Justin Walkey, Chairman of Bird & Bird Asia Pacific, speaks to Kanishk Verghese about the firm’s key objectives in Asia, its growth strategy, and the challenges it faces in an increasingly competitive environment.

ALB: It has been just over two years since you relocated from London to Hong Kong as the Chairman of Bird & Bird Asia Pacific. What were some of the key objectives you laid out for the firm’s practice in Asia upon taking on this role, and what are the firm’s key strategic goals for Asia in 2015? 

Walkey: The larger strategy has been to effectively build on three pillars of work: international clients’ inbound investment, the local client base’s regional activity and the outbound work back into the wider firm network. 

Initially, Bird & Bird’s Asia practice was not entirely reflective of the firm’s practice mix back in Europe.  One of the objectives was to try and balance the practice mix in a way that more closely reflects the mix that we enjoy back in Europe.  Intellectual property (IP) and IP litigation is a very important part of our business and our service offering, but it makes up a greater percentage of our practice in Asia.  We are looking to balance this with corporate and commercial transactional work as well as non-IP dispute resolution work. 

We need to build up our resources in the transactional space, and to strengthen our reputation for that work as well.  In order to do that, as with any international law firm, you need capabilities across a lot of different disciplines and practice areas.  We are looking to build a larger local client base to complement the traditional international client base that we have enjoyed.  To do that, you need local capability that is relevant to what the major local clients want. 

ALB: Bird & Bird has been acquiring that local capability, merging with Truman Hoyle in Australia and forging alliances in Korea and Indonesia in 2014. Are there any further expansion plans in the pipeline?

Walkey: China is a dynamic and highly competitive market.  We are looking at evolving our offering in China to adapt to recent and future changes in the market.  For example, we currently have offices in the traditional locations like Beijing and Shanghai.  It is possible that we may look at other cities in China, especially in areas where the new IP courts are coming up. 

ALB: Aside from organic growth, it seems that Bird & Bird in Asia is more inclined to expand through alliances with local firms rather than through mergers. Would that be a fair assumption?

Walkey: I think it depends on the market.  We do have this model of cooperation agreement first and see where it leads you.  And sometimes it may lead you to the door because you don’t work very well together or the culture is not right or there’s no fit.  And sometimes within a jurisdiction where it is possible for Bird & Bird to trade as Bird & Bird, it might lead you to opening up as it did for us in Australia. In Australia, the cooperation agreement led to a merger.  The arrangement with what used to be Truman & Hoyle – now Bird & Bird Australia – was only ever a platform to get us started.  We’re building off that platform now, and growing out the bits of the business that we needed that weren’t necessarily there on day one. 

If we look at a market like Korea for example, we could have gone in under the Free Trade Agreement with some of the other British and U.S. firms.  But when we analysed the market, we had no particular requirement to practice Korean Law.  The model for us was really based on outbound work.  A similar analysis can be drawn for the Japanese market.  There are lots of businesses in both Korea and Japan that perfectly fit the profile for Bird & Bird, and it’s the outbound side of these businesses that is really the focus for us. Entering into an alliance with Hwang Mok Park in Korea gave us access to a top ten corporate Korean law firm with excellent local relationships.  That was Bird & Bird’s approach in Korea. It is a different approach to everybody else in the market, and we have some nice stories to tell already which demonstrate that our approach is working well for both Bird &Bird and Hwang Mok Park.

ALB: Are there any key practice areas that the firm’s Asia Pacific group will focus on in 2015? 

Walkey: The aviation finance business is extremely active and we see quite a lot of potential for growth there. Indonesia and Malaysia have been key jurisdictions for aviation finance, but we are turning our attention now to China and Hong Kong for that. The life sciences area is going to be subject to a major push and for us in 2015, as well as energy and utilities and the technology and communications industries. Another area for potential growth is in the licensing and franchising space. 

In terms of regions, China continues to dominate conversations because of the sheer size of its market.  There are some very interesting developments going on there at the moment, with some early signs pointing to the possible loosening of certain regulations and steps toward the liberalisation of the legal market. 

ASEAN is bound to offer many opportunities, especially as we move towards the creation of the ASEAN Economic Community at the end of 2015.  Indonesia is a massive economy in ASEAN, and is now moving in to a consumer-driven phase that suits our type of business.  This explains why we planned out cooperation agreements with K&K Advocates and Nurjadin Sumono Mulyadi & Partners in Indonesia last year.  You can see the appeal for a general counsel at a major multinational of being able to go to one law firm that can offer key services across the ASEAN countries, rather than having to approach different law firms country by country.  We will be looking to improve our ASEAN coverage in 2015 through our service hubs in Singapore (ATMD Bird & Bird) and Malaysia (Tay & Partners) and by building on our network of relationship firms in the region.

ALB: Competition in Asia has intensified in recent years with a number of international firms growing their presence in the region, and several local firms beefing up their practices. Does this pose a major challenge for Bird & Bird in Asia? How does the firm aim to stay ahead of the pack?

Walkey: Some of the local firms are regionalising quite successfully, particularly in Southeast Asia, and are offering a pretty competitive service and quality of service in the region in a way that we can’t ignore as an international firm.  That’s coupled with other phenomena like Japanese firms establishing in the region for the first time.  If you stand back from it all, it’s hardly surprising that the focus of the world is on the potential for growth in places like ASEAN and China. 

I believe the Bird & Bird offering is differentiated in the marketplace, and that is going to be the key for us.  If the market doesn’t want to buy the deep industry knowledge and value added services we offer in the region, then we will find trading challenging.  But the indications are that the market is becoming more interested in getting more specialised services, and what we are offering is well received.  But I don’t ignore the fact that it is a very competitive environment. You have to be smart in the way you structure your offerings to maintain a margin and remain price competitive as well. 

I think the biggest challenge in growing our business here in a sustainable way is to get the correct blend of local expertise with international expertise.  I believe you need both in order to succeed in Asia.  Clients need that local market knowledge blended with international standards and expertise.  Ultimately, it’s all about the people.  You need to find the right people with the right skill sets and build a culture for them to thrive in.