Keep in-house informed

In-house lawyers do realise they are placing their external advisors in somewhat of a difficult position with this position. For as much as they don’t want their outside lawyers to be doing work that wasn’t asked of them, they do want the external advisers to be “two or three steps ahead.”

This means keeping in-house lawyers informed on the latest regulatory developments and what, if any, impact they are likely to have on their client’s future or ongoing projects.

“That’s the difficulty of being an external lawyer,” said the Asia-Pacific legal head of the largest global computer company. “In Asia, there are things like competition laws, corporate compliance and FCPA issues which are worrying for us. We need to be kept up to speed on these [developments] and it doesn’t necessarily need to be done in the context of a transaction.”

“[This information] can, and should be, offered by law firms to us as it comes to hand … I think this is a vital part of the value-add that a firm must offer to be competitive in this practice area.” But it’s something that is all-too commonly handled incorrectly by both large and small firms alike.

“Some law firms seem to have confused regulatory updates and other such communiqués for spam,” says the US-based general counsel of a pharmaceutical company.

“I’ve usually got five or six large projects on the boil in Asia at any one time and I don’t have the time to read emails which claim to be delivering ‘important’ updates, but then only give a snippet of information with something directing the unwitting recipient of the email to ‘contact x or y partner for further information’. This wastes my time.”

Other legal practitioners concur. “The marketing efforts of merger and acquisition practices that are most effective are those that deliver commercially smart advice and which show that the lawyers have an understanding the most important issues affecting individual sectors,” says a senior in-house lawyer at a domestic bank in Malaysia.

“When I get an email, letter or something similar like this, I am 100% more likely to call the firm who sent it for a quick chat, rather then just deleting it and forgetting about it.”

Selection criteria

It is not surprising to learn that ‘commercially oriented’ advice is again listed as one of the top criteria taken into consideration, when in-house legal teams are selecting outside counsel.
Similarly, in-house lawyers and business leaders note that there was more of a tendency to go to individuals rather than firms – on big and small deals alike. This is only fitting then, that ALB has provided a snapshot of the region’s 25 most in-demand dealmakers. But just what separates these individuals from others in the market?

Survey respondents cite a wide array of factors including technical expertise, industry and market knowledge, quality of advice and accessibility as the most important factors that come into consideration in this area.

Many respondents also add the qualities of leadership and the depth of the lead lawyers’ team, as critical considerations in their selection of external counsel.

“Apart from the things one would expect of a leading M&A practitioner, we look for leadership skills,” says the vice president of a French-based investment bank. “This applies to both their immediate team at the law firm and people within my organisation.

“We have closed a number of cross-border deals over the past few years where external law firms have had to work closely with not only our in-house legal team but financial analysts, human resources professionals and accountants.”

Respect for the position of in-house counsel is also required, say other survey respondents. And while one would naturally assume that all merger and acquisition practitioners possess this, surprisingly so, many do not.

“There have been occasions where I have briefed outside lawyers with specific instructions to work closely with my own team on particular aspects of transactions,” the French-based investment bank vice president explains. “Such instructions are regularly ignored…”

‘You get the impression there isn’t a sufficient level of respect among some private practice lawyers towards in-house teams – and perhaps not [enough of] a high recognition of the value we can bring to deals,” he adds. “Thankfully, I believe such attitudes are not as prevalent as they used to be.”

TO ACCESS THE LIST OF THE LEADING LAW FIRMS AND LAWYERS, CLICK HERE.

Go to page: 1 2