21
Possum Poo; Mallesons, AAR, Blakes & CGW Scoop Dodgey Corporate Awards
Posted by The Spy | Posted in Cooper Grace Ward, Mallesons Stephen Jaques | Posted on 9.00am
Other than the coveted suite of Firm Spy awards, including the Down Low Medal, Partner of the Year and Firm of the Year, the various prizes and trophies awarded to corporate Australian firms are a laughable marketing device. At best. You know it, and so do we.
In today’s post, we’ll take a moment to consider why some of the various awards aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.
We’ll open the ledger with the BRW “client choice” awards. Last week, an anonymous Cooper Grace Ward spy sent us the following comments:
Hi - was just looking through the list of this year’s BRW client choice awards and saw that Cooper Grace Ward won the best firm for under $50 million. CGW are a great firm and deserved to win but it seems a remarkable coincidence that when the awrds first started CGW struggled to get a mention. These days the firm has certainly evolved in recent times but one has to wonder if Beaton Consulting who conduct the survey on behalf of BRW) are just a little conflicted in deciding winners. Surely if a firm comes to you asking to “take it to the next level” it has to be difficult to impartially judge its merits come awards time. Let’s not pick on CGW actually - look through the award winners and Beaton’s client list and you’ll see a heavy correlation.
We took it upon ourselves to check how BRW informs itself for the purpose of making decisions about the most deserving recipients of its “client choice” awards. And yes, as reported by our anonymous spy, the recipients are awarded with the “independent research” of Beaton. But shouldn’t BRW be contacting clients directly if these truly are “client choice” awards? Like the anonymous spy, we also found it difficult to stomach the “independence” of Beaton in circumstances where it relies on the patronage of major corporate firms to remain a going concern. It is currently advising major Australian law firms on merger proposals for chrissakes!
We also received some comments earlier this week in relation to the IFLR awards. Thanks to the anonymous spy who sent the following (this is an excellent tip off):
Who is the IFLR Australian Law Firm of the Year for 2009? The banner on the Blake Dawson website states that they won the award. http://www.blakedawson.com/x_home_page.aspx?id=18415 BUT… If you look at the Mallesons website (the 12th award down the page), they appear to be the winner too. http://www.mallesons.com/our_firm/5501514W.htm I’m unclear about this award. Was it jointly awarded to both law firms?
Indeed both firms are claiming to have won a 2009 IFLR award. Mallesons claims to have won the “IFLR National Law Firm of the Year (Australia) 2009”, while famous gay porn actor national law firm Blake Dawson is claiming to have won the “IFLR Australian Law Firm of the Year 2009”. Yes, one award named “National Law Firm of the Year (Australia)” and one named “Australian Law Firm of the Year”. Let’s hope this isn’t a case of IFLR just trying to get bums on seats by creating so many awards - each of which rewards similar conduct/achievements - that “everyone goes home with something”.
Lastly, our good friends at Roll on Friday reported last week that Mallesons Stephen Jaques and Allens Arthur Robinson had become “the first Australian firms to be accredited as Fairtrade Workplaces”. The firms are reported by RoF to have received this accreditation after committing to source all their hot drinks from Fair Trade suppliers. This must surely be a hollow victory for the Mallesons partnership when an anonymous Mallesons spy is making the following comments:
I notice that all of the reports that mention Mallesons’ new Fair Trade accreditation fail to mention that our new “Columbian” coffee looks like possum poo. Or that the fair trade tea tastes so offensive that we’re still stocking Dilmah’s finest (not fair trade). Or that our decaffeinated coffee is still the Nescafe Blend 43 (not fair trade).
Still, we’ve thankfully left behind the dark days when the firm switched to International Roast (not fair trade and certainly not fair to those forced to drink it) at the height of the financial crisis.
Anyone fancy a Friday morning cup of possum poo?
Send the Firm Spy your news and views!
Related posts
- Possum Poo Poo; The “Look & Feel” of a Giant Blakes Fake Two Friday’s ago we reported the frankly hilarious news that...
- Blakes, Mallesons & Allens; The Good, The Bad & The Ugly Considered Clint Eastwood’s greatest cinematic triumph, the 1966 classic spaghetti...
- Corporate Wizardry; Mallesons Announces Voluntary Redundancy Scheme Mallesons Stephen Jaques is reported to have yesterday announced a...
- Clear Forthright Open & “Shonky”; Mallesons Slams Firm Spy Analysis In response to last Friday’s post regarding dodgey corporate awards,...
- The Tony Awards; DLA Phillips Fox Partners Give Gong New Name It has been a while since we have heard anything...



Loading...
But does it taste like possum poo?
So….. What does IFLR say about this? Have Blake Dawson and Malleson’s written in to clarify? The Mallesons Wikipedia entry says that Mallesons won the IFLR “Australian Law Firm of the Year” for 2009. That’s the same award that Blake Dawson claims on their website.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mallesons_Stephen_Jaques
I think both firms should duke it out Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome style. “Two firms enter. One firm leaves.”
At least we won’t confuse them with Dorda Brugger Jordis. They won IFLR’s “AUSTRIAN law firm of the year for 2009”. http://www.dbj.co.at/phps/Presse/Pressinfo_engl20090323.pdf
Mallesons does not currently pay Beaton Consulting for Client Choice research, so how interesting that we still won the BRW ClientChoice award this year.
Shock, horror! Maybe we won the award because clients actually consider our service to be better.
The majority of legal awards are voted as a result of polling clients. Since these clients work with most of the major firms, they have no vested interest in choosing one over another, unless they think the service is better.
As for IFLR, Blakes won Australian Firm of the Year and Mallesons won Regional Firm of the Year in the latest awards. A quick check of the IFLR website would confirm this. Or doesn’t Firm Spy bother with traditional journalistic principles like basic research?
It’s your analysis on this one that is shonky, not the awards.
[…] response to last Friday’s post regarding dodgey corporate awards, we received the following comments: analytical review So….. What does IFLR say about this? […]
Re: the “shonky” story. You guys are remarkably thin skinned when it comes to accepting a little criticism, given how free you are in handing it out.
[…] Yes, something other than the feted “possum poo” the firm is currently serving up! […]
[…] Friday’s ago we reported the frankly hilarious news that two major Australian law firms were apparently claiming to have won the same “coveted” I…. A terrific anonymous spy put the following question to us: the Blake Dawson video basket Who is […]