Category: Awards

The Legal 500 US 2020 – An interview with US Editors Ian Deering and Helen Donegan

Posted on | by Alex Boyes

2019 has seen several interesting developments to The Legal 500’s US guide. Following former US Editor Seth Singh Jennings’s move to pastures new, Senior Researcher Ian Deering was appointed joint US Editor alongside Helen Donegan, who joined The Legal 500 in 2019 and has more than a decade of experience in legal publishing. I sat down with Helen and Ian ahead of the publication of the 2020 US research guidelines (now available here) to discuss their aims and objectives for the US guide over the next 12 months and beyond – here are some key takeaways from that discussion.

On the Editors’ respective remits

Having two editors on one guide is a novel approach for The Legal 500, which has historically had one Editor in charge of the guide per jurisdiction.

Ian’s focus will be on the rankings and editorial content produced in the US guide itself, while Helen’s remit will be on creating new, US-focused content across The Legal 500’s other content platforms and products, including their GCand fivehundredmagazines.

Given the all-encompassing nature of The Legal 500 US guide, separating out the roles of overseeing the research into and production of the US rankings and editorial, and that of generating new editorial content for The Legal 500’s various other publications and initiatives, will enable the editorial team to maintain the high quality of the core US guide while also giving them the opportunity to expand the scope of their coverage into areas that would not necessarily fit within the guide’s methodology and remit.

On the topics the new content will be covering

Helen is looking at a number of topics to cover in the coming months, largely driven by discussions with law firms in the US as well as feedback from the GC community – these include areas such as legal tech and leadership, although a key priority will be diversity and inclusion (D&I). Given the increasing role that D&I is playing in client purchasing decisions, the directories have been exploring ways to showcase firms with strong D&I initiatives and stories to tell. Given the relatively structured approach to researching the US rankings and editorial for the guide, providing a specific platform to showcase D&I and other developing areas of legal business will give the editorial team space to do deep dives into these areas.

The work being done to showcase the US legal market’s approach to D&I will form part of a broader approach to D&I across the jurisdictions covered by The Legal 500.

On US law firms’ response to the new initiatives

While US law firms have primarily engaged with The Legal 500 through the guide, the response to the new editorial initiatives has been positive. The proliferation of “pay-to-play” operators has made the US legal market decidedly wary of new products from new market entrants, so an established player like The Legal 500 seeking to drive engagement through free content is a welcome breath of fresh air.

Helen emphasised the importance of dialogue with US law firms and the GC community, and encourages firms to get in touch to discuss how they can take part in these new editorial initiatives.

On the upcoming US research

In addition to the new editorial content, we also discussed plans for the rankings and accompanying editorial. If you’ve pored over the recently released submission guidelines, you’ll see that The Legal 500 will not be introducing any new practice areas. However the team has introduced practice area definitions this year, the first time The Legal 500 has done so for any of its guides.

These definitions (which are available to review in the “Practice Areas” section on The Legal 500’s US submissions page) will provide valuable guidance to firms submitting this year (if you’re weighing the pros and cons of submitting this year, this article might help), Ian was keen to stress that these guidelines are open to change, and encouraged firms to get in touch with any feedback on how these definitions could be updated.

We also discussed planned changes to the format of the guide’s editorial coverage. Editorial paragraphs will have separate sections focusing on the practice, key clients, work and individuals – long-time devotees of The Legal 500 may recall the first US guides adopted a similar structure. The new format will enable the editorial team to utilise more of the information provided by firms in their submissions.

On Ian and Helen’s US travel plans

As part of their ongoing engagement with the US legal market, Ian and Helen will be travelling extensively as part of their respective roles. Having recently returned from trips to New York and Washington DC, Ian will be jetting off to visit firms in San Francisco, and also plans to travel to Chicago and Texas in the coming months. Helen will be visiting New York in September. If you are interested in meeting them while they’re doing the rounds, do get in touch with them to set up a meeting. Here are their contact details:

Ian Deering – E-mail: ian.deering@legal500.com Tel: +44 (0)207 031 0014

Helen Donegan – E-mail: Helen.Donegan@legal500.com Tel: +44 (0)20 7070 0403.

