time,
networks were not as secretive and even published directories, materials, and brochures.19 The members met
annually, and some networks focused on specific practices, such as litigation,20 while others were more generic.
Because networks were not thought of as franchises or strategic models, the membership selection process was
not particularly rigorous.21 Many of the networks that were innovators in the 1980s reached Level 2 and had no
intent to develop beyond this level. This is evident by the fact that their membership over several decades has not
increased, their websites contain no information, their governance depends on the same individuals, and their
operations are limited.
Level 3 networks began in 1989 when Lex Mundi was formed.22 It was the first network that required
each member to be one of the largest and most established firms in a state or country. Unlike a Level 2 network
where all activities are internal, 50 percent of its activities were external.23 The list of internal and external
activities reflected approximately 30 different items. Another difference existed in Lex
Mundi’s operations: It was a network organized around a home office with staff, rather
than a staff being assembled after the network was established. Finally, Lex Mundi set
itself apart by using collaborative efforts among its personnel, board, councils, and
members to achieve the objectives. In essence, Lex Mundi operated as a business that
provided members with many alternatives to expand their resources. While different
from the accounting network, the concept was that of an entity which provided services
to members and should also have an established brand.
Other networks like TerraLex24 and Meritas25 soon followed with a similar business-based model. Their
stated objective was to create a branded alternative to the large United States and English law firms that had
15 Chris Blackhurst, The Secret World of Clubs, 4 INT’L. FIN. L. REV. 20 (1985). The first known club was the Club de Abogados, which had members in
Latin America and Spain. There was also a sister club called the Club de Abogados Europeo.
16 There were no directories. Periodically an article might appear on the networks.
17 James Swift, Nine-Strong CIS Legal Network Gets Off Ground, ARMENIAN DIASPORA, available at
http://www.armeniandiaspora.com/showthread.php?197623-Nine-Strong-CIS-Legal-Network-Gets-Off-Ground.
18 SLAUGHTER AND MAY, http://www.slaughterandmay.com/where-we-work.aspx (last visited May 3, 2015).
19 See INTERLAW, www.interlaw.org (last visited May 3, 2015).
20 ALFA was one of the first networks in the legal profession. Finding information about ALFA and member was very difficult. Today, this is not the case.
See ALFA, www.alfainternational.com (last visited May 3, 2015).
21 This selection process is reflected today in the networks that have firms with a wide range of sizes, e.g., small firms in locations where there are firms
that are three and four times the size. See TERRALEX, www.terralex.org (last visited May 3, 2015).
22 Stephen McGarry, Practicing Law in the 21st Century Will Require Affiliations, LEGAL MGMT. 34 (May/June 1994); see also Stratton, “Captive Law firms
vs. Global Legal Networks: The MDP Inquiry Continues,” 82 Tax Notes 26-40 (January 4, 1999); see also Nick Jarrett-Kerr, International Alliances: How
They Work, What They Deliver and Whether to Join, JARRETT-KERR.COM (December 5, 2012), http://www.jarrett-kerr.com/blog/International-alliances;
see also Lis Wiehl, How Small Firms Compete Amid the Giants, THE N. Y. TIMES, November 10, 1989, http://www.nytimes.com/1989/11/10/us/law-how-
small-firms-compete-amid-merging-giants.html.
23 Lex Mundi is the network that has spent the most to become “the Leading Association of Independent Law Firms.”
24 TERRALEX, www.terralex.org (last visited May 3, 2015).
25 MERITAS, www.meritas.org (last visited May 3, 2015).
84
citizens and to be admitted to the bar where they practiced. Naturally, when foreign firms began to meet these
criteria, local firms became concerned. The result was a need for local firms to band together, and networks
became tools to compete against the much larger intruders to address this expansion. In fact, the first network of
local firms came about primarily as a result of the invasion by London and New York firms.
Networks can be evaluated at differnent by the level of organization and activities persued by the network.
There are four levels. In the legal profession there are no Leve 4 networks unless you count the large international
firms now organized as Swiss vereins as networks. A case can be made for this development.
