Legal and Business Advice
I firmly believe that lawyers should provide legal advice in a business context and indeed can often provide effective business advice.
Many lawyers take the view that when they receive a new instruction, let's say to review a contract for the supply of goods or services, their job is to read it, comment on the legal aspects, negotiate the contract forensically with another like minded lawyer and then organise a ceremonial signing.
This narrow approach often misses the point and in my view does not provide a comprehensive and value added service.
I have developed a perspective over many years as a partner in private practice and as a leading in house lawyer in global corporations that I, and lawyers generally, have far more to offer. Our professionalism, experience, business knowledge and analytical skills can and should all be brought to bear to provide a far more profound and valuable service.
I consider that as a lawyer I provide legal and business advice to my clients and it is that combination that allows me to contribute most effectively and to add value to my client organisations.
If in this scenario I receive a contract to review I first look at in a holistic business context and seek to understand its purpose and what it means to my client before even beginning to look at the potential legal issues.
This means firstly understanding my client’s business and what it's drivers are. Only then can I see the contract in its true light. To take two extremes is it a vital sales contract for a new cloud service on which the supplier technology client is betting its business. Or is it just another procurement agreement for a customer client which may be high value but in real terms less of a risk.
I can then review the contract not just looking for obvious legal issues like the extent of the limit of liability clause, but also can work out which provisions will really matter to my client’s business and which, even though they are onerous, will not expose the organisation to much risk.
The true measure of success in this situation is where the client comes to me for advice about the contract before they receive or create it asking about the structure and sometimes even need for the contract in the first place.
Part of this conundrum is lawyers’ unwillingness to go beyond the strict realms of the law and part is clients’ lack of appreciation that we can help on the broader business issues they face or will be too expensive to engage for this purpose.
Many lawyers take the view that when they receive a new instruction, let's say to review a contract for the supply of goods or services, their job is to read it, comment on the legal aspects, negotiate the contract forensically with another like minded lawyer and then organise a ceremonial signing.
This narrow approach often misses the point and in my view does not provide a comprehensive and value added service.
I have developed a perspective over many years as a partner in private practice and as a leading in house lawyer in global corporations that I, and lawyers generally, have far more to offer. Our professionalism, experience, business knowledge and analytical skills can and should all be brought to bear to provide a far more profound and valuable service.
I consider that as a lawyer I provide legal and business advice to my clients and it is that combination that allows me to contribute most effectively and to add value to my client organisations.
If in this scenario I receive a contract to review I first look at in a holistic business context and seek to understand its purpose and what it means to my client before even beginning to look at the potential legal issues.
This means firstly understanding my client’s business and what it's drivers are. Only then can I see the contract in its true light. To take two extremes is it a vital sales contract for a new cloud service on which the supplier technology client is betting its business. Or is it just another procurement agreement for a customer client which may be high value but in real terms less of a risk.
I can then review the contract not just looking for obvious legal issues like the extent of the limit of liability clause, but also can work out which provisions will really matter to my client’s business and which, even though they are onerous, will not expose the organisation to much risk.
The true measure of success in this situation is where the client comes to me for advice about the contract before they receive or create it asking about the structure and sometimes even need for the contract in the first place.
Part of this conundrum is lawyers’ unwillingness to go beyond the strict realms of the law and part is clients’ lack of appreciation that we can help on the broader business issues they face or will be too expensive to engage for this purpose.
