Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Printer Friendly Version
If mergers of equals are the ideal, why then do so few take place? After all, there are several law firms with equivalent-sized peers. The problem is that many of these firms are occupying the same market position (or at least trying to). They may even mirror each other’s geographical position. Inevitably this means the partners in firm A spend most of their working lives competing against partners in firm B to win work from the same clients and the same potential clients. “Why not just combine and stop the endless competition? We’re even the same size. It’s a perfect fit,” you may say. That sounds logical, but it’s not that simple.
Let us say that in each of these firms there are two finance rainmakers apiece who dominate the relationships with the key banking clients. If such client relationships are in conflict then the deal is a non-starter. But, even if they do not generate business conflicts, rainmakers from either firm may wonder what is in it for them. Why invite your greatest competitors for your best clients’ attention into the room next door? If the other firm’s rainmakers had great client links to a group of banks you had never approached before, or were all based in another country, it would be a different story. But when operating in the same market position, in the same legal jurisdiction, combinations are tricky.
If one extends this scenario across all of the two firms’ practices then one may find a number of leading partners who see no benefits to them in a deal with their peer. Moreover, would they even get on together if put in a combined business, even if the managing partners would? While a corporate may ride roughshod over senior individuals’ wishes in the face of compelling financial logic the same type of approach rarely works well in a law firm partnership. Corporate employees may talk, but partners walk.
In which case what would a merger of equals need to take place? It likely means:
To work it would also need shared cultural values, partners who actually get on and share similar strategic visions. The chances of all these factors aligning are very small, hence perhaps why out of 90 mergers involving the UK 100 since January 2011 at best seven could be regarded as mergers of equals. In this light, a deal with a smaller firm whose practice focus and client mix was largely additive and helped expand the combined firms’ capabilities is a far easier merger to get through.
Richard Tromans, Founder and Consultant, TromansConsulting - www.tromansconsulting.com
0330 161 1234