KWM

What does China mean to law firms?

The unfortunate truth is, too much…

…rarely do international law firms get the return on the investment they make in China that they do in other jurisdictions (for example the Middle East right now; but Malaysia and South East Asia if we want to look closer to home!).

If you don’t believe me, take a quick look at the number of firms who have entered/exited the China market in the past 15 years (tip: focus on US firms).

Law firm’s short-sighted approaches to this issue are typically for two reasons:

lack of knowledge of the market
lack of understanding that Asia is a long-term – multi-generational – investment (not, typically, your law firm investment M/O).

So why the post (other than the shout-out that I have been part of a team that has successful established not 1, nor 2, but 3 international law firms in SE Asia)?

Well because, while the Eversheds / KWM tie-up has a long way to go, comments like those in this article…

[‘The art of the possible’ – Eversheds’ international CEO on its eye-catching KWM China alliance‘]

makes me wonder.

Law firm culture isn’t everything, certainly post 2008, it still counts for something.

And the most interesting comment in that article is who initiated the introduction: – Sue Kench.

Which makes me ask: Are the partners in KWM Australia off loading their investment in KWM to Eversheds?

[this article first appeared on rws_01]

Photo credit to: Li Yang on Unsplash

Some initial thoughts on the Eversheds Sutherland and King Wood Mallesons ‘exclusive alliance’

Woke up this morning – Australia time – to news that had broken overnight that Eversheds Sutherland (ES) and King Wood Mallesons (KWM) had entered into an exclusive alliance, along with a whole lot of DMs (Direct Messages) in my LinkedIn box asked me what my initial thoughts were.

So here I go with some initial, off the cuff, thoughts about this:

With the closure of the 6 KWM offices across the UK, Europe and Middle East, the deal likely brings to a happy end KWM’s sad foray into those markets and puts final closure on the SJ Berwin story.
Both KWM Australia and KWM Hong Kong are not part of the deal. While this is good news for ES’s Hong Kong team – who I hold in very high regard – it seems very odd and shows possible cracks in the Swiss Verin model that is KWM (with KWM China being party to this arrangement). I’ll be very interested to see what this means for KWM Australia in particular.
The arrangement requires – subject to “client preference and conflict clearance” – KWM China to refer all outbound UK, Europe, Middle East, Africa and South America instructions to ES. I understand the “UK, Europe and Middle East”, but why include “Africa and South America” (noting that ES has offices in Africa but not South America that I can tell)? I think this could be particularly telling given both Africa and South America will be geographies in which KWM Australia plays and so there is the potential to see KWM Australia pitching for work against work that ES has been referred from KWM China.
Noting the deal is with “Eversheds International”, there is no mention of whether the consultancy arm of Eversheds is included in the arrangement. If it is, then KWM China has boosted it offering in this space significantly overnight (although there may well be some regulatory restrictions around that [consultancy] in China).

To me though, what will likely make or break this “formal cooperation agreement” however will be:

How are inbound/outbound referrals being tracked?
How are the referring partners being rewarded for the referrals?
And, what will the KWM Australia partners make of all this given access to a network of lawyers in one of their biggest overseas geographic locations, the UK, will be gone? Do they refer work to ES, even though they are not part of the deal? Or do they refer work to lawyers/mates in other law firms who compete with ES in the UK – including, interestingly US firms with news earlier this week that: “Nearly half of the UK’s largest law firms are US-headquartered”.

I guess we will have to wait and watch this space, but my three big observations are:

(1) Not sure what Eversheds is getting out of this deal – do KWM China refer that much work into UK, EMEA and South America?

(2) Looks to be a great deal for KWM China.

(3) Are KWM Australia being left in the wilderness?

rws_01

“You actually need to be in Asia to understand Asia.”

“You actually need to be in Asia to understand Asia. You cannot look at it from a distance, or certainly run a business in Asia from a distance. So, unless you are actually in Asia and focused on Asia and the different markets in Asia, it’s very difficult to understand the different markets, their stages of development, and how you need to run your business in those markets. And certainly you can’t do that from London or New York. That’s a fundamental point.” – Stuart Fuller, King & Wood Mallesons

The above quote, which I couldn’t have put better myself, is from an interesting interview between columnist David Parnell and Stuart Fuller, Global Managing Partner of King & Wood Mallesons (‘Stuart Fuller Of King & Wood Mallesons, On Vereins and Succeeding in China’s Legal Market‘) posted to the Forbes website on 20 July 2015.

A lot can be said about the ‘Mallesons’ strategic approach to Asia (or, probably more to the point, the lack of it) in its days as ‘Mallesons Stephen Jaques’ – when the firm was rumoured to be heavily courted by the likes of Clifford Chance and Linklaters in the UK – but since the tie-up with King & Wood (and the subsequent merger with SJ Berwin), the firm that is KWM, as it is now affectionately known, has certainly turned a corner, got its strategy ducks lined up and come a long way.

To my mind evidence of this is clear in the following two paragraphs by Fuller:

“Secondly, it’s a business model issue. If you come into Asia and run a Western business model, then you are likely to lose money. That’s quite difficult for many of the international firms because they have such powerful and strong business models in their home markets, and they export them to the rest of the world.

Thirdly, some markets are more developed than others, so if you come into Asia and think that because the law firms are younger, that they are less developed, or frankly, in some ways less professional, then you’ll be surprised. There are firms here — us for instance — who have 1200 lawyers and 2000 people across 12 cities in China alone. We have an impressive international business in China operating at an international standard. There are a number of firms across the market like us, and I think that is a surprise to Westerners.”

Absolutely spot on!

Indeed, probably the only thing missing from Fuller is the strength that relationships play in the overall marketplace throughout Asia – both at government level and in many of the region’s family run businesses.

Then again, possibly that’s what Fuller is eluding to when he says:

“And for Western business coming into Asia, the big thing you need to know is how to get things done. The system is different. It’s the lore as much as the law.”

In any event, it is clear that KWM has moved forward a long way since 2012, and I’m not sure the rest of the pack are giving this firm the appropriate credit they deserve.