Chambers and Partners will launch its 2018 Latin America edition next month. A new research cycle is about to start and the first deadline for submissions was last Monday. There is so much going on on the Latin American front and still, Rhodri Holtham, the guide’s editor, kindly managed to find the time to give me an interview. And what a pleasure it was speaking to him. Here, Rhodri talks about what’s new for the 2019 research, gives invaluable tips about the submission process and more. Check it out!
DV – There’s a new research cycle about to start for Latin America. The research schedule was announced in July. Any new sections compared to last year?
RH – We have opened one new section in Ecuador (competition/antitrust), one in Guatemala (real estate) and one in Chile (bankruptcy in Chile).
What about Brazil?
There are plans to increase the number of sections in Brazil future, but we haven’t added any new sections this year. There has been, however, an increase in the number of ranked firms, particularly in the regional tables. They are growing so much. The Centre West and North East have seen the biggest surge in interest from firms. I am very pleased with the progress of the regional sections in Brazil.
The research for the Chambers Latin America 2018 edition was the first one to allow firms to send 20 referees on their spreadsheet, as opposed to the previous 10. What were the practical results of this change? How did it impact on the rankings?
It meant a lot more work for us, as a research team. But undoubtedly it did improve the research and the level of feedback grew a lot, particularly for Brazil, which is a very responsive jurisdiction.
As a result of this growth, the rankings will become even more accurate. Chambers has a careful approach to its rankings, but having more feedback from clients should allow us to be more agile and respond more quickly to developments in the market. It has also had an impact on our editorials, as we now have access to much more information. It can be quite difficult to get feedback for some areas, so having 20 referees helped in this respect too. So, although this change meant a lot more work for us, it is now easier to get feedback from clients, which made the results of our research even more accurate.
Latin America is a very diverse region and, as a former researcher on your team, I can also say that the research for the LatAm guide is always interesting. What is the biggest challenge you, as the editor of the guide, face when handling so many different countries and their singularities?
Personally, I think it is the continuity of the product. Each country is unique, there are many differences across the region, and all are developing countries but in different stages of development. So the research can be very different from country to country.
We encourage researchers in each respective market to understand its idiosyncrasies. The response rates and the level of information available varies dramatically according to jurisdictions. We have uniformly high standards for both our research and editorial and thanks to our researchers being so diligent and hardworking in all jurisdictions we can achieve this continuity.
In the case of Brazil, how do you think the recent political instability affected the legal market?
In different ways. Obviously, the compliance market is really taking off and this is reflected in the rankings. There are more firms in this year’s table and many more are on the borderline for rankings. Compliance programmes have more than doubled. Dispute resolution, particularly for white-collar crime, has grown in demand as well.
Investors don’t like uncertainty and there is still some uncertainty at the moment about the economic and political situation in Brazil. On the other hand, thinking of the legal market specifically, it is both cyclical and counter cyclical in relation the national economy. That’s to say there is always work, it’s just the type of work changes. The firms are more confident that foreign investment and M&A in particular is picking up and will continue. Certainly in comparison with last year there is a lot more optimism. Nonetheless there is still a big question mark there, as we have yet to see the resolution of the current political problems and that could further impact the investment climate. Hopefully there will be a resolution in the near future.
What are the most common mistakes law firms make in the submission process? What advice would you give to firms regarding the submission process? What would be your top tip for firms wishing to be ranked or to improve their current position in the rankings?
The answer is the same for all three questions. It is a really simple point: it is always the writing.
Some firms feel they must write essays on each field of their submissions and it just loses effectiveness, particularly in Brazil, where we receive so many submissions for each practice area. It is a bigger issue for practice areas such as Corporate/M&A, Dispute Resolution and Tax which are very competitive.
The firms need to have a good ability to communicate the message they want to convey in a clear manner. There tends to be too much marketing speak. My advice is: let the clients do the marketing speech for you, let the clients talk about how marvelous your services are.
What is the message you want to get across? Focus on that and how to say it in a concise way. Get the point across and move on to the next field on the submission.
Don’t worry about writing long pieces, especially to describe the department. You want to pick out the key strengths and let the work highlights speak for themselves. There is nothing worse than reading in that description that their department is the best when the work highlights don’t confirm this. Tie in the overall narrative with the work highlights. They should be clear, highlighting the key aspects of the work without getting bogged down in too much detail.
