What Microsoft, Starbucks, Rackspace Expect From Their Outside Counsel
In-house legal professionals at three large organizations agree that hiring the right outside counsel is as much a matter of culture than it is of expertise and ability.
August 27, 2018 at 10:00 AM
4 minute read
|
Legal departments will likely differ in types of legal work they handle, their technological abilities and their size. But when it comes to hiring outside help, many have the same expectations.
At the “Expectations of Outside Counsel: A General Counsel Perspective” session of ILTACON 2018, three in-house legal professionals from some of the biggest companies in the global economy shed light on how they approach hiring outside counsel, and what they expect from these firms.
For Zabrina Jenkins, managing director of litigation at Starbucks Corp., it's important to hire outside counsel who not only have expertise to match the needs of specific matters at hand, but have attitudes that reflect Starbucks' culture.
“My expectation is that you will present to us the best team that you feel matches our matter, our company and our goals,” she said.
Jenkins noted, for instance, “that diversity is one of the top things that is listed in our outside guidelines. … And I will expect that you will take into consideration that we are a diverse company and serve a diverse community.”
And Starbucks, she said, “isn't just speaking in terms of race and gender.”
“You need to understand that when you come to meet with us that is something we value. And you need to demonstrate why your values link with ours,” Jenkins added.
To be sure, while many legal departments want outside counsel to match their values, what values they stress will inevitably differ. In Microsoft's case, Alonzo Barber, an attorney in Microsoft's legal and corporate affairs group, cited “efficiency and being in lockstep” with how the tech company operates as essential.
“We are moving to be as efficient as possible, so we select outside counsel that have that mindset,” he said.
What's more, Barber expects his outside counsel to be on board with Microsoft's core offerings and business, and types of technology aren't an exception.
“It's ironic to me that some outside counsel that are actually customers of ours aren't implementing these cloud technologies,” he added.
Still, David Kilgore, corporate counsel at cloud computing company Rackspace, cautioned that outside counsel shouldn't be adopting technology just to get business.
“I don't want them going to the cloud because they're going to pitch to Rackspace,” he said.
But that doesn't mean tech ignorance is acceptable either. Rackspace's legal department expects outside counsel to have a deep understanding of technology. “You are looking for that technological competence, and you are looking at them understanding [things like] privacy by design.”
In addition to finding the right cultural and technological fit, for some legal departments, flexible pricing is of importance. “If we're doing kind of rotational work, then we are going to do flat fee,” Kilgore said. “But if we are looking for in-depth analysis and advice on a complex matter, we are more likely to see that as a billable hour.”
The legal department at Starbucks takes a similar approach. “Sometimes it makes sense to do billable hour, and sometimes it makes sense to consider flat fee or hybrid, some alternative to the hourly billable rate situation,” Jenkins said.
She added that it's also helpful if outside counsel works with the legal department to initially figure out how much time and effort a matter will likely take before diving in.
It's important to “have that comfort level on both party's sides to say, 'Let's just invest in 'X dollars' to try to figure out how we need to proceed in this particular matter,'” she added.
➤➤ Law firms have never been under more pressure to deliver results and demonstrate value. Have you explored the benefits of Lean Adviser Legal from Law.com?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readAs Tech-Focused Roles in C-Suite Expand, Newcomers Embrace Big Law Opportunities
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250