From the sole practitioner to the largest multi-office LLP, there is no best way to run a successful legal firm.  In the second of our series looking at management styles Steven Raeburn meets David Laing, Chairman of Ledingham Chalmers, to find out his approach to the challenge of running three offices from Aberdeen.

The offices of Ledingham Chalmers in Aberdeen are in one sense a fair architectural microcosm of the firm itself. They are bright, modern, accessible and cheery, but unlike many of their competitors are situated neither in a converted Victorian era townhouse, nor in a purpose built modern office development. They are somewhere in between. And this appears to be exactly how chairman David Laing likes it.

As chairman he presides over three offices in Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Inverness, although the firm formerly had offices in Azerbaijan, Turkey and the Falkland Islands, so he has form in overcoming geographic constraints in order to run his business effectively. Ledingham Chalmers remains a partnership of 23 -not too big and not too small, you might say- and continues to be run along partnership lines. With Laing installed as chairman, the firm has adapted to the more commercially minded business climate, and has taken advantage of specialist non-lawyer expertise to supplement the partners’ input.

“The reason we have a chairman and not a managing partner is because we have had two non-lawyers in senior management positions here since 1997 -our chief executive and director of HR-  to fulfil the finance admin and HR slots,” Laing explains.

“We had moved away from the single practice manager, who was expected to do everything, from ordering stationery to recruitment and selection. At that time the practice manager tended to recruit office support staff, but it would be partners who would be dealing with lawyers. What we were trying to do from the HR side was to get a more consistent and rounded approach to recruitment and selection than we had by doing it in pockets over the firm.

“The plan was to introduce these people at partner level, although they couldn’t be partners for technical reasons. But they could have partner status in the sense that they could be part of our strategy and meetings, and be doing everything partners would have done in the past part-time. Bringing in professionals to do those jobs worked really well, and they have gone on in those roles and are still with us. In 2006 we moved to having them as the management team, and a chairman whose main job is to look after the consensus among the partners. The nature of partnership is that it carries this rather odd cultural requirement to manage a consensus.”

This requirement falls to Laing, the longest serving partner within the firm. Collectively, Ledingham Chalmers have eschewed the full time executive role adopted by some larger firms, and have moved beyond the strict partnership model retained by the smaller. Using professional managers in key roles is an approach that doesn’t appeal to everyone, but for Laing, he says it fits the Ledingham Chalmers model well.

“Other law firms have decided to go for a more corporate approach, and that may well work for them. But we are still treating the partnership as being an important part of the mix of what binds us together. We have tried to evolve the idea of having a degree of equality and diversity at the same time. I’m not suggesting this is unique. Partnerships all have to find their modus operandum, because there isn’t a one-size-fits-all. Where you have come from, where your partners have developed, the age range plays into this,” he says.

“At the moment we are not operating with a formal board, so we don’t have a ‘star chamber’ or other group who run the partnership. It is being run in terms of service delivery by partners; teams of lawyers. It is being run in terms of admin by our two professional directors, and then you have the partners’ meeting which is the place where this consensus is measured, gauged and refreshed.

“We have given the management functions of the practice to professional managers. We have asked the lawyers to deliver the legal services, and the partners get together and the major decisions come to that group. What I am trying to do is measure the consensus of that group on a whole range of subjects and trying to make sure that group functions in the way that it should.”

Not all firms have elected to retain the partnership structure, and it is often the more commercially minded firms who have reformed their structure. Being based in the northeast with all that that entails, this is an unusual stance.

Ledingham Chalmers are certainly not the only firm to operate from multiple sites, and Laing acknowledges that it can be a challenge to ensure that staff across all locations are included and feel part of the firm’s activities. His experience managing offices internationally stands the firm in good stead.

“From a management perspective it is not hugely difficult. At one time we were managing an office in the Falkland Islands, so logistically it is a bit easier,” he says.

“There will always be a challenge to ensure that the partners feel integrated. The largest office is in Aberdeen, where much of the admin is centred. We do need to work hard to find ways of pulling people into discussions and seminars. We can have seminars that involve colleagues in all three locations simultaneously. Travel is not a significant drain on time. It has never been a problem.” 

One thing possibly unique to Laing’s approach  -and certainly a view not often expressed, even if it is commonly held- is that sometimes it is necessary to put the firm first, rather than its clients. Without diminishing the essential role the client plays in the business mix, Laing points out that on occasion, for the good of your business, it is necessary to pull in the drawbridge a little.

“One of the things I am conscious of is the need for someone to be trying to look at the firm from 360 degrees. It is really easy for a lawyer in one work area to see the firm through that lens only, or by location, age of the firm. What I try to do wherever possible is steel myself against that single lens approach to see all the angles.  I am not sure I fully accept that you should only see yourselves as clients see you. This firm -any firm or business- is a community which has to put its own requirements first from time to time,” he says.

“When partners get involved in management or administration, there is a tendency to put client work first, and things that they do for the partnership take second place. That is one of the reasons why we have these professional managers. They don’t have external clients; their client is the firm, and they put the firm first.

“When we were making a major change in our practice I wanted to ensure that all colleagues knew of the proposals from me before they heard rumours from outside. We therefore delayed sharing the proposals with any clients until our colleagues had been briefed. One client -who considered himself to be a major client- was upset that he had not been told before the news was circulated externally. I explained that I wanted to speak to colleagues before him. What I wanted to say to him -but in fact refrained from saying-  was this: “I will put the interests of your business before those of mine when you are able to put the interests of my business before yours.” It may sound glib but I think it’s the right approach.”