Articles Posted in “Legal” Issues that Present “Management” Issues

shutterstock_1554045269-300x140

The Point

Though prized by earlier generations of corporate executives for their wide-ranging wisdom, today’s most highly sought-after lawyers tend to be narrowly-focused technicians.

How did that come about? The technician specialties are highly rewarded financially, and they offer stable work. And, with the legal system’s intrusive and unreasonable demands on business enterprise, such specialists’ help is imperative.

But the C-suite, and the frontline for that matter, face a broad category of business decisions that demand mature practical judgment, in addition to mastery of legal technicalities. Continue reading

shutterstock_2123937818-300x184

The Point

In turning from the current reactive, makeshift approach to Legal, to a financially sustainable and operationally coherent strategy, what options does the business have?

I suggest three kinds. Continue reading

shutterstock_2123937818-1-300x184

The Point

Part I of this series concluded:

” … In most companies, corporate Legal is a business function without a strategy … without objectives and metrics by which to assess its effectiveness .”

In other words, most corporate Legal functions neglect to target specific results for which executive management can hold them accountable. And they lack measures against which to assess their results (other than generalized cost complaints).

Nevertheless, most corporate Legal functions have what amounts to a substitute for a strategy, implicitly adopted by default. As the article cited in Part I (“The One Thing You Need to Know About Managing Functions“, Roger L. Martin & Jennifer Riel, Harvard Business Review, July – August 2019) put it:

“You have a strategy whether you like it or not … The goal may be implicit … The choices may have emerged without discussion or exploration. The actions may be ineffectual in achieving the goal. But the strategy exists nonetheless.”

So the typical corporate Legal function’s implicit, default substitute for a coherent strategy that actually amounts to a set of tactics:

  1. Respond to events ad hoc; don’t commit Legal to achieve particular outcomes, and
  2. When a legal need arises, simply assign lawyers to whatever task needs doing.

Continue reading

shutterstock_2123937818-300x184

The Point

In most companies, corporate Legal is a business function without a strategy.

Executive management needs to fix this. Because neither attorneys in law firms nor those in-house have defined what is — and is not — within Legal’s scope of responsibility. And, apart from generalized concern about cost, business leadership lacks agreed measures by which this function’s results can be evaluated.

Unaccountable to explicit performance metrics, Legal lacks a meaningful foundation on which to craft its strategy as a corporate function. (“The One Thing You Need to Know About Managing Functions“, Roger L. Martin & Jennifer Riel, Harvard Business Review, July – August 2019).

So Legal’s prevailing mode of operation, with minor exceptions, is reactive. With attorneys both in law firms and in-house making ad hoc responses to client events. Leaving the business enterprise without objectives and metrics by which to assess Legal’s effectiveness as a corporate function. Continue reading

shutterstock_1951293316-300x200

The Point

Two surveys of general counsel reported in December offer identical descriptions of the budget crisis facing corporate Legal departments in 2023:

(1) From the legal system: most face increasing demands, and

(2) From the C-Suite: most face cost reduction demands.

In such circumstances, executive management usually asks Legal for some measure of cost discipline similar to what they ask of other corporate functions and business units. Too often, Legal reacts by threatening a game of “chicken” with the business side: give us the funding we want, or the company faces potentially catastrophic risk.

C-Suites facing intransigence from Legal should consider a tool used where an employee’s performance has slumped, but summary dismissal would be premature: a performance improvement plan. Continue reading

shutterstock_635517326-300x200

 The Point

  1. Operational risk — the possibility that a business’ efforts might fail in their actual execution — poses the greatest peril to success of a company’s contracts.
  2. Operations take place outside of the corporate law function, so evaluation of the risks they pose should consist of practical judgments by businesspeople — not legal analysis.
  3. Therefore contract creation and management should be a cross-functional — not solely a Legal — responsibility.

Continue reading

Contact Information