The Journal, September 2006, page 50
When managing a complex commercial transaction, in-house counsel are invariably faced with many competing demands for their time. The session debated how corporate counsel can take practical steps to ensure that transactions are managed as smoothly as possible; and the important issue of stakeholder management.
Although in-house counsel may regard complex transactions as “one-off” events, large companies may be involved in several major projects per year. To deliver these projects, many companies make use of established project management techniques, or employ dedicated project managers. Either of these resources could potentially assist the in-house lawyer.
Typically, major projects will be broken down into smaller, more manageable “mini-projects”, with personnel assigned to deliver them. Timetables will be drawn up to deliver specific elements, and the “dependencies” between these will be identified and mapped. Though it may come as a culture shock to some in-house counsel, they will be expected to fit their work into this structured framework for delivery.
In fact, counsel who have gone down this route say such techniques can be highly effective. Not only do these procedures allow them to manage the large number of people typically involved, they assist in reporting progress to senior management. And, by identifying “dependencies” between tasks, counsel can demonstrate to colleagues why it is important to contribute to the transaction’s overall objectives. “Since we began using these techniques, we’ve made more progress in the past six months than we had in the previous 12”, recalled one senior adviser. “When I first started, I couldn’t understand how the legal function fitted into the project plan”, confirmed another. “Now, I’m a convert.”
While complex projects can often be run from commonly available software, effective project management also requires dedicated personnel to act as “enforcers”, to ensure all stakeholders perform the tasks assigned to them. This can be a full time role in itself on large transactions.
In any large transaction, in-house counsel will require input from a large range of internal stakeholders. Devising a detailed project plan will help them to manage this process, by forcing them to assign delivery of each task to a dedicated person or business unit.
The importance of identifying all relevant stakeholders was highlighted in a case history one participant provided. A proposed internal restructuring required the company to write to a large number of minor stakeholders in advance of the transaction. Because of an internal failure to keep comprehensive records, a significant number of stakeholders were not identified until hours before the crucial mailing was due. As a result, there was real risk that the proposed restructuring would not have been lawful.
“Although the legal team was able to get advice from counsel that it was OK to proceed with the mailing, this incident taught us an internal lesson in stakeholder management”, the adviser recalled. “At the outset, not enough people within the company had been made aware of what we were doing, and how important it was to identify correctly all the relevant stakeholders.”
In-house lawyers should recognise that specialist outside counsel are often more difficult to constrain within the project management process. As one participant said: “If your chosen expert is busy on another matter, they won’t always jump because you ask them to jump.” Factoring in a generous contingency timeframe where such counsel are involved will help manage expectations of senior managers, who are used to expecting immediate results from their employees.
On a major project it is essential that in-house counsel properly brief their external advisers of what is expected of them. In some instances it may be specific expertise not available in-house; in others, simply extra capacity, with no specialist insight required. However, one unifying factor for participants was that law firms should, as far as possible, be upfront and transparent about fees. One counsel voiced the views of many: “When I’m working on a project, I know how many versions of documents I will expect to produce, and how many one-day meetings I will expect to have. If a firm provides me with a woefully low quote for work, that’s no use to me.”
If foreign legal advisers are involved, in-house lawyers should not assume that they will be aware of critical legal concepts from a different state. One delegate recommended meeting them in person in order to judge their understanding. Language and cultural differences can also complicate matters. “I once tried negotiating with a Spanish party via simultaneous translation – never again!” said another. Nor were participants interested in advice that was unnecessarily academic.
Several speakers suggested that in-house lawyers should not be afraid to terminate relationships with external advisers who they felt were not performing adequately. “I decided I had to fire my original lawyer and engage another one”, said one. “In the end the transition was all pretty seamless – the new lawyer was up to speed in 3-4 days.”
Not surprisingly, several counsel at the meeting advocated the adoption of standard documents as a useful way of improving the efficiency of deal-making, not only in the consumer sector.
One counsel working in the “business to business” sector recalled how their employer was investigating standard terms and conditions as a practical response to the sheer number of parties he was now expected to work with. “At present, I’m dealing with more than 130 different organisations, which causes problems in terms of getting anything done. Although standard documents may slightly weaken our bargaining position in some instances, overall they should allow my company to achieve its end goals.”
On a slightly different tangent, establishing a risk profile of well-known contract terms can assist in-house counsel when their employers are bidding for major tenders. “In our business, you have to work within the standard terms that the tendering organisation provides you with,” said another participant. “However, it does mean that you can say to the organisation: ‘You can have that particular term, but it will cost you £X million’.”
Many complex transactions require in-house counsel to seek approval from government regulators. Maintaining a positive relationship with regulators should therefore be a routine part of the in-house counsel’s role. This is particularly important where a deal requires the regulator to implement new and untested legislation, or deal with a matter that is politically sensitive. Several speakers around the table could recall deals that had been threatened because regulators had either demanded unduly onerous conditions, or changed the regulatory environment in which the deal would operate.
