Too early to tell

Expanding on a topic Anu Rao analyzed a month ago, The New York Times detailed at length on Friday, and Brian highlighted yesterday, AmLaw?s Michael Goldhaber critiques implications that international expansion may yet allow BigLaw?s elite to ride out the recession storm. Goldhaber?s inspiration comes from a series of speakers at last week?s Globalization of the Legal Profession conference at Harvard Law School. The numbers, as Goldhaber mentions, are impressive: ?In 1987?57 U.S. law firms operated 148 overseas offices with 1,331 lawyers. In 1997, 101 U.S. law firms operated 368 overseas offices with 4,271 lawyers. And in 2007, 106 U.S. law firms operated 551 overseas offices with 15,231 lawyers? (National Law Journal data).

Speakers such as Hildebrandt Institute chair James Jones and K&L Gates chief Peter Kalis pointed to such figures to suggest that a select few U.S. firms with diverse and well established foreign practices are separating themselves from the pack; Goldhaber counters that, compared with U.K.-based firms and other American industries, ?globalization still has a long way to go at U.S. firms, and reports of its triumph are premature.?

In other words, it?s far too early to draw conclusions. Emerging markets in the Middle East and Asia are still providing work in practice areas that have collapsed stateside, and firms continue to hire there?witness Pillsbury?s wholesale acquisition in September of Thelen?s 20-person China group. What we do know is that American firms, on the whole, boast a fraction of the international foothold of their British counterparts (a ?pretty provincial? presence by U.K. standards, Goldhaber writes). Everyone expects that the slump will eventually reach these markets in force?what?s uncertain is how far up the global hierarchy ladder it will climb, and how much damage it will inflict upon international firms clinging to the lower rungs.

- posted by ben fuchs