國際律師及律所都是怎麼排名的？

Breaking Down Legal Rankings

ISSUE 5OPINION

本文的作者Dhiraphol Suwanprateep是 Baker McKenzie 曼谷辦事處的合夥人。本文發表於《瑞中法律評論》第5期。本文由瑞中法律協會及瑞中卓越國際研究院編輯。原標題為《Breaking Down Legal Rankings》

摘要：長期以來，法律排名一直被視為一個律所或律師在其領域的成功的標識。但是，隨著新的法律名錄和出版物如雨後春筍般出現，要確定它們的合法性是很困難的。然而，如果對營銷策略基本瞭解，而且得到這方面的稍許指導，各種規模的律所都可以利用排名和評獎制度來幫助自己在吸引潛在客戶方面獲得有利地位，筆者下文將予詳述。

長期以來，法律排名一直被視為一個律所或律師在其領域的成功的標識。但是，隨著新的法律名錄和出版物如雨後春筍般出現，要確定它們的合法性是很困難的。然而，如果對營銷策略基本瞭解，而且得到這方面的稍許指導，各種規模的律所都可以利用排名和評獎制度來幫助自己在吸引潛在客戶方面獲得有利地位，筆者下文將予詳述。

Legal rankings have long been seen as an identifier of a firm’s or individual‘s success in their field。 But with new directories and publications popping up left， right， and centre it can be difficult to determine their legitimacy。 However， with a little guidance and a rudimentary understanding of marketing tactics， which I will provide below， firms of all sizes can utilize the rankings and awards system to help put themselves in good stead for attracting prospective clients。

法律排名可以根據不同層面而編制：全球、區域和國家。所有這三個層面都有其相關性，如果要成為一個全面發展的律所，當然應鼓勵他們在每個層次的法律排名中獲得一席之地。初看之下，你可能會問：“我應該選擇誰？”。不幸的是，這個答案並不像指稱一種出版物為最佳出版物那樣簡單。相反，選擇一家律所可能取決於多種因素，諸如他們現有的聲譽，所從事的法律領域，或影響力的廣度。

Legal rankings are compiled at different levels： global， regional， and national。 All three have their relevance and to be seen as a well-rounded firm， securing a place at each level is certainly encouraged。 At first glance， you might ask： “Who should I write to？”。 Unfortunately， the answer is not quite as simple as naming a publication as the be all and end all。 Rather， the choices a firm makes may depend on factors such as their existing reputation， areas of law they practice， or breadth of reach。

律所在與一些鮮為人知的出版物打交道時應謹慎行事。一般的經驗法則是，要避免那些臭名昭著的付費出版物。實際上，如果你支付一筆入會費或在他們即將出版的雜誌上刊登廣告，這些出版物就會給你排名。廣告費越多，排名就越高。這與購買自己的獎盃並在旁邊刻上 “第一律師 ”相差無幾。你如果突然收到一封電子郵件，稱 “恭喜你，你被選為……”，這是一個警示訊號，當你通讀完的開場白，會發現你被選中的原因，也就是獲得了“……以5000美元的優惠價格 ”，這已成為當前點選誘餌時代各行業中許多線上業務的典型策略。

Firms should be cautious when engaging with some lesser-known publications。 As a general rule of thumb avoid the notorious pay-to-play publications。 Essentially， these publications will rank you if you pay an initial fee or take out an advert in their upcoming magazine。 The larger the advert， the higher the rank。 This is not far off buying your own trophy and etching “No。 1 Lawyer” on the side。 Receiving an email out of nowhere stating “congratulations， you’ve been chosen as…” is a telltale sign that once you wade through their preamble of why you should participate， you will be hit with “…for the special price of $5000”， which has become a typical tactic by many online businesses in various sectors in the current click bait era。

然而，真正的評獎和排名是透過深入研究每種法律名錄產生的，而每種名錄的運作方式略有不同。許多主要參與者將經歷一個三階段的過程，首先是由每個律所提交一份表格，以瞭解他們的執業情況以及過去12個月中的打贏的最大案子。其通常鼓勵在多個司法管轄區設有辦事處的大律所為其經營的每個司法管轄區提交一份材料，以便能夠更準確地與同行進行公平的評價。一旦提交了材料，出版物的代表通常會與合夥人進行訪談，他們會討論一些話題，如事務所在過去一年中最重要的案件，以及在其法律領域和司法管轄區的任何最新發展。事務所可能被要求對其他事務所和個別律師提出意見。最後，出版物還會抽樣聯絡每個事務所的客戶，以提供他們對事務所在過去一年中的表現的看法。

