Page 54 - Professional Services Networks
P. 54
The Handbook: Law Firm Networks
authority. Not surprisingly, this can win autonomy by losing unanimity and purchase
participatory buy-in at the cost of political bail-outs.
Shared control in network organizations leads to more consensus management which
tends to increase “buy-in” among employees affected by new decisions. “Research
suggests that hierarchical design dampens employee motivation because individuals are
likely to be more committed when they have participated in a decision, and much less
enthusiastic when they have been ordered by superiors to undertake a particular task.”259
Participatory involvement of committees and line management in the process of setting
strategy increases group member acceptance of and responsibility for final
recommendations.260
Local agents are not only better positioned to gather information on specific local
conditions, but vested with decision authority and ownership of the result; they are also
more likely to look for problems and opportunities.
Groups – Application to Professional Services Networks
Professional services networks by nature organize themselves into groups. They are a natural outgrowth of
any human organization. People want to associate with others who share their interests. In professional
services networks it is straightforward to identify groups because the professions are self-defined. The groups
in networks are parallel to those found in professional associations like the American Bar Association or the
AICPA. In law firms, one finds practice groups such as intellectual property, litigation, environmental, real
estate, etc. In accounting networks, the groups are tax, audit, and financial consulting. In multidisciplinary
networks the operative groups would be by industry rather than by practice.
Today’s technology has created different types of groups. The purpose remains essentially the same: to
share information and create relationships. However, technology can extend the sharing of this information.
The networks can create an extranet for collaboration. They can also create an internal networking system
similar to LinkedIn.com. In the short term, this technology is realistically only available to Level 3 networks.
A network can leverage a member’s participation in other organizations and associations that do not compete
with the network. For example, international attorneys belong to the IBA. They are members of both a firm
and the network.261 Providing these attorneys the opportunity to meet as a de facto group reinforces the
network and its membership. This is done without cost in either time or money.
Groups in a network, however, can create internal issues that require management. A poorly organized group
will detract from the network. As with any human endeavor, groups can become cliques. The groups may
seek to operate independently of the network. For example, they may arrange their own meetings
independent of the network. This can have a significant negative impact on the network.
There can be timing conflicts when members have to decide to attend the regional meeting or a group
meeting. The groups may seek to have a member host a meeting, thus precluding that firm from hosting a
regional or annual one. The groups may decide they no longer need the network to achieve their own
objectives. This increases the power of the group leaders in that they can now make all decisions.
259 Id., citing W. W. Powell, Neither Market Nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization. 12 RES. IN ORG. BEHAV. 295, 295-336 (1990).
260 Id., citing R. Howard, The CEO as Organizational Architect: An Interview with Xerox's Paul Allaire, HARV. BUS. REV. (Sept.-Oct. 1992) at 107-
121; see also T. PETERS, LIBERATION MANAGEMENT: NECESSARY DISORGANIZATION FOR THE NANOSECOND NINETIES 834 (1992).
261 See Calendar of Events, TERRALEX, www.terralex.org/calendar/View (last visited Feb. 4, 2016).
- 42 -
authority. Not surprisingly, this can win autonomy by losing unanimity and purchase
participatory buy-in at the cost of political bail-outs.
Shared control in network organizations leads to more consensus management which
tends to increase “buy-in” among employees affected by new decisions. “Research
suggests that hierarchical design dampens employee motivation because individuals are
likely to be more committed when they have participated in a decision, and much less
enthusiastic when they have been ordered by superiors to undertake a particular task.”259
Participatory involvement of committees and line management in the process of setting
strategy increases group member acceptance of and responsibility for final
recommendations.260
Local agents are not only better positioned to gather information on specific local
conditions, but vested with decision authority and ownership of the result; they are also
more likely to look for problems and opportunities.
Groups – Application to Professional Services Networks
Professional services networks by nature organize themselves into groups. They are a natural outgrowth of
any human organization. People want to associate with others who share their interests. In professional
services networks it is straightforward to identify groups because the professions are self-defined. The groups
in networks are parallel to those found in professional associations like the American Bar Association or the
AICPA. In law firms, one finds practice groups such as intellectual property, litigation, environmental, real
estate, etc. In accounting networks, the groups are tax, audit, and financial consulting. In multidisciplinary
networks the operative groups would be by industry rather than by practice.
Today’s technology has created different types of groups. The purpose remains essentially the same: to
share information and create relationships. However, technology can extend the sharing of this information.
The networks can create an extranet for collaboration. They can also create an internal networking system
similar to LinkedIn.com. In the short term, this technology is realistically only available to Level 3 networks.
A network can leverage a member’s participation in other organizations and associations that do not compete
with the network. For example, international attorneys belong to the IBA. They are members of both a firm
and the network.261 Providing these attorneys the opportunity to meet as a de facto group reinforces the
network and its membership. This is done without cost in either time or money.
Groups in a network, however, can create internal issues that require management. A poorly organized group
will detract from the network. As with any human endeavor, groups can become cliques. The groups may
seek to operate independently of the network. For example, they may arrange their own meetings
independent of the network. This can have a significant negative impact on the network.
There can be timing conflicts when members have to decide to attend the regional meeting or a group
meeting. The groups may seek to have a member host a meeting, thus precluding that firm from hosting a
regional or annual one. The groups may decide they no longer need the network to achieve their own
objectives. This increases the power of the group leaders in that they can now make all decisions.
259 Id., citing W. W. Powell, Neither Market Nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization. 12 RES. IN ORG. BEHAV. 295, 295-336 (1990).
260 Id., citing R. Howard, The CEO as Organizational Architect: An Interview with Xerox's Paul Allaire, HARV. BUS. REV. (Sept.-Oct. 1992) at 107-
121; see also T. PETERS, LIBERATION MANAGEMENT: NECESSARY DISORGANIZATION FOR THE NANOSECOND NINETIES 834 (1992).
261 See Calendar of Events, TERRALEX, www.terralex.org/calendar/View (last visited Feb. 4, 2016).
- 42 -
