Biglaw

Lawyers Aren't Necessarily Good Managers... So Why Do We Let Them Manage Firms?

Biglaw looks almost exclusively to within for leadership, which probably isn't the best use of resources.

By  
on

As Biglaw firms grow ever larger — in some cases becoming global behemoths — it becomes even more absurd that firms cling so tightly to the idea that only one of their own can lead the firm. This isn’t to say there aren’t a plethora of successful managing partners out there, but as a law firm drifts farther from a small law partnership and closer to a Fortune 500 conglomerate — as many firms have — why exactly do these firms stick with a managing partner model?

The answer is probably “rank hubris,” but let’s suss this out.

Chris Johnson touches on this in a recent piece providing context to the news of former DLA Piper chair Nigel Knowles lateraling to DWF:

Despite this, there is still a degree of stigma attached to management within law firms. Partners, in particular, can be fairly dismissive of leadership roles, often seeing them as a business overhead of questionable importance.

It’s worth noting just how many law firm managers retain an active practice of lawyering and running client relationships. In what other industry would running a billion-dollar organization not be seen as a full-time job? (The reality is that many Big Law management partners just end up effectively working two full-time jobs, but still…)

It’s simply bonkers for an efficiency-minded company to have a CEO with a divided attention, and yet that’s what most elite law firms do every day. But worse than dividing loyalties is the risk of the infamous Peter Principle, that everyone is promoted to the level of their own incompetence. The world’s greatest rainmaker doesn’t necessarily make the best at balancing office supply budgets, and yet firms assign the latter tasks on the basis of skill at the former.

Few other industries work like this. Steve Jobs built the most valuable company in the world, yet he had to be fired and spend years in the wilderness to get his management skills right. The people with their pulse on the substantive business of companies are rarely CEOs — and even when they are, a quick scratch below the surface reveals a shadow COO. Running a company is just a different job. That’s why no one bats an eye when — to stick with the Apple example — a soda company executive takes over a tech company. There’s a management class that exists wholly distinct from the substance of any given business.

Not that these professional executives are always great at their jobs. It’s a sickness of corporate culture that an executive can run a company into the ground and, instead of languishing in obscurity as befitting their epic failure, immediately gets the benefit of the doubt when another board hands them the keys to another shiny new corporation. Running a company may involve a unique skill set, but there’s a danger in putting this managerial class on too much of a pedestal.

Sponsored

Which brings us back to the Biglaw bias against “nonlawyer” managers:

The argument against bringing in a professional manager from outside the legal industry is that they simply wouldn’t understand how to run a law firm. I’d proffer that it has more to do with lawyers being extremely reluctant to take orders from nonlawyers, but it is fair to say that it does represent a difficult transition.

Are law firms really such unique hothouse flowers that no one from outside of lawyer life can understand them? It’s a service industry! The nuts and bolts aren’t that much different than any other professional-services provider.

In the end, the charitable reason why Biglaw lacks nonlawyer management is the deeply risk-averse nature of lawyers. The management class may offer needed skills that partners just can’t match, but there’s always the risk of landing a dud. Partners know each other. Perhaps the managing partner isn’t the best option on the market, but he or she is a known variable. The firm isn’t going to crash while some mercenary executive pulls the ripcord on their golden parachute. That just might be worth forsaking some of that partner’s business.

But it’s probably still hubris.

Sponsored

Why Don’t Law Firms Like Experienced Managers? [Am Law Daily]

Earlier: Why These Global 100 Numbers Should Scare The Bejeezus Out Of You

HeadshotJoe Patrice is an editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.

Topics

, , ,