In the past few weeks, I’ve had numerous conversations with equity and managing partners from large law firms around the world. Some might think that sounds boring, but I find their stories fascinating. There’s always something to learn from them, and, surprisingly, they’re often funnier than we might expect.
One of my favorite questions to ask them is:
Given that we know the following:
- The current big law business model is bound to change,
- There’s a major challenge in talent retention, engagement, and attraction,
- The partnership model is evolving (most of us are betting on a reduction of partners to associate ratio)
- Revenue structures are shifting,
- Many first-year associate tasks, along with some professional support lawyer (PSL) roles, will be replaced by AI,
- Clients are outsourcing less work, and will continue to do so
- The Big Four will continue their upward trajectory,
- Geopolitical pressures will require flexible structures,
- Data and generative AI will significantly impact everything—from drafting to marketing, CRM, business development, and smart use of analytics…
If we all agree on this, why is no one taking the next step?
And by “the step,” I mean creating a new kind of law firm.
Specifically, I see a gap in the market for an international law firm with revenue in the range of $50–500 million (the range depends on numerous factors, including key players, international markets, practice areas, target clientele, etc.). This firm wouldn’t be a Big Four, nor a boutique, nor a traditional multipractice big law player. It would take all of these known shifts as starting points and set the foundation for a new legal paradigm.
When we founded Better Ipsum, the goal was to do something different—a consultancy that is also a benefit corporation, fully remote, and one day, hopefully, a tech-tool provider. Plus, the oldest person on the team (me) is still under 40. Time will tell if we made the right choice.
But why hasn’t anyone taken a similar leap and applied it to a larger, different environment?
Of course, there are many reasons for hesitation: big law revenues haven’t collapsed (in fact, sometimes they have increased, especially in the U.S.), partners still have well-established client portfolios, and the demand for their services hasn’t significantly diminished. Moreover, many of the 60-plus-year-old partners have made enough money to retire comfortably before the proverbial wave hits, so—to be blunt—they might not really care about what’s coming next.
But I still believe there’s something incredibly attractive about disrupting the status quo.
Here’s the other side of the story: most of the partners I’ve spoken with agree with me.
A couple of them even asked, “The idea is great. Why don’t you do it?”
Well, first, it’s not my challenge. My challenge is to help them be successful—hopefully with a little human touch along the way.
Second, it’s about gravitas. For a project like this, I envision a team of experienced partners with incredibly thick skin, strong media presence, and a serious, tangible international track record. Plus, the group would need to be cohesive—and that’s no easy task.
Third, money. I estimate that launching a project like this would require an initial investment of a $10–50 million (depending on factors like location, number of offices—if not fully remote—key players, business model, and practice areas).
And then there are the inevitable risks: profitability in the short term, market reaction, and reputation. I mean, we’ve been reading articles predicting the end of billable hours since the 1980s, and yet, they’re still here.
One thing is certain: this would be a monumental shift. And if managed well—especially from a storytelling perspective—it could become massive in the media.
We’ve seen the era of law firm incubators, the era of law firms investing in tech tools, and the era of law firms offering consulting and advisory services.
The question is: will we see the era of truly different law firms?