While there is clearly little that an in-house lawyer can do to overcome an overtly hostile regulator, several participants suggested practical measures to minimise regulatory risk. Most obviously, proactively “scan the horizon” for legislation that may impact on your employers’ business activities. This can often be achieved simply by requesting to be added to the mailing list for government consultations. “The trick is to know when in the legislative process you should alert management to possible regulatory changes,” said one counsel. “There’s not always any certainty that new proposals will actually affect your business.” Counsel should not be afraid of co-ordinating lobbying activities with their business counterparts – so long as they do not lapse into cartel-like behaviour.
However, in some transactions, in-house counsel should consider making a positive decision not to engage with government agencies or other external organisations, such as the media. For example, government agencies may ask companies to supply them with information about particular transactions that would effectively require the company to prejudge the outcome of ongoing negotiations, or reveal confidential or market-sensitive information. “We were asked to appear before a parliamentary committee, but in the end we wrote to them and said ‘Sorry, we won’t be coming’,” recalled another in-house. “In a high profile deal, it is too easy for you to become distracted. You need to focus on getting the deal done.”
Current Issue FeaturesBraving the stormHow different types of legal firm are coping with the current economic downturn, and how they see their future Civil justice: where next?An abridged version of the keynote address delivered to the conference on civil justice held in Edinburgh on 20 June Title Conditions Act: new registration proceduresNew procedures are in place for deeds intended to create new real burdens, to assist solicitors in complying with the requirement for dual registration Young lawyers rebornInterview with Scottish Young Lawyers Association President Maryam Labaki on SYLA's ambitions as it relaunches Shining some more light...Second part of overview of this year's Finance Act looks at the provisions on savings, pensions, residence/domicile and business taxes, among others Power to the tribunal?An advocate's and a solicitor's views of how the Scottish Government's proposed reforms to arbitration law might work in practice Piece by pieceA progress report from England & Wales on the setting up of the complex regulatory machinery under the Legal Services Act 2007 The poor in our midstInterview with Scottish Solicitors' Benevolent Fund convener Craig Bennet, who aims to raise awareness of the Fund so it can provide more help to those in need Current Issue ArticlesShifting sandsPresident's message: with economic issues dominating the profession's thoughts, the Society is taking steps to provide advice and support to those in need A rank bad ruleOpinion by two advocates that the Faculty's response to the OFT does its members a disservice by defending the cab rank rule and by resisting the use of ABS The Society's future role in complaints handlingA reminder, in the light of reactions to the first levy issued on behalf of the new Complaints Commission, of when and how the Society's responsibilities are changing Appreciation: Lord JohnstonReport of the tribute paid in court by the Lord President Professional Practice CommitteeNew guidelines on acting as a company director; and document control and file tracking Facing the lean yearsSome advice on how to pull through a recession and be ready for the next upturn, as word goes round of legal firms looking at staff cuts and other measures (part 1 of 2) It's a web 2.0 worldThe interactive nature of web 2.0 technology presents business opportunities, while posing new risks for those with inadequate precautions as to employee internet use Questions, questionsIn reviewing their risk profiles and risk controls, all firms might benefit from conducting a self-assessment by addressing questions put by some insurers elsewhere Bare necessitiesLatest criminal cases, including offensive weapons; Moorov rule; withdrawal of representation; evidence of a deceased; contempt of court by solicitor Coming on the blind sideA technical-sounding consultation, currently open for comments, covers some significant aspects of dispute resolution in employment Relocation, relocationA recent decision explores the matters to consider when one parent wants to relocate abroad along with their child Worse than the disease?Has the UK quietly outlawed "alternative" medicine through the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations? Sleeping bountyThe Scottish Community Foundation has a scheme to breathe new life into dormant charitable trusts Scottish Solicitors' Discipline TribunalReports relating to Eileen Agnes Coogans; Zosia Marion Elizabeth Fraser; Annaline Webster; Ian Samuel Gerard Donnelly; Mark David Sheppard Website reviewsReviews of sites of organisations concerned with domain name disputes Book reviewsReview of Child and Family Law (Sutherland) Industry standardA survey south of the border suggests that in-house work in commerce and industry doesn't always match expectations - but most in-house lawyers expect to stay Meet the committeeProfile of In-house Lawyers Group committee member Sara Scott What's in a motto?A sample of In-house Lawyers Group members' notarial mottoes, collected by ILG secretary Tricia Sim Leasing by example"Green leases" appear to be some way off yet for the UK, but a Canadian model now published shows how they might work Good call?Reply to article questioning the Donald Trump planning application call-in argues that the decision is both competent and consistent with proper operation of the system Home reports - the practice questionsOpen letter over reservations as to the Society's proposed guidelines on the operation of home reports, in so far as they deal with conflict of interest |