Genuine awards and rankings， however， are created through in-depth research by each directory， with a slight variation on how each one operates。 Many of the main players will implement a three-stage process， beginning with providing each firm with a submission form to learn more about their practice and biggest wins over the past twelve months。 Large firms with offices in multiple jurisdictions are often encouraged to make a submission for each jurisdiction they operate in so they can be measured fairly against their peers with greater accuracy。 Once submissions have been made， interviews with partners are often carried out by a representative from the publication， where they will discuss topics such as the firm’s most important cases from the past year， any recent developments in their area of law and jurisdiction。 Firms may be asked to give their opinion on other firms and individual lawyers。 Finally， a sample of each firm’s clients are contacted to provide their view on how the firm has performed over the past year。

目前的排名程式往往運作良好，因為這給了每個公司一個機會，以最好的方式展現自己，然後也得到法律領域其他重要參與者的支援（或可能在罕見的情況下才會喪失信譽！）。鑑於排名程式需要花費了大量的時間和精力，真正的排名出版物可靠地說明了法律行業的現狀，許多頂級的律師事務所通常會認可最終的結果。這表示，必定有人支援律所每年參加多項評獎的好處，也有人會提出其壞處。

The current process typically works well as it gives each firm an opportunity to represent themselves in the best possible manner and then this can be backed up （or perhaps in rare cases discredited！） by other major players in the legal sphere。 Considering a lot of time and effort goes into this process， the genuine publications give a solid account on the current state of the legal industry and many of the top law firms tend to agree with the final results。 With that said， there certainly are arguments to support both the benefits and detriments to participating in multiple awards each year。

任何獎項最明顯的好處，也許是得到一個著名出版物的認可，其肯定了一家公司或個人工作之卓越。享譽法律界的《錢伯斯》或《法律500強》等刊物，如果一直將一家律所排在最高層，現有和潛在的客戶都會看到，至少在決定誰應該代表他們的法律事務時，這是一個很好的切入點。人們在做出許多不同型別的決定時都會參考評論，從推薦房屋承包工程或醫療服務提供者，一直到根據奧斯卡提名選擇電影或在米其林星級餐廳用餐等更瑣碎的事情。不管是何種事項，評論和獎項都有積極的影響，這不應該對此嗤之以鼻，任何有商業頭腦的人都會利用其之優勢。

Perhaps the most obvious benefit to any award is the recognition by an esteemed publication that serves as confirmation of quality work by either a firm or an individual。 When the likes of Chambers or The Legal 500 – both of which are well-known throughout the legal world – consistently rank a firm in the top tier， both current and prospective clients will see that， at the very least， as a good place to start when deciding who should represent their legal affairs。 People look for reviews when making many different types of decisions， from recommendations for contracting work on their homes or health care providers， all the way through to more trivial matters like choosing movies based on Oscar nominations， or eating at Michelin-star restaurants。 Regardless of the subject， reviews and awards have a positive impact that should not be scoffed at， and any business-savvy person will use them to their advantage。

由於排名出版物肯定了小規模律所在業界巨頭主導環境之下的優異表現，從而可以創造公平的競爭環境，小規模律所尤其可以從中獲益良多。而大律所對排名的期望則要高得多，這意味著他們也必須與自己以往的業績相比較。從這個意義上說，排名是小規模或專業事務所進入某些業務領域的一種有效方式，同時也為事務所擴大客戶群創造了機會。此外，排名靠前並不只是表明一個事務所在過去12個月中表現出色。其至少可以在未來一年內向現有客戶展現為什麼他們應該繼續聘用一家律師事務所，以及為什麼潛在客戶應該尋求獲得其服務。

Smaller firms in particular can reap the benefits of participation as the rankings can level the playing field since publications recognise how well smaller firms perform under the dominance of the industry giants。 The expectations are much higher for larger firms， meaning they must also compete with their own previous submissions。 In this sense， rankings are an effective way of showing how smaller or specialist firms can be the way to go in certain matters， whilst also giving rise to the opportunity for a firm to expand its client base。 Furthermore， a top ranking does not just simply show that a firm has excelled over the past twelve months。 It can be relied on for at least the next year to show existing clients why they should continue to engage a law firm and why prospective clients should look to secure their services。