If you have any questions about the upcoming US research and the new editorial initiatives discussed here, Helen and Ian would be delighted to hear from you.

My name is Alex Boyes and I am one of the directors at SavageNash Legal Communications. I’m a former editor at The Legal 500 and also worked at a large international law firm. Together, SavageNash Legal Communications has over 40 years’ directories-related experience, from both sides of the directories process. If you’d like more guidance on making submissions to Chambers or The Legal 500 in the next cycle, please do get in touch via our website or on LinkedIn.

Toothpaste and Directories

Posted on | by Mike Nash

The other day, after forgetting to buy toothpaste, I was faced with a choice of which of two second-choice toothpastes to use up since my first choice wasn’t an option! (Bear with me.) In addition to mulling the prospect of sucking it up and forcing my way through some spearmint-flavoured toothbrushing, the conundrum took me back to my first-job-after-university days researching the pharmaceuticals and personal care market (exciting times!). How Arm & Hammer came out with a new toothpaste that repaired teeth. And how its advantage was wiped out the moment the patent expired.

Since directories season never really ends, sadly this train of thought led me to the epiphany of the link between new toothpastes and legal directory rankings: if you have a new product to sell, you have a temporary advantage. And just so if your legal practice has a new story to tell but it won’t take long for that advantage to vanish.

With that in mind, and with submissions from Asia to Europe and the USA upcoming, here are some top tips on how to change up the information in order keep your next submission fresh (definitely peppermint, not spearmint fresh!):

1. If you reported on some new team hires last year, then this time round make sure to showcase how those hires have bedded in by exemplifying their new work and the transitioning of their clients into the practice.

2. By all means, do include some ongoing examples of work that were submitted last year – it’s a common and reasonable thing to do – but be sure to update the matter in order to describe the significant progress of the deal or case since last year.

3. Not all years are created equal – take a fresh look at the lawyers you want to nominate as candidates for ranking. Some members are so central to the practice that they will merit nomination every year, but there will be lawyers who had a strong year last year, unfortunately didn’t get ranked and have since had a quiet year for one reason or another; unless it’s a strategic priority to have that person nominated, this quiet year for them may well indicate that it’s time to promote the case for a different lawyer this year, i.e. a lawyer who has made an impact of their own with a strong body of industry-affecting or cutting-edge mandates. This type of consideration of year-to-year strength of case is especially important for large teams where you may have numerous lawyers who are viable candidates for recognition.

4. Last year, you may have reported on some trends affecting an industry or practice area. Maybe some of those trends never turned into work for the practice – after all, it’s the law not fortune-telling – but make sure to flag up any trends that did come to fruition by following up that line of argument and exemplifying relevant work which has resulted.

5. When submitting your referees, it’s always a good idea to review whether to change the list compared with the previous year. Some of your best clients will be happy to promote the cause year after year but this won’t be the case for every client, particularly if the lawyers haven’t done much for them in the past 12 months. Keeping an eye on this not only avoids overburdening clients with repeated requests but it helps to avoid a client’s comments becoming stale and/or a client saying they haven’t used the firm much this year, which might be an incidental slowdown in a long-term client relationship but may come across to the researcher as an implicit negative.

If you have any questions about how SavageNash could help your law firm with its directories needs, please go ahead and contact us via our website – or email me directly. We look forward to hearing from you.

IFLR1000 Expands, Adding U.S. State-wide Rankings

Posted on | by Nigel Savage

 

The next edition of legal directory IFLR1000 will feature considerably expanded coverage of the U.S. market, adding rankings and editorial in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

IFLR1000 – Euromoney Institutional Investor’s flagship legal directory, which is now in its 27th year – is unique in that it focuses its research exclusively on the corporate and finance areas. This sets it apart from, for example, the Legal 500 and Chambersguides, which cover the full range of legal services (employment, real estate, life sciences etc.)

