GC urges law firms to provide more innovative content

Sophia PK Yap, chief legal officer and proud co-owner at Hong Kong Broadband Network (HKBN), is quite the entrepreneur. Having moved in-house early in her career, she has worked across healthcare, real estate, investments and telecommunications, where she is now facilitating the roll-out of innovative solutions and high-speed broadband access across the region. Sophia told Lextel she would like to see a greater commitment to innovation when it comes to law firm outreach.

 

I first met Sophia more than a decade ago when, as Asia Pacific general counsel and global deputy chief ethics & compliance officer at CBRE, she led panel discussions at numerous corporate counsel events I organised in Hong Kong. Sophia started her career as a banker in Australia before being recruited to Hong Kong by Baker & McKenzie. Following a four-year leadership role at GE Healthcare, she then assumed business and legal roles in the private equity and venture capital markets before building upon that at CBRE.

While I was aware of her entrepreneurial background, I hadn’t realised I had experienced it first-hand when I was last in Hong Kong in October 2022. As the territory opened up from its strict Covid-19 measures, residents and visitors were obliged to record their movements via the contact tracing ‘LeaveHomeSafe’ app.

Together with her family and friends, Yap formed ‘Tech Response to Covid-19’ and built a functioning app which they successfully pitched to the Hong Kong Government on a pro bono basis to help the territory recover quicker from the pandemic. “What Hong Kong needed to get out the crisis was a simple workflow and solution that a three-year-old or a 100-year-old could use,” she says.

Sophia contributed to the data-security-by-design and privacy-by-design core features and principle, the go-to-market strategy, marketing as well as risk mitigation strategies. “It was a community project that needed to be up and running very quickly so that schools, businesses and daily lives could resume.”

Under the leadership of the Government, and with the keen support from the business and wider community, the ‘LeaveHomeSafe’ app became the most highly downloaded app in Hong Kong with more than eight million downloads. “We just understood what was needed and brought everyone together.”

In June 2022, Yap found her spiritual ‘home’ when she joined HKBN. “HKBN was a perfect match in the sense that they had this co-ownership plan where talents could all walk-the-talk and be a financial investor and co-owner in the company. So, I see myself not working as a member of staff but more as an investor who can contribute and help shape the company in a positive direction.”

In June this year, HKBN became the first fixed network operator in Asia to deploy 25Gbps broadband speed (in partnership with Nokia) within Hong Kong. Yap says HKBN prides itself on being entrepreneurial, not just as a telecommunications service provider but also as an ICT powerhouse. “We are always the market leader in terms of developing a faster network and customer-orientated solutions powered by GigaFast™ broadband speeds driving the future of innovation. And if you look at the direction in which the Government wants to transform Hong Kong, in terms of being a smart city, you need to have that GigaFast™ speed as the infrastructure for companies to leap to greater technological innovation and advancement.”

The collaboration with Nokia, which is enabling HKBN to upgrade its existing fiber network, has been described by executive vice-chairman and group CEO William Yeung as part of the company’s “unwavering commitment to innovation”.

And, in our discussion, Sophia told me the extent to which her law firms demonstrate such a commitment when it comes to their outreach:

 

SY: In this part of the world, law firms tend to be a bit too factual and legalistic with their content. The challenge is that many lawyers in law firms have not worked in-house, so they can be too legalistic in their presentation.

If they were to come up with practical insights, or present content in a way that was more digestible and easier to understand and apply, that would catch the eye more than just reading about what is coming next from the law.

SM: How bespoke is the thought leadership you receive and consume from law firms?

SY: We use quite a few law firms and receive legal updates from many international and local law firms. For example, some law firms send very frequent communications on a weekly basis. Other firms are more strategic and targeted, with helpful and practical legal and ICT industry insights (like Baker McKenzie, Clifford Chance, DLA Piper, Slaughter and May, and Squire Patton Boggs. The danger, when you send out too much, is that some of it might get ignored because it can seem like a data dump.

SM: Which platforms do you use to stay up to date with industry news and developments?

SY: I read the newspapers of course as they also tell you what’s happening, or directly from industry thinktanks. There are the Big Four professional service firms who also produce write-ups, and then there are the law firms.

It all depends on whether certain topics are relevant to your particular industry. If they’re not, then you won’t pay that much attention. But if it’s something to do with new technologies, internal risk management with upcoming business, such as legal and regulatory changes around the opening of new markets or the direction that we might be considering, then that can be helpful.

I am then more likely to compare a few law firm articles because they all write very differently. Some are more helpful than others. For example, some of them just repeat back what was in the news or on some of the government sites, so that is not very helpful. I think it’s a mixed bag.

SM: To what extent should your law firms keep you appropriately informed about news and developments in your industry sector?

SY: We would like that but often they have got too many clients, so I don’t think they do that proactively. They just put you on the mailing list and ask what you would like to subscribe to i.e. employment law, M&A, regulatory, telco etc. Then they just leave it to their in-house teams to get the publications to you. It’s not like there’s a new law and then the relationship partner tells me all about it. They don’t do that because maybe they think that’s not the best use of their billable hours.

SM: Do you feel that your firms understand your industry?

SY: I don’t just use one law firm. I take a proactive decision in terms of determining who might be the right expert for a particular transaction or a particular need, and I go for that rather than looking at one firm to take care of it all.

It depends on different types of CLOs (chief legal officers) or GCs (general counsels). Some might just go for a big law firm and use them for everything because it’s the big brand. But I look more at the expertise of a particular counsel and the challenge I have on hand and then determine who might be better for the risk that I’m trying to address. It is not so much about just looking at the dollar sign, but where the real value is for my company and stakeholders. And are they able to stand up for a defensible position? Are they able to give me the right level of support?