What else makes a strong submission?
It is important to emphasize that there is a misconception that we only care about big, sexy numbers. Firms shouldn’t inflate their numbers, it is obvious when they do and we can easily cross check. Another zero on the submission won’t get you up the rankings. However, clearly explaining why a piece of work is particularly complex or groundbreaking is a clear plus point.
We want to get an idea about the team, so list the associates and the other partners involved in the work highlights. Giving us a good idea about your team is key to a good firm ranking. Sometimes we see a great lawyer there and only their name listed all over the submission, but if they leave, will the firm still be there? We are always asking ourselves: “Do this firm have a solid team with real strength in depth?”
Any tips when it comes to the referee spreadsheet?
The most senior person in the client’s company isn’t necessarily the best one to select as a referee. Sometimes the senior people only deal with one partner, so best to have somebody on the referee spreadsheet who will mention more people from the team, not just the main or managing partner. Also, the most senior person in the company is often the busiest and therefore does not have a lot of time to take a call with one of our researchers.
What would you say to the firms which did not get an interview for a given practice area?
We would love to interview everybody, but don’t have enough time, particularly for the larger sections.
I would therefore make the most of the rankings space in the submission. In case you don’t get the interview, your opinion is registered and logged. Again, no need for a big, long essay just an overview. Be objective when comparing yourself to other firms. Get straight to the point and give reasons why you think what you think.
I represent some Brazilian law firms and lots of smaller firms and boutiques think they can’t be ranked. What would you say to those law firms?
This is a very common question, not just in Brazil. I would say they are mistaken, have a look at our guide: there are hundreds of small firms and boutiques, often they are even in Band 1.
You will shine through if your clients reply. It is the quality rather than quantity of the work that we are looking at. We always rank departments and practice areas, not the firms as a whole. It is all by department so, for example, if you don’t have an insurance practice, it doesn’t mean you can’t be the best in intellectual property.
What does a firm or lawyer need to do to be ranked for the first time?
I will happily admit that it does take a bit of time to appear in the rankings for the first time. We need to see at least a couple of years of consistent performance first.
Often, a firm sends a submission, a referee spreadsheet, we get OK feedback and we see a good start, but then the firm gets disappointed because they didn’t get ranked immediately. If they are new on our radar, we will need to see two years of consistent work. Sometimes, if they were already on our radar when they submit it is possible for them to get in quickly. But it is different if this is the first time we have heard from them.
Be patient and be consistent, if you are doing the work and the clients are responding, it will happen. Maybe not as quickly as you would like but it will. This careful approach ensures the high quality of our product and in turn makes our rankings more exclusive.
Speaking of Brazil again, what does a regional firm (such as a firm based in, let’s say Santa Catarina or Brasília) need to do to be listed in the national table?
The work needs to have national relevance, in a scale of size and sophistication.
The bar is higher in the national tables, as the regional tables are still developing and the national tables have been established for a long time. Nothing excludes a regional firm from being on the national tables. We just need to see work that has national relevance.
There are several different legal directories these days. What makes Chambers and Partners different? What would you say is Chambers USP?
It is the size of our research team. We have the people power that others don’t. The volume and specificity of the information that we have, others can’t match. Our rankings are more influenced by what clients say. It is about client feedback and 20 clients per firm, per practice area is a lot of feedback in responsive countries such as Brazil. In our guides client opinion outweighs the opinion of peers.
Other legal directories may have as many or even more lawyer meetings than they have interviews with clients, therefore their rankings will necessarily be more influenced by that measure. Our USP is that our guides are based on client feedback and therefore reach the highest standards of impartiality and integrity.
A final piece of advice for the firms?
I know firms put a lot of effort into their submissions, which I commend, but don’t neglect your referee spreadsheet. The best client is the one that responds. List people who are willing – somebody who enjoys sharing their thoughts and giving their opinions makes for the best interviewee. While we accept written feedback from clients, nothing beats a telephone interview with someone who can give us real insight into the work of a firm and the reason for instructing them.
Thank you for reading this. If your firm needs help with their submissions, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us. It will be a pleasure talking to you.