IFLR1000‘s expanded editorial will include rankings and editorial in four core practice areas: Banking, Capital Markets, M&A, and Restructuring & Insolvency. However, the depth of the market in each state will determine which areas appear in each state – it’s unlikely that all four practice areas will be covered in all 50 states.

The state-wide rankings will sit alongside the nationwide rankings. As is the case with Chambers, firms are of course able to submit both for the state-wide sections and the nationwide sections (for the time being at least, Legal 500 prefers to adopt the nationwide-only model, and it’s working well for them).

IFLR1000‘s rankings are based on three criteria: quality and quantity of deals, peer feedback, and client feedback.

A few things firms should bear in mind when putting submissions together (this according to IFLR1000‘s press release on the expanded coverage):

  • Deals should be focused on the state in question. They should have been completed primarily by lawyers based in that state, and governed by that state’s laws.
  • Deals involving two of more states can be submitted in each individual state submission.
  • International cross-border deals should be submitted as part of the nationwide research process.
  • Firms can submit deals that have been completed, on or which they have started work on, since January 2017.

Follow these links for more information on how to take part, as well as IFLR1000‘s practice area definitions.

My Take On This

I applaud Euromoney for taking steps to expand and improve its coverage of the world’s biggest legal market. I have felt for a while now that concerted efforts by both Legal 500 and Chambers to hone their research processes and engage fully with corporate counsel have meant those two organizations have pulled far ahead of the competition, in the U.S. and elsewhere. IFLR1000 is, in my view, playing catch-up.

The rankings/legal directory space is becoming more and more crowded, and firms are increasingly reluctant – not to mention unable – to submit to everything. At SavageNash Communications, we’ve come across many large firms who are significantly cutting back on the number of rankings publications they submit to, and instead are selecting a small handful of market leaders on which to focus their efforts.

This is the challenge IFLR1000 will face.

Strong, deep research and compelling editorial coverage are absolutely essential to success of any new directory in this already overcrowded market. I sincerely hope IFLR1000 has significantly expanded its editorial team to handle the large amount of extra research this new venture will require.

As ever, please feel free to get in touch if we can help.

Legal 500 Takes Fresh Approach To Awards Ceremonies

Posted on | by Nigel Savage

The Legal 500 has announced a fresh take on the run-of-the-mill awards ceremonies, with the launch of its Legal 500 2013 Awards.

Awards ceremonies are big business in today’s legal market. But,  increasingly, they are all the same: big black tie events, where you sit at a table of  whoever the firms could persuade/bribe/beg to attend.

According to Legal 500 Publishing Director, David Burgess: “Our view is that we want to recognise the best in the business, without all the hoopla of an event to overshadow it.”

Using Legal 500‘s in-depth research as a starting point, the aim will be to judge the work of firms and barristers on the submissions they’ve already provided during the Legal 500 research process. The awards themselves will therefore follow the practice areas in the Legal 500 book, apart from the few regional/jurisdictional awards (Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Offshore). The Bar awards, meanwhile, will recognise sets and QCs across the sections.

So far, so familiar, right? But, there are some crucial differences that make Legal 500‘s awards a somewhat different beast.

First, awards won’t be handed out on the night (so, no long ceremony – something I’m sure will make a lot of people very happy). Instead, firms will be presented with a trophy and logos which they can use for promoting the firm.

Secondly – and here’s the real difference – there won’t be a massive event at a London hotel for a thousand people. No big black tie event, no table sales… a departure indeed. Instead, winners will be invited to a networking dinner, with a mix of firms, sets/QCs and importantly, in-house lawyers – to deepen relationships and be allowed to properly network.

And the real difference between Legal 500‘s awards and pretty much every other awards event in the market? None of the attendees will be charged money to attend.

It’s a pretty radical approach, and it will be interesting to see whether it catches on. But however it is greeted in the market, one thing is for sure: innovation seems to be the new watchword at Legal 500. And that can only be a good thing for the market generally.