To specialise or not to specialise?
December 11, 2009 by Damian
From years of experience in overseas recruitment, the main feedback that clients give me about NZ (and Australian) lawyers is that one of the main reasons that they are so employable is because of their versatility.
Due to the nature of the market down here, few practitioners are what UK lawyers would call ‘specialists’. For example, there would not be one finance lawyer in NZ who would be dedicated to only doing aviation finance. My own legal career in the UK (for what it was) was purely in tobacco litigation – I did nothing else. This degree of specialisation just does not exist in NZ firms.
Until now, allowing practitioners to specialise in London has worked. The deals are huge, sophisticated and specific so people with detailed knowledge of the subject matter are necessary. One unforeseen consequence of the GFC, if the Linklaters’ plan as laid out in The Lawyer article below works, may be that the specialist lawyer may be a thing of the past in London -
http://www.thelawyer.com/1002837.article?nl=TL-LND.
If the way of the future for London lawyers is to become generalists rather than specialists, this could have some effect on the employability of NZ lawyers in the future. If that point of difference is taken away, it will be up to NZ lawyers to come up with another selling point to differentiate themselves from the rest of the market.
Any ideas?
Comments
Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!