學門類別
哈佛
- General Management
- Marketing
- Entrepreneurship
- International Business
- Accounting
- Finance
- Operations Management
- Strategy
- Human Resource Management
- Social Enterprise
- Business Ethics
- Organizational Behavior
- Information Technology
- Negotiation
- Business & Government Relations
- Service Management
- Sales
- Economics
- Teaching & the Case Method
最新個案
- A practical guide to SEC ï¬nancial reporting and disclosures for successful regulatory crowdfunding
- Quality shareholders versus transient investors: The alarming case of product recalls
- The Health Equity Accelerator at Boston Medical Center
- Monosha Biotech: Growth Challenges of a Social Enterprise Brand
- Assessing the Value of Unifying and De-duplicating Customer Data, Spreadsheet Supplement
- Building an AI First Snack Company: A Hands-on Generative AI Exercise, Data Supplement
- Building an AI First Snack Company: A Hands-on Generative AI Exercise
- Board Director Dilemmas: The Tradeoffs of Board Selection
- Barbie: Reviving a Cultural Icon at Mattel (Abridged)
- Happiness Capital: A Hundred-Year-Old Family Business's Quest to Create Happiness
Points of Law: Unbundling Corporate Legal Services to Unlock Value
內容大綱
The traditionally close relationship between corporate legal departments and big law firms is being disrupted--in part because the former are concerned about costs and lack of accountability. But executives now have many more choices about how to get their legal work done: They can use technology to do document search, bring in high-end temporary lawyers to manage major projects, or send routine processing work overseas. It's tempting for legal departments to react to these new options by asking, "How can we acquire the same services at a lower cost?" But aiming for relatively small, short-term savings could critically damage important relationships, the authors write. Instead, corporations should seize this chance to do four important things: assign legal work to the providers best suited to a particular task; lower legal costs without sacrificing quality; achieve greater transparency and accountability; and derive greater value from in-house counsel. The recent downturn has resulted in excess capacity at many law firms and heightened scrutiny of the billable-hours model. Technology has both created a problem--by generating oceans of data that must be collected, preserved, and reviewed in litigation--and offered solutions, in the form of "smart searching." And over the past few years, new types of legal-services providers have emerged. These three factors have led many companies to renegotiate terms with their law firms. They should beware, say the authors, of focusing on discounted rates rather than aligning incentives between client and counsel. And if legal services are unbundled, firms should be alert to the opportunity to reintegrate them for valued clients.