Just using the cheapest option can bring its own problems. If it is a small and straightforward M&A transaction in a low-risk country then, yes, we look for the cheapest. But, if it involves regulatory concerns or it’s more complex, then the more important measurements are experience, influence, first hand familiarity with the regulators, expertise, and how they view the things we should be making a note of.

SM: How important is it to you that a law firm has demonstrated relevant expertise before you instruct them? (is it a preference or might you not instruct them unless they have)

SY: I would normally start by going to my peers and asking them who they would use for a particular kind of matter. While that often means that I end up going to the larger firms, because they are more likely to have run into similar sorts of issues, real user experience is a more reliable indicator than asking them to show me their CV.

In terms of thought leadership content, it helps if they have at least written something on the matter i.e. they have turned their mind to generating valuable content to attract clients. If they haven’t written anything then you worry whether they know anything about it.

There are some law firms that organise their content in a very user-friendly, logical and practical way. This does make you think that these firms have thought about new laws, and the sort of issues they present to clients. So, obviously, they would rank ahead of firms that have not written anything, particularly if they have also not received any peer recommendation.

In those circumstances, you might then test them on the law based on what you’ve read in content from another law firm and see if they pick up some of those issues, red flags or concerns. So, law firm content is certainly relevant when it comes to benchmarking one firm against another, because if they’re not even able to mention some of the things that a law firm has written about then you do worry whether they really understood what the law means and where it’s going.

SM: To what extent have any of your law firms consulted you when it comes to content ideation?

SY: It’s not common in this part of the region. These days, law firm content is more about new laws and trends i.e. what we expect will happen, what you should be aware of, how to ensure you’re prepared in terms of allocating budget resource, make sure your IT security is up to date etc.

Sometimes, I’m not sure if law firms provide more information than what’s already available to access. There is value if they dig deeper into an issue and give us a perspective that we were not aware of and couldn’t just read on Google. That would be helpful.

Use of statistics and infographics also definitely helps. If you can present in a way that is eye catching and easy to understand as opposed to wading through long articles trying to find the key takeaways. Being digital also means you must be quick to get the intended message across. All of this has an impact on the extent to which the content is user-friendly.

SM: In terms of being consulted, we also help law firms with their client feedback programmes given that many companies now insist that their external legal advisers provide them with such a programme. So, when your law firms fill your inbox with comms about changes in legislation and various other things, to what degree do they ask you what you want?

SY: I haven’t seen that in Asia. It is still very passive i.e. it is for you to tell them what you want. I don’t think there’s that customisation and client care in the region.

The only time when we are asked how they can do things better is when they are nominated for awards. Then, independent agencies contact me to ask how I rate the firm, what they’ve done well, what they could do better etc. Apart from that, I don’t think law firms in Hong Kong proactively ask us to rate them and give feedback. But they do ask me to nominate them and then, through those vehicles, ask me to rate them.

SM: To what extent are law firms in Asia investing more in thought leadership to better serve their audiences?

SY: Some of them do. But some firms, if they have a good pipeline of work and are busy, may not give as much attention to their content output. They would just be doing billables.

If I look back at my associate days at Baker & McKenzie, we all had to provide content from time to time and the partner and a dedicated marketing department would come after you to contribute articles. But I’m not sure how coordinated it is in law firms in terms of having a team of people generating the content, designing the tone, and then getting the lawyers to validate it.

SM: Law firms have real difficulty measuring the effectiveness of their thought leadership content. Can you cite an example of when a piece of law firm thought leadership directly influenced your decision-making (particularly outsourcing), and why?

SY: New regulatory changes are the ones that you need to take serious consideration of because, if you don’t, they do have reputational and financial implications – as opposed to content on new business opportunities, which is a bit different.

So, for regulatory compliance, whoever is able to write it first, write it better, flag the risks, and show their edge in being able to guide their clients, that will set them apart from their peers.

For example, with China’s Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL), everyone was grasping to understand what it really meant because the implementing regulations were not clear. So, the firms that stood out were those that were able to go the extra mile, understand it locally from their context, and present a certain direction for affected clients in higher risk categories.

I start with who was involved in drafting and passing the law, then who has written something about a particular topic, and then draw up a shortlist of law firms. I then look at the profile of the partners and their track record in that area of expertise. And I will probably pick the ones who have a stronger track record than base it solely on the ‘flavour’ of the writing. So, that does influence the decision. After that, I will ask them to present their expertise, and then quiz them and compare them with other firms.

So, the extent to which a law firm’s content appears on Google Search as a first port of call is actually quite important.

SM: Any final words of advice on what law firms can do to improve their outreach to clients and prospects through content? What would you like to see?

SY: Succinct content if possible. More use of infographics, because visualisation is always easier than reading hundreds of words describing the issues. Greater client care by being more proactive with clients i.e. they should email and tell us what should be keeping us up at night, and what we should do about it. And, as a client, I will take that and try to get a budget approval.

They also need to get our attention right now as opposed to six months later when an issue has become a problem. That can ensure that they secure clients earlier rather than later and gain a first-mover advantage.

Just like entrepreneurs, they should look at their own marketing and online content as an opportunity to maximise their first-mover advantage to capture the market. Basically, make your content simple, clear thinking and visual so it stays in the mind of CLOs and GCs that you are the person to call for whatever they need.

SM: I guess it might often be a question of resources?

SY: Whether or not a firm has sufficient resources for this is often reflective of how strong a practice they have. For example, if they have a strong practice, they would have better thought leadership. They would know how to approach the topic. Rather than just writing a piece that they’re proud of, they will be thinking about how their content impresses clients with a first-mover advantage that enables them to pull in the clients rather than have them shopping at other law firms. That’s what real content marketing is all about.