Q. First off Rachel, many congratulations on 25 years at Arthur Cox. We perhaps think of careers in more short-term chunks these days. Tell us about some of the factors that made you stay?

Thank you – I still can’t believe it’s true. I always know how long I’ve been here as I joined at the beginning of the century!  People do now think more short term when it comes to a career – and I did too when I joined. I’d been practising law at another firm and I thought I would do a business development and communications role for a few years here at Arthur Cox…and look how that worked out.

One of the reasons I’ve stayed so long is the people. I know a lot of firms say they have great people, but we really do; we’re not hierarchical and it’s very collegiate. People work hard but we also have fun and being in a firm at the top of its game is difficult to beat. I’m not sure why I would move somewhere that doesn’t have the same quality of clients, work and people. At the start it was just me and now we have a team of 25. I was delighted to be made partner in 2007 and I now sit on our management committee so I am centrally involved in the business.

Q. You’re well placed to talk about the changes in how we market and sell professional services? What have been the best of the developments? And which ones have you perhaps been less enthusiastic about?

So much has changed – and principally with technology and digital. When I started, many firms didn’t even have a website and nowadays a website is only a part of the digital offering. PR back then was literally the newspaper of record that went to print in the evening. Now PR really is public relations, and reputation management is multi-faceted, especially on social media. Clients are more sophisticated and, dare I say it, demanding, but that’s their right.

If you go back to the beginning of my career, lawyers didn’t really value business development, let alone marketing. Accountancy firms were way more advanced. I think we have caught up and lawyers (well most of them) really appreciate and understand the support a top-class BD and marketing team [BD&M] provides – and the value it adds. It’s great to have so many more metrics from an RoI perspective too. Lawyers respond when there’s evidence.

On balance, I think most of the developments have been positive. But if we feel there’s been a lot of change so far, I think we’re in for a rollercoaster of a ride with GenAI. I believe it will have an enormous impact on the legal profession generally and on BD&M. It’s important to look at this new tool as an opportunity rather than a threat. We need to be open-minded and nimble about how we respond. I think it will make everyone’s work more interesting and that can only be a good thing.

Q. PwC research last year showed 45% of some 5000 global CEOs surveyed feel their organisation won’t be fit for purpose in the next decade without significant transformation. That surely points to there being issues around business models overall?

That’s an interesting statistic and there’s that cliché organisations fail because they are structured to serve a world that no longer exists. I think the PSF [professional services firm] model is being challenged on several fronts. I have already mentioned GenAI which is clearly huge and is likely to impact the shape of the law firms of the future and what clients expect of those advising them.

Generation Z and their expectations and career plans is another – they don’t come into firms and believe they’ll be there for 30 years. Many don’t want to be a partner either and have different priorities in terms of what they want and expect from life, which is not always compatible with what law firm life has traditionally been like. Having said that, I think every generation believes the one coming behind is different and are sometimes critical. It does feel different this time though. To address some of these issues, we’ve developed several alternative career paths for people including ‘of counsel‘ and senior legal tech roles.

Q. Another obvious challenge is that it’s become business-critical to be, as you’ve said, nimble and more comfortable in adapting. Some might say that’s especially challenging within a professional services/partner structure?

You’re right it’s important to be adaptable and firms need to find ways to make that happen. The PSF model of fill up the tank during the year, empty it at the end and start again does not always lend itself to long-term thinking or planning. In fact, it does the opposite. Partners have the brainpower to really think and plan and it’s more a question of changing the culture to think long-term. And to be prepared – and have the courage – to change plans if required. For example, a five-year strategy is no longer realistic. A firm that had such a strategy even three years ago would most likely not have included GenAI in a SWOT analysis. I think Covid is a good example of firms being good at adapting and changing.

Q. Something else we’re looking at in this issue is workplace ageism or, at least, our perceptions around age? I’m interested in [A] what’s going to happen when/if more wisdom and experience leaves the building, and, [B] how are we then going to teach young lawyers and other staff key skills such as judgement?

There’s a lot of talk about ageism and it’s quite funny really as the one thing that is going to happen to everyone (if they’re lucky) is they are going to grow older. As you know, many law firms tend to have relatively low retirement ages; it’s a demanding job. But I think there is room for people who want to stay on, particularly if they’re in a specialist area. There is life after law though. In recent years, several of our partners who retired have gone into interesting in-house and advisory roles.

The judgment question is an interesting one and GenAI comes into play. We all cut our teeth on drafting documents and sitting in data rooms doing due diligence or reading discovery documents. If GenAI is going to do all of that, how will we teach young lawyers judgment? What will judgment even mean in the future? There are existential questions around all of this.