Level 1 international networks, called clubs, generally consisted of 10 firms in different countries.15 The
typical format consisted of holding several meetings a year among managing partners to discuss management and
market-related issues. Secrecy shrouded the networks because the members feared losing business from other
firms if they knew of these networks.16 On the other hand, many did not hesitate to advertise to their clients that
they had foreign connections and correspondents. Today the clubs are commonly known as “best friend’s
networks.” Examples include Leading Counsel Network17 and Slaughter and May.18
Level 2 networks began in the 1980s when the Level 1 clubs evolved intointo networks. By that time,
networks were not as secretive and even published directories, materials, and brochures.19 The members met
annually, and some networks focused on specific practices, such as litigation,20 while others were more generic.
Because networks were not thought of as franchises or strategic models, the membership selection process was
not particularly rigorous.21 Many of the networks that were innovators in the 1980s reached Level 2 and had no
intent to develop beyond this level. This is evident by the fact that their membership over several decades has not
increased, their websites contain no information, their governance depends on the same individuals, and their
operations are limited.
Level 3 networks began in 1989 when Lex Mundi was formed.22 It was the first network that required
each member to be one of the largest and most established firms in a state or country. Unlike a Level 2 network
where all activities are internal, 50 percent of its activities were external.23 The list of internal and external
activities reflected approximately 30 different items. Another difference existed in Lex
Mundi’s operations: It was a network organized around a home office with staff, rather
than a staff being assembled after the network was established. Finally, Lex Mundi set
itself apart by using collaborative efforts among its personnel, board, councils, and
members to achieve the objectives. In essence, Lex Mundi operated as a business that
provided members with many alternatives to expand their resources. While different
from the accounting network, the concept was that of an entity which provided services
to members and should also have an established brand.
Other networks like TerraLex24 and Meritas25 soon followed with a similar business-based model. Their
stated objective was to create a branded alternative to the large United States and English law firms that had
15 Chris Blackhurst, The Secret World of Clubs, 4 INT’L. FIN. L. REV. 20 (1985). The first known club was the Club de Abogados, which had members in
Latin America and Spain. There was also a sister club called the Club de Abogados Europeo.
16 There were no directories. Periodically an article might appear on the networks.
17 James Swift, Nine-Strong CIS Legal Network Gets Off Ground, ARMENIAN DIASPORA, available at
http://www.armeniandiaspora.com/showthread.php?197623-Nine-Strong-CIS-Legal-Network-Gets-Off-Ground.
18 SLAUGHTER AND MAY, http://www.slaughterandmay.com/where-we-work.aspx (last visited May 3, 2015).
19 See INTERLAW, www.interlaw.org (last visited May 3, 2015).
20 ALFA was one of the first networks in the legal profession. Finding information about ALFA and member was very difficult. Today, this is not the case.
See ALFA, www.alfainternational.com (last visited May 3, 2015).
21 This selection process is reflected today in the networks that have firms with a wide range of sizes, e.g., small firms in locations where there are firms
that are three and four times the size. See TERRALEX, www.terralex.org (last visited May 3, 2015).
22 Stephen McGarry, Practicing Law in the 21st Century Will Require Affiliations, LEGAL MGMT. 34 (May/June 1994); see also Stratton, “Captive Law firms
vs. Global Legal Networks: The MDP Inquiry Continues,” 82 Tax Notes 26-40 (January 4, 1999); see also Nick Jarrett-Kerr, International Alliances: How
They Work, What They Deliver and Whether to Join, JARRETT-KERR.COM (December 5, 2012), http://www.jarrett-kerr.com/blog/International-alliances;
see also Lis Wiehl, How Small Firms Compete Amid the Giants, THE N. Y. TIMES, November 10, 1989, http://www.nytimes.com/1989/11/10/us/law-how-
small-firms-compete-amid-merging-giants.html.
23 Lex Mundi is the network that has spent the most to become “the Leading Association of Independent Law Firms.”
24 TERRALEX, www.terralex.org (last visited May 3, 2015).
25 MERITAS, www.meritas.org (last visited May 3, 2015).
84
