Page 24 - CCCA62_2008

CCCA_V2No2_Innovation-FIN.qxd:CCCA_V1No1_DriversSeat-FIN.qxd 5/1/08 3:06 PM Page 36 Feature he words “corporation” and “innovation” go together invention,according to Stock.Rather,it means“doing things dif- like — well, the possibilities for analogy are endless. ferently in several dimensions.” THand and glove,peanut butter and jam,profits and share- He singles out five areas that offer law departments the oppor- holders… But what about “law department” and “innovation”? tunity to distinguish themselves through innovation: having a As a pairing, it lacks the appealing ring or rhyme — but consid- strategic impact on the company,better anticipating and respond- ering the way many corporations are drawing their law depart- ing to demands for legal services, measuring performance, man- ments into the innovation loop, the relationship seems destined aging costs, and keeping internal clients “deliriously delighted.” to endure. The need to be innovative is hardly brand new, of course. But Increasingly,companies are waking up to the opportunities for what’s changed over the last five or six years,says Stock,is that law innovation in their legal departments — and sizing up the costs departments are realizing it’s important to be proactive rather of ignoring those opportunities.As companies take note of what’s than simply responsive. “You’re initiating on all of these fronts, happening among their competitors, law departments may find rather than sitting around waiting to be called upon like a Maytag innovation becoming less a matter of going the extra mile, and repair lawyer.” more a matter of justifying their very existence. Despite the aggressive climate, most law departments are not Richard Stock, founding partner of Catalyst Consulting, a yet expected to actually make money — although some do. Toronto-based global legal services consulting firm, confirms that DuPont Co., for example, has reportedly transformed its law in this evolving culture of continuous innovation,“individuals who department from a cost centre to a profit generator, and has a don’t anticipate, let alone keep up, are simply replaced.The conse- group of lawyers tasked with scoping out ways to recover money quences of not innovating include lost opportunities,increased risk and calculate an expected return each year. for the company, obsolescence, irrelevance, and termination.” Of course, there are many ways to get more bang for your legal It sounds cutthroat. But what does innovation actually mean, buck. Swiss banking monolith UBS, for example, has adopted a especially as applied to a law department? It doesn’t refer to ranking system to rate its external global legal advisers, awarding In-house It’s not enough for law departments to simply be quietly competent anymore — corporate leaders demand that Legal contribute to the com- pany’s strategy, operations and bottom line through innovative methods. Here’s how several Canadian law departments are doing just that. 36 CCCA Canadian Corporate Counsel Association SUMMER 2008