Page 232 - 2019 - Leaders in Legal Business (n)
P. 232
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 TerraLex1 and Meritas2 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 expanded into their countries. These networks were not secret, and all
of them have many of the features of Level 3 networks.
U.S. national networks also joined the revolution. The first was the American Law Firm
Association, a network that focused primarily on insurance litigation.3 The second was the State
Capital Law Group, which began as a national network of firms dedicated to government affairs.4
To qualify for membership, a former governor needed to work at the firm. Both of these networks
became international and changed their names to ALFA and State Capital Global Legal Network,
respectively.
The same national expansion occurred in other regions. For example, there are 80
European-centric networks. Some cover most of Europe, while others focus on a specific region
like the Nordic or the CIS. In Canada, national firms have gradually opened offices in most
provinces. However, there is a clear demarcation between the two approaches. Canadian firms that
did not agree with this strategy joined the better-known networks.
Law firm networks are not all organized by law firms. Some, like the DuPont Legal
Network for example, have been organized by corporations.5 DuPont first established its network
in 1992 to consolidate its outside counsel, then generated internal efficiencies by creating a
network to which all of the outside counsels were also members.6 Additionally, networks
organized by corporations can exist for other purposes such as offering pro bono services.
Thomson Reuters7 has organized such a foundation that selects law firms that add prestige to its
network for membership. It matches experienced firms to work together on projects. Participating
firms find unique and priceless motivation through the opportunity to establish new contacts, who
will in turn become paying clients, at no financial cost — simply by working on pro bono cases.
With more than 170 already in existence, law firm networks are here to stay. However,
networks in the legal profession do not garner the same level of respect found in the field of
accounting. One reason could be that the networks were simply a reaction to the initial
globalization of large New York and London firms. Additionally, the large law firms have much
1 TERRALEX, http://www.terralex.org.
2 MERITAS, http://www.meritas.org.
3 Supra note 20.
4 STATE CAPITAL LAW REVIEW GROUP, http://www.statecapitallaw.org.
5 DUPONT LEGAL MODEL, http://www.dupontlegalmodel.com; see also Competitive Advantage through a Legal Network: An External Lawyer
Review One Year On, MANAGING PARTNER 23 (May 13, 2011).
6 DUPONT LEGAL MODEL, BUILDING THE VIRTUAL LAW FIRM. http://www.dupontlegalmodel.com/building-the-virtual-law-firm-
through-collaborative- work-teams/ (“Why did DuPont Legal create a virtual law firm? What is the payoff? We believe that significant competitive
advantages flow to a company that can build a team consisting of inside counsel and members of outside law firms and various service providers,
such as accountants, jury consultants, and document management specialists, who have the skill sets required by a legal matter and who are capable
of working smoothly and effectively together. Such a team would be dedicated to the company’s interests and knowledgeable about the company’s
business and case- handling processes. Through shared technology, members of such a team could easily communicate.”)
7 TRUSTLAW, http://www.trustlaw.org.
217
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 TerraLex1 and Meritas2 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 expanded into their countries. These networks were not secret, and all
of them have many of the features of Level 3 networks.
U.S. national networks also joined the revolution. The first was the American Law Firm
Association, a network that focused primarily on insurance litigation.3 The second was the State
Capital Law Group, which began as a national network of firms dedicated to government affairs.4
To qualify for membership, a former governor needed to work at the firm. Both of these networks
became international and changed their names to ALFA and State Capital Global Legal Network,
respectively.
The same national expansion occurred in other regions. For example, there are 80
European-centric networks. Some cover most of Europe, while others focus on a specific region
like the Nordic or the CIS. In Canada, national firms have gradually opened offices in most
provinces. However, there is a clear demarcation between the two approaches. Canadian firms that
did not agree with this strategy joined the better-known networks.
Law firm networks are not all organized by law firms. Some, like the DuPont Legal
Network for example, have been organized by corporations.5 DuPont first established its network
in 1992 to consolidate its outside counsel, then generated internal efficiencies by creating a
network to which all of the outside counsels were also members.6 Additionally, networks
organized by corporations can exist for other purposes such as offering pro bono services.
Thomson Reuters7 has organized such a foundation that selects law firms that add prestige to its
network for membership. It matches experienced firms to work together on projects. Participating
firms find unique and priceless motivation through the opportunity to establish new contacts, who
will in turn become paying clients, at no financial cost — simply by working on pro bono cases.
With more than 170 already in existence, law firm networks are here to stay. However,
networks in the legal profession do not garner the same level of respect found in the field of
accounting. One reason could be that the networks were simply a reaction to the initial
globalization of large New York and London firms. Additionally, the large law firms have much
1 TERRALEX, http://www.terralex.org.
2 MERITAS, http://www.meritas.org.
3 Supra note 20.
4 STATE CAPITAL LAW REVIEW GROUP, http://www.statecapitallaw.org.
5 DUPONT LEGAL MODEL, http://www.dupontlegalmodel.com; see also Competitive Advantage through a Legal Network: An External Lawyer
Review One Year On, MANAGING PARTNER 23 (May 13, 2011).
6 DUPONT LEGAL MODEL, BUILDING THE VIRTUAL LAW FIRM. http://www.dupontlegalmodel.com/building-the-virtual-law-firm-
through-collaborative- work-teams/ (“Why did DuPont Legal create a virtual law firm? What is the payoff? We believe that significant competitive
advantages flow to a company that can build a team consisting of inside counsel and members of outside law firms and various service providers,
such as accountants, jury consultants, and document management specialists, who have the skill sets required by a legal matter and who are capable
of working smoothly and effectively together. Such a team would be dedicated to the company’s interests and knowledgeable about the company’s
business and case- handling processes. Through shared technology, members of such a team could easily communicate.”)
7 TRUSTLAW, http://www.trustlaw.org.
217
