Wednesday, June 15, 2016

How Do Chinese Firms Compensate Partners?

, The Asian Lawyer

Chinese law firms generally operate either under a centralized profit-sharing corporation model or a decentralized commission-based model. (For part one of this story, click here.) But when it comes to remuneration system, the two models become more complicated and over intertwined.

In general, partner compensation at Chinese firms trails that of Western firms. In prime markets such as Beijing and Shanghai, Chinese firms partners typically make somewhere between about $150,000 and $800,000, according to three partners from different firms, while a small club of partners makes between $1.3 million and $1.6 million or more. At corporation-style firms, these sources agree, partners tend to have higher pay that is clustered in a somewhat narrower band than is seen at commission-model firms, where the gap between the compensation of the lowest- and highest-paid partners can be much higher.


Aiming to build Haiwen into a long-lasting institution—a “Bai Nian Lao Dian,” or 100-year-shop in Mandarin Chinese—managing partner Zhang Jiping and his partners adopted a pure lockstep compensation system in 2009. The idea was to encourage cooperation and reduce competition among partners; but it also meant that the firm, then just 100 lawyers strong, became more cautious about scaling up.

“We are very selective in adding partners, because any addition could potentially have a dilutive effect,” says Zhang. Since 2009, the firm has grown by about 30 lawyers and 13 partners. “We’ve never done so much as a team acquisition. We are after consistency and good reputation,” Zhang says.

But Zhang says the firm knows that size does matter: “Smaller in size has certain limitations on our development. We might be able to do more and better had we been bigger.”

Last year, to prepare for faster expansion, the firm added a performance-based element to its remuneration system. Instead of being based purely on seniority, a partner’s pay is divided into two parts: a smaller part based on seniority and historical contribution and a larger part based on billings. The firm has grown more rapidly since the reform, hiring six new partners as well as opening a new office, Zhang says.

Other corporation-style firms such as Han Kun and Fangda use a similar modified lockstep. The differences usually lie in the relative size of the seniority-based portion.

At JunHe, another corporation-style firm, the remuneration structure has moved in a different direction. Traditionally the firm divided its profit into five pools, compensating partners on the basis of seniority, client development, work execution, work coordination and management. Software calculated partners’ compensation in each pool using fixed formulas that were public to all partners.

JunHe managing partner Xiao Wei says that the performance-emphasized system helped attract several high-profile hires, such as Llinks cofounder David Liu, who joined in Shanghai in 2004. But Xiao says that it also made partners become reluctant to share clients.

Last year, Xiao created a pilot program, a modified lockstep, that partners can join on a voluntary basis. Compensation of the pilot program partners—now more than 80 percent of the firm’s 128 partners—are determined by seniority-based points plus an evaluation based on billable hours, client development and work execution as well as nonbillable contributions such as participating in associates’ training and career development.

The catch is that partners don’t know how the evaluation process works. “It is deliberately kept confidential so that partners can focus only on their work,” says Xiao.

Inside the pilot program, partners work as one team. Any client brought in by a partner becomes the entire team’s client. “In the past, a client is typically served by one particular partner; the rest of the firm’s resources weren’t really helping,” Xiao says. “Now that we’ve broken the wall, some client can get as many as a dozen partners working for them on whatever they need.”

Billings now go through a centralized system, and resources such as associates and paralegals are assigned through a personnel coordination center. Xiao says that the system has improved efficiency and grown business. Last year, JunHe recorded $190 million in revenue, up 17 percent from 2014.

“With the new compensation evaluation system, which takes work execution and billable hours into account, young lawyers can focus their energy on delivering quality work rather than fighting with other partners for clients,” he says.


At the other end of the spectrum from the corporation-model firms is commission-based Yingke. Its compensation system has also evolved. The firm formerly operated under a franchised model in which all lawyers—partners and nonpartners—practiced independently in a shared office. Lawyers kept their own billings after paying the firm 5-10 percent as commission; there was no profit sharing.

In 2013, Yingke started to introduce profit sharing within individual offices. Partners can buy into an office’s equity; an equity partner shares in the office’s profit at the end of the year, in addition to what she makes from her own billings.

The new system is now in place for all 508 equity partners at Yingke’s 38 Chinese offices. Global managing partner Mei Xiangrong says the profit-sharing system has motivated equity partners to work harder and is responsible for the firm’s growth to $210 million in revenue last year, up 49 percent from 2014, according to China 25 data. “Our revenue goal in 2016 is $317 million,” says Mei.

For Zhong Lun, designing a compensation system that both motivates partners to perform and encourages them to cooperate has long been a struggle. Since its launch in 1993, the firm has gone back and forth between a commission-based model and a corporation model. The system now in place borrows from both models. A partner’s income is calculated by multiplying her total billings by the firm’s average profit margin. To budget costs, partners estimate their annual billings at the beginning of the year, and use 31 percent of the lower end of that range as their target for expenses. They pay a penalty if their actual costs exceed that number.

Gary Gao, a Shanghai partner at Zhong Lun, says the system is transparent and simple to understand. “It controls costs, it has the motivation of a commission-based model, but unlike the commission model, we have to cooperate; otherwise the average profit margin will drop,” he says.

Talent retention is one of the chief concerns for firms under the corporation model. In 2015, The Asian Lawyer reported that young lawyer were leaving leading corporation-model firms because of the dim prospects to join the partnership. Those lucky enough to make partner often struggled to survive, as they lacked sufficient preparation. 

Zhong Lun’s flexible model has fueled the firm’s faster expansion than its peers. It has allowed the firm to grow largely by lateral hires, whereas many of its corporation-model counterparts rely mostly on organic growth. Last year, the firm made 10 partner hires, compared with four at JunHe, three at Haiwen and three at Fangda, according to Asian Lawyer data.

Similarly, Global Law Offices, which uses a commission-based compensation system, was able to attract lawyers from international firm such as King & Wood Mallesons, Davis Polk & Wardwell and Morrison & Foerster. “For young and capable lawyers, growth here will be much faster,” says Jerry Fang, who joined Global last year from Davis Polk’s Hong Kong office, adding that new partners are encouraged to take in their own clients.

Other international returnees have different preferences. Guiping Lu, a former Latham & Watkins Hong Kong counsel who opened the Shenzhen office for Haiwen in February, says that he joined his new firm mostly because he finds Haiwen’s culture and remuneration system consistent with his experience at international firms.

Perhaps the corporation model is best suited for firms that are already leaders of the pack, says University of Wisconsin professor Sida Liu. “For top firms with specialties, their brand is strong enough to keep people; they already have the best clients, and they don’t need to scale up,” he says. “Because once you expand, you have to tolerate other cultures. It’s hard to carry on with your own.”

No comments:

Post a Comment