What do you see as the main points that differentiate Joyce A. Tan & Partners LLC from your competitors?

Perhaps, we should start with who we see as our competitors. Over the past 23 years of the firm’s existence, we have consistently and successfully procured mandates and built relationships with clients, either beating out or being empaneled with top tier firms, many of which outnumber us in headcount. So what differentiates us?

One formula for our success lies in our holistic and integrated approach to the client’s needs. We do not see clients as an opportunity for different practice groups to divvy up their attention, with their respective output pulled together in a superficial patchwork of disparate pieces. Instead, our design thinking takes root at the underlying architecture and engineering of our solutions. Our work for a client is not dictated by how we happen to organize ourselves into practice groups. On the contrary, we organize ourselves according to the client’s practical and business circumstances, which may, for example, require the tactical structuring of a corporate transaction to achieve a commercial objective driven by technology or intellectual property considerations. For that, the client gets an integrated end-to-end solution, not different pieces from different corners of the firm.

In this regard, we consider ourselves a business-focused law practice – this means we support businesses. In terms of subject matter specialization, we do happen to have a strong preponderance to areas that involve TMT and IP, areas which have a natural relationship with one another. But because we see the clients’ business as the touchstone of the required focus, we do happen to move seamlessly from these areas into corporate law, mergers and acquisition, fintech, employment, or investments. There are no artificial practice-area-centric barriers to the way we think in how we support our clients.

Such an approach allows us to optimize for the client, the second reason we do better. Our clients know that we don’t try to fit their problems into pre-packed boxes of solutions, in the hope that one of them will work. We understand, we optimise and we lead.

Which brings us to the third reason. When we say that we are lawyers who lead, it means taking responsibility for a client’s needs and leading the way in matters of law, which may sometimes even include formulating the required services, as opposed to merely providing services described to or requested of us.

Which practices do you see growing in the next 12 months? What are the drivers behind that?

I do see a connection between our core practice areas and the growth sectors. I can mention 3 generally.

First, anything and everything to do with technology will accelerate and this includes investment in technology (including corporate mergers and acquisitions or fund raising), classic TMT work, intellectual property, and regulatory and governance. The drivers are obviously the much larger macro issues around digitalization – increasingly rapid fire automation, the growth and adoption of new technologies.

Secondly, we are arriving at a new geopolitical world order so that as governments shift in their attitudes to globalization and the balance of power, the roles that businesses and the business community play undergo important adjustments. For example, we see the influx of resources and business leadership positions here in Singapore in the wake of US-China tension. Already we act for clients who are based in other parts of the world and who look to Singapore and Southeast Asia, as a credible and neutral base and a favourable regulatory environment to continue their push to globalize.

Thirdly, the rise of environmental governance and law. It is clear that businesses and the way they operate and the way they are answerable or accountable to stakeholders is undergoing a gradual but inevitable evolution and this is most visible in the way regulators and shareholders are changing their attitudes to private power. The most urgent frontier in this regard is in environmental law and the way organisations use resources. We see a nascent practice in this area picking up momentum.

What's the main change you've made in the firm that will benefit clients?

It’s in vogue to speak of how law firms adopt technology, and though we find ourselves doing that as well, that isn’t what stands out for me. Of all the changes that are important, we have consciously moved to broaden our practice base over the years – to add carefully curated capabilities. We know clients�� needs evolve and we anticipate where these needs are going and we have been doubling down on future-proofing our expertise.

Is technology changing the way you interact with your clients, and the services you can provide them?

Yes and no.

Yes, in that technology adds efficiency opportunities (but also risks!) and allows us to move up the “value chain” in terms of tasks and where we can operate more efficiently and meaningfully with and for clients.

But no, in the sense that what drives the clients’ motivation to work with us continues (and will continue to be) our judgment and our ability to be attuned to what is truly needed in the moment. Technology might make us smarter, but not necessarily wiser.

And whilst it is fashionable to cite virtualization and moving to new models of client support – and the firm is all behind this – it is more important to recognise that there should be no assumptions about the past continuing to be necessarily capable of serving our clients at any given point in time. A nimbleness in mindset is needed to service our clients today.

With all that, as we face the adoption of AI and technology tools for legal services, the ultimate question is whether any technology can fully simulate the fullness of nuanced human judgment which lies at the core of lawyering.

Can you give us a practical example of how you have helped a client to add value to their business?

We could talk about a range of ways we do so, but perhaps I can share an anecdote that hopefully speaks to the managers and teams that run businesses and make decisions.

A multinational client of mine was dealing with its post-merger integration exercise and the classic problem of melding 2 different work cultures, 2 different set of resources and 2 different operations, etc. (and all the anxiety that comes with such an exercise). Their legal counsel introduced me to their global head of HR who was managing the transition across the affected jurisdictions. This brave soul had been in meetings with other external lawyers, all of whom had run her through the usual slew of legal concepts like compliance with regulatory obligations, contractual commitments, handling of redundancy, harmonization and rationalization of policies, benefits and documents, and abstract concepts like “synergy” etc.

This HR director was obviously fatigued, head in a dizzy spin with an overload of legal technicalities, wondering how in the world lawyers were helping her. After taking an initial brief on the practices of their 2 merged companies vis-à-vis their large workforce from senior management to clerical staff working across multiple campuses, replete with a laundry list of disconnected practical issues that lacked any framework, I simply started with “let’s talk about car park arrangements”. Later, the legal counsel told me that I “had her at car parks”. Not because the legal issues weren’t going to be addressed – but because she was assured that this was going to be done with the practicalities at the forefront.

Are clients looking for stability and strategic direction from their law firms - where do you see the firm in three years’ time?

It does depend on the client. Some clients are highly transactional – they want a deal done and after that, they move on and seldom think of their legal advisors beyond that. Others better understand what is meant by legal “counsel”. These clients do need reliable counsel who will always have their back and add to the way they see things strategically, over a longer term and a wider range of matters beyond pure legal ones. I do believe that lawyering will evolve in a much more interesting way.

This segues in the point that as time goes by, the true irreplaceable value is in the wisdom and judgment of the team. I certainly see us growing further in that direction and adding more like-minded and fellow counsel to our team, growing in the way that truly matters.