The average organisation is losing more than $17-million a year because in-house counsel is giving legal advice that is too conservative, according to Gartner.
“When legal advice is too conservative it costs the organisation broadly and the legal team specifically,” says Stephanie Quaranta, distinguished research vice0president for Gartner’s legal practice.
“Legal advice that is misaligned with an organisation’s risk tolerance causes organizations to miss or downsize potential opportunities amounting to a value of $672 000 per lawyer at a median legal department we studied.”
Gartner surveyed more than 200 in-house counsel and interviewed or received survey input from more than 100 general counsel in studying the ramifications of legal advice that is misaligned with organisational risk tolerance.
The research identified a series of adverse business and legal impacts when legal guidance is too conservative.
On average, in-house lawyers reported the costs of overcautious counsel were steep. In Gartner’s survey they said that when legal guidance is too conservative, the organisation was:
* 2,5-times more likely to miss a business opportunity.
* 4,25-times more likely to reduce the benefits of a business opportunity.
* 2,5-times more likely to delay exploitation of a business opportunity.
In-house lawyers noted that when guidance is too conservative, the department sees a 4,5-times higher rate of “internal forum shopping,” where business partners seek different opinions from multiple lawyers, while “escalation” to more senior lawyers occurred at 4-times higher rate.
“The costs of continuous escalation are high,” says Quaranta. “Our research shows that General Counsel lose one full day per week to escalation requests, creating considerable delays for both legal teams and their broader organisations.”
To determine the best strategies for combating undue risk-aversion, Gartner measured the impact of a variety of different approaches and their contributions to risk alignment.
The Gartner experts identified three key areas that had the most impact on improving risk alignment among in-house counsel. All three actions require proactive guidance from General Counsel that go beyond messaging and into the management of implementation.
* Facilitate Regular Conversations on the Right Risk Posture – Gartner’s survey of in-house counsel revealed the majority of respondents (57%) didn’t fully understand their organisation’s risk posture as established by their general counsel and company’s strategic direction. This represents an opportunity for general counsel to regularly engage their in-house counsel on the organisation’s risk tolerance.
* Embed Structure in Lawyers’ Analysis to Limit Biases – Today’s uncertain and rapidly-shifting environment means that relying on past experience of familiar terrains to guide new risk decisions may lead to undue caution. General counsel must support in-house counsel with updated legal risk models that consider new legal analysis. Gartner found that analysis discipline was the largest contributor to improving risk alignment within legal departments, but only 25% of in-house counsel reported their departments as effective in this area.
* Remove Conflicting Signals from Real-Life Examples – Lawyers are frequently confused about which behaviors to prioritize. Signals that support appropriate risk taking must go beyond messaging and link to goals established in performance reviews, to successful examples from peers and legal leadership, and to the tools and templates lawyers use to provide legal advice.