Canadian Lawyer InHouse

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2019 26 INHOUSE Sidhu experienced on a recent deal, when she was working with one lawyer and didn't realize there were 10 lawyers working on the back end of the fi le. "I think it's absolutely crucial to let your external fi rm know exactly where your ex- pectations are," she says. Put on paper what the junior associates can do, what needs a senior partner, what is urgent and how many lawyers you want working on the fi le, says Sidhu. That communication needs to be direct- ed within the company as well, so legal can engage externally, effectively and effi cient- ly. Sidhu says she consults with her CEO on what aspects of the fi le need to be handled by a senior partner and which are less sig- nifi cant from the business standpoint. "I think that helps a lot with the value- based billing and making sure that you get exactly what you need without breaking your budget," she says. Linardi says knowing your external fi rms well is key to keeping costs down. "I think an often-under-looked avenue for cost con- tainment is relationship building," he says. "I think just having a good relationship with counsel where expectations are clear and you have a lot of trust in that relationship." And when you've reached an agreement but unpredicted complications arise in the process, "there is nothing that can't be ne- gotiated," Sidhu says. The process is underscored by the 67 per cent of respondents who said the general counsel/legal department had the autonomy to select fi rms. In an encouraging improvement, outside law fi rms are becoming more proactive and personal in their dealings with corporate le- gal departments, says Sidhu. Like a friend, the relationship prospers when one side isn't just calling when they need something. Keeping an ear to the street and offering tips or help when external counsel's life in- tersects with the industry in which Sidhu is enmeshed all day every day strengthens the working bonds, she says. "It just goes to show that there's a relation- ship and there is somebody that is looking out for you," she says. "We can't see every- thing and it's nice when you know that one of your external partners is watching over you to make sure you don't miss anything." Unlike risk management, alternative fee arrangements are not dominating the in-house bar. Sixty-fi ve per cent of survey respondents said they are using a billable- hour model with their external legal provid- ers and only three per cent are using AFAs. Of those who do use AFAs, 60 per cent use them only for up to 25 per cent of the work they send out. There may be more action on the AFA front if law fi rms were suggesting them to legal departments, but only seven per cent of respondents said their fi rm introduced the idea of using them. "I would say there's still a lack of consis- tency in the industry. It's very rare that the law fi rm will ask us for an AFA," says Lin- ardi. "Usually, it's Golder that would have to bring the issue up and, once we do that, they're pretty responsive to try to structure something that would work." Linardi says he's using AFAs more fre- quently and has found success with them with their real estate services provider. "We're able to measure our legal spend a lot more effi ciently, and that helps the com- pany plan a lot more effi ciently for real es- tate costs in general," he says. But as to the value of AFAs, some of the survey participants left comments in sharp contrast to Linardi's real estate experience. "AFAs are generally an expensive gim- mick," said one. In the spirit of the divide between the 50 per cent of respondents who saw no added value in AFAs and the 44 per cent who said they did, one commenter left the note that the "jury is still out on value of AFAs." Developing AFAs takes time, which has a cost, so many fi rms and legal departments stick to what they know, Linardi says. But to make AFAs work takes consistency and learning from mistakes when they don't work, he says. "You have to have a client and a law fi rm that are both creative and that want the AFA to work. If the fi rst time we tried an AFA it wasn't that successful, you have to learn from that, but you have to try again," he says. "So, it takes some planning and it takes some effort." The biggest issue facing legal depart- ments for 10 per cent of the survey partici- pants was scope creep — the unloading of non-legal work on the legal department. But like the issue of risk management, with scope creep, Linardi sees an opportunity. It's a "double-edged sword," he says. While it increases the legal department's workload, it gives legal a better perspec- tive on new developments and challenges the company is experiencing. Though scope creep happens increasingly, he says, he wants the other divisions to come to him with problems, and many problems without a legal element can develop one quickly if not handled promptly and properly. Goodwin says he prefers the term "chip- ping in" over "scope creep" and wants to be involved on the "business side of things." "Doing things that are sort of quasi-busi- ness, quasi-legal and, if [lawyers] have cer- tain skills and talents, you should use those skills and talents for stuff that's not strictly law or legal-oriented and use them toward using your creative thinking, intuitive skills on other parts of the business," he says. "So, that's good." Even with scope creep, legal departments claim to be keeping the hours down to lev- els conducive to work-life balance. Forty per cent said they worked between 35 and 45 hours per week and another 36 per cent said they worked between 45 and 50 hours. Only fi ve per cent said they clocked more than 56 hours. Linardi says those numbers seem low, his being in the 60-hours-a-week range. "But, you know, it comes with the terri- tory. I think that a lot of people think that when you're in a leadership role, you del- egate more things," he says. "But it's more of a service role from my perspective, and you're just helping, you're supporting more people and that takes time, because there's your regular job to do and you also have to support people." But the reasonable workweek refl ected in the survey is not a surprise to Sidhu, who says 35 to 45 hours a week is "bang on," but she notes that it can fl uctuate depending on what is going on. Sidhu oversees operations in four different time zones and some days she works overtime, while other days it bal- ances out. IH

• Cover