Price tops list of reasons why GCs give law firms the boot

Print This Post

8 October 2012


Fired: firms need to keep tabs on what clients are thinking

The biggest single reason general counsel are dropping law firms is price, according to a survey of top in-house lawyers at major global corporations.

The study, by UK-based market research company Acritas, revealed a range of reasons given by 132 general counsel in companies with revenues of more than US$1bn for giving firms their marching orders.

Top (22%) was that they were too expensive, followed by lack of demand (16%), quality of expertise/results (14%), poor service/slow response (14%), and a key contact leaving the firm (11%).

In a question to which 404 general counsel responded, one in three said they had dropped a law firm in the past year.

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

The data comes from the interim results of Acritas’s Sharplegal 2012 Global Elite research, which seeks to determine trends from the views of over 1,400 international ‘elite’ buyers of legal services, part of a wider survey of more than 2,500 general counsel in businesses operating in 40 countries.

Acritas CEO Lisa Hart Shepherd said: “It is frustrating to read some of the reasons clients give for moving their business elsewhere. In so many cases, it’s clear that firms could have easily prevented the losses if they had had better ‘early warning’ systems in place – through a structured client feedback programme, for example.”

She added: “[Our] research shows that the key to client retention lies in the strength of the relationship – aided by open, clear and ongoing client communication. Checking on a regular basis that clients feel they are getting good service and value is a proven way of not only keeping but growing their business.

“Clients want to be asked. In most cases, they are passionate about their business and value law firms which share and demonstrate that passion for their business too.”

Tags: ,



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