After BigLaw and NewLaw, here comes MicroLaw

Print This Post

20 February 2014


Flood: boutique firms offer similar advantages to the Bar

The case for ‘micro’ law firms – small, boutique practices spun out of larger firms – is growing as lawyers struggle to control the ‘Leviathan’ of big practices, a top academic has argued.

Professor John Flood of Westminster University, one of the leading thinkers on the development of legal services, argued that while most of the alternatives to so-called BigLaw are based on technology with intensive outsourcing, “they aren’t the only way of organising the delivery of legal services”.

The boutique trend has been noticeable for some years, and Professor Flood was speaking in the wake of the announcement of the by heavyweight Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer partners.

One of the key problems with BigLaw is inherent in its name, he said – it’s big, and “large organisations are hard to change”.

Error, group does not exist! Check your syntax! (ID: 14)

He continued: “A key dilemma with BigLaw is that in essence it is a set of interlocking networks that both vie and compete with each other. The result is that fission is common, and fusion is less so. Its main form of remuneration–profits per equity partner – enforces short termism and low thresholds of loyalty.

“Even the moves from traditional partnership to more bureaucratic forms of partnership are failing to solve the problem.”

As a result, the rise of the boutique or ‘MicroLaw’ is being seen as a way to resolve some of these issues, Professor Flood said.

He drew an analogy with the Bar – “small groups of lawyers in small offices depending largely on referrals from other lawyers”.

He said: “And this is what MicroLaw can do: cases can be referred to it without fear of poaching clients and conflicts conundrums can be outsourced. Most importantly the client will be dealing with the key lawyer, not a junior associate being trained at the cost of the client…

“There is no end to lawyers. We will always need lawyers. No society could function without them and, no, they can’t all be killed. Lawyers are bad at organising themselves and have created their own Leviathan which they seem to be unable to slaughter. Nor is technology the answer, although it is tremendously helpful. Lawyers need to get back to doing what they do best. The law.”

However, Professor Flood told Legal Futures that he does not predict catastrophe for BigLaw, as some do.

“On the contrary I think some type of BigLaw is necessary if only for referrals. Secondly I think BigLaw is important as it’s probably going to remain the key supply source for MicroLaw, as it is for ‘NewLaw’ enterprises, such as Axiom. Finally there will be transactions like major privatisations or M&As or big IPOs that will need the scalability of BigLaw.

“Having said that, however, if we take BigLaw as primarily sets of interlocking networks that comprise the ‘firm’, it should be possible in the future to have interlocked micro firms that fuse for particular deals.”



2 Responses to “After BigLaw and NewLaw, here comes MicroLaw”

  1. I agree with much of this analysis but believe that small law can and should generate its own leads as big law has not yet accepted that it cannot cover all areas. Small law also allows flexible staffing, allowing people the freedom to work some of the time and play more than would have be possible in big law.

  2. Rex Parry on February 21st, 2014 at 12:41 pm
  3. For sound economic reasons network organisations are prevalent in knowledge-based industries, so their increasing emergence in law is to be expected.

    The challenge for these ‘firms’ is whether they adopt a traditional ‘BigLaw’ business model or use the opportunity to become ‘NewLaw’ business models. The difference is much more than semantic.

    Readers please note BigLaw and NewLaw – at least in my language – refer to business models, not to size or age. Therefore John it’s potentially misleading to use the term MicroLaw. It might be better to suggest NetworkLaw as a descriptor to distinguish them from isolated solo practitioners.

    Readers who would like a complimentary copy of NewLaw. New Rules, my e-book on business models are welcome to email me for a Smashwords coupon at george.beaton@beatoncapital.com.

  4. George Beaton on February 25th, 2014 at 11:02 am

Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Know your client checks – A lesson from BHS

Paul-Bennett for Legal Futures

As you will be aware, it is a legal requirement for advisory firms to carry out ‘know your client’ checks. The purpose of doing so is to confirm your client’s identity and to seek to provide protection in respect of anti-money laundering (AML) and terrorist financing laws. The BHS experience before the House of Commons’ work and pensions committee and business, innovation and skills committee shows that firms need to think beyond AML obligations.

September 29th, 2016