REFLECTIONS ON THE IMPETUS FOR CHANGE AND SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE INTERNAL TENSIONS VEXING MEDIUM-SIZED FIRMS.
| Published date | 01 December 1990 |
| Author | V K RAJAH |
| Date | 01 December 1990 |
This paper is divided into three parts. The first part deals with what I identify as the general impetus for change in the face of inexorable developments in society. I have also taken the liberty to infuse into the text some personal views on disturbing trends in practice. This part would be of relevance to all concerned with the future of the profession. The second part deals with the future directions a medium-sized firm has to take to remain relevant and competitive in tomorrow’s brave new legal world and would be of particular relevance to practitioners in medium-sized firms. The third part summarises the paper. In view of the constraints of space, I frequently employ the methodology of reductionism to make and to illustrate my points. I must also state at the outset that I do not attempt to specifically identify new areas of legal practice in this paper as these are covered elsewhere.
The 1980s were a tumultuous period in different ways for the legal profession in Singapore and in England. Right up to the 1970s the legal profession in Singapore, in many respects was almost a mirror image of the legal profession in England — that is after discounting the fact that we are a fused profession. Our professional practices were and still are substantially modelled on English practices. The English legal landscape is now in a state of ferment. The developments of the 1980s have permanently scarred the symbiotic relationship between barristers and solicitors. The contours have been re-defined with the introduction of professional advertisement, licensed conveyancers, enhanced clientele access to barristers, additional rights of audience to solicitors and very significantly the wider common market of Europe in 1992 twinned with the globalisation of legal services. Solicitors and barristers now actively and unabashedly compete for clients, business and enhanced rights at the expense of each other.
The legal profession in Singapore has not experienced the same haemorrhaging as its English counterpart. The images of the 1980s would be of growth and increased specialisation. The 1980s were not, unhappily, conspicuous as being a period of deliberation. The
two most important changes affecting the profession were the result of passivity rather than of stimuli from within the profession. I am of course now referring to the injection of non-practising lawyers into the disciplinary process and the creation of the Academy of Law. Both changes were necessary. The former was needed to maintain public confidence in the profession as it was felt that the image of the profession was tarnished as a result of the misbehaviour of a few members and passivity in the face of flagrant ethical transgressions. The Academy of Law’s avowed purpose is to establish an institution akin to the Inns of Court in the United Kingdom to stimulate a ‘collegiate spirit in the legal fraternity’.
Internally the 1980s has not transformed law firms. Changes have been more in form and style rather than in the fundamental way we practise. Law firms have been growing larger. Today’s medium-sized firm is yesterday’s large firm. (Please see the attached Tables). Management practices have however changed in response to the larger sizes of firms. Unfortunately, to many the profession has become a mere business rather than a profession which is quintessentially a public service with distinct and critical values. It is this malady that has to be extirpated if the profession intends to maintain its distinctiveness, standing and relevance in the eyes of the public.
Having very briefly adverted to what I think is the fundamental problem of the 1990s, (which is essentially an attitudinal problem) I now turn to the future landscape which will call for a realignment of our horizons. The components of change will be both external and internal. It is however axiomatic that canned solutions from England will no longer be unthinkingly absorbed. A significant development will be that the 1990s will see the severance of the professional umbilical cord with England as we begin to assert our distinctiveness under the umbrella of the Academy of Law.
As a service industry, we lubricate the machinery of commercial and administrative intercourse. To remain relevant we have to keep abreast of changes in business practices and understand the packaging of financial services. The firm of tomorrow will have to look to the international marketplace for its potential clientele rather than to just localise its priorities.
This will affect us at two levels. First it compels us to understand
and to develop new areas of law e.g. patenting of new products and the comprehension of principles pertaining to the transgressing of and preserving of intellectual property. Secondly, we have to tool up and computerise to respond to commercial demands. Modern technology however while sometimes changing the methodology will not affect the fundamental nature of our services.
A more educated public, more conscious of its rights will expect and demand more of and from the profession. We will become more accountable for our professional practices.
The public perception is that through the shield of archaic rules and...
To continue reading
Request your trial