相反，對於律所而言，考慮諸如財務影響、花費的時間人力成本等因素，從而確定收益是否超過了成本，這至關重要。完成提交排名所需的資料相當耗時，需要收集和整理大量的資料，並以一種能使律所脫穎而出的方式編排。更重要的是，往往需要很多人參與其中，他們必須在已經緊湊的日程表中擠出時間來做這件事。由於大多數提交的材料部分是基於客戶的評價而做出的決定，律所必須仔細選擇哪些客戶，特別是對於小規模律所來說，由於他們可能不想煩擾自己的頂級客戶，這可能會給人一種不安的感覺。然而，最後是最重要的因素，也就是是律所的努力是否得到認可，而被忽視可能會令人沮喪，並被認為是浪費時間，而這些時間本可以用來以更有利的方式促進事務所的發展。

Conversely， it is important for firms to determine whether those benefits outweigh the costs by considering such factors as the financial implications， time spent and labour costs。 Completing a submission is extremely time-consuming as a lot of information needs to be gathered， sorted， and displayed in a way that will make your firm stand out。 To add to this， there are also often multiple people involved that must make time for this in their already tightly packed schedule。 As most submissions partly make their decisions based on client testimonials， firm‘s must carefully select which clients to put forward and with smaller firms in particular， this could give a sense of unease as they may not want to appear bothersome to their top clientele。 Yet ultimately the biggest factor comes down to whether or not a firm is given recognition for their efforts – being overlooked can be disheartening and considered a waste of time that could have been used to promote the firm in more beneficial ways。

雖然目前的排名系統可靠地列出了法律領域的頂尖人物，國家、地區和全球層面的律師事務所肯定應當予以利用，但還是具有改進的空間。一個特別值得關注的問題是，律師個人的排名應該有更明確的標準，以幫助某些律師獲得他們應有的認可。如前所述，律所排名的標準清晰明瞭。但是，當涉及到個人獎項時，我們常常會撓頭，不明白為什麼有些律師儘管手握令人驚歎的客戶群體，業績斐然，並獲得了著名的客戶，但卻不斷被忽視。在這方面，瞭解這些人需要關注什麼以獲得他們應得的認可，這可能有所幫助。

Whilst the current rankings system is a solid indication of those at the top of the legal field and should certainly be utilised by law firms at the national， regional， and global levels， there is always room for improvement。 One concern in particular is that individual lawyer rankings should have more clearly defined criteria to help certain lawyers gain the recognition they deserve。 The basis of the firm rankings are straightforward， as detailed above。 But when it comes to individual awards we can often be left scratching our heads wondering why some lawyers are continuously overlooked despite managing an impressive portfolio of clients， achieving big wins， and securing prominent clients。 In this respect it would help to know what these individuals need to focus on to gain the recognition they deserve。

法律排名出版物的不足之處在於，分析人員沒有能力充分理解律師事務所呈交每項業績的複雜性。出版物可以透過深入研究每個律所如何處理複雜的業務來實現更多的批判性分析。例如，一家事務所可能聲稱他們 “參與了一個數十億美元的專案”。這在某種程度上可能是真實的，但可能不完全是全部情況。這種大型專案可能會涵蓋多個法律領域，但這個特定的律所可能只承擔了一小部分工作，例如處理外籍人士的簽證。這家律所確實同時參與了一個大型專案，因為他們並不屬於使專案成功的核心任務。因此，當出版物採訪將簽證任務分配給這家律所的客戶，並且他們對結果感到滿意時，這家律所會得到一個不一定能反映現實的好評價。如果分析人員對這些交易的運作方式有更多的瞭解，他們將能更好地看到律所的真正價值，大律所和小律所都將有平等的機會被列入名單。

Where the legal ranking publications tend to fall short is in analysts’ ability to fully explore the intricacies of each assignment that law firms present。 Publications could achieve a far more critical analysis by delving into how each firm handles complicated assignments。 For example， one firm may claim that they “were involved in a multi-billion dollar project”。 This may be true to an extent， but may not quite the whole picture。 This kind of mega project would likely cover multiple areas of law but this particular firm may represent only a small fraction of the work， say handling visas for expats。 It would be true that this firm was involved in a mega project at the same time as they were not part of the core assignments that made it successful。 So when publications interview the client who assigned visa assignments to this firm and they are happy with the results， this firm will get a good review that doesn’t necessarily reflect reality。 If analysts have a greater understanding of how these deals work， they will be better able to see the true value of firms， and both big and small firms will have an equal chance to be listed。