At LegalTechTalk 2026, a panel discussion titled “What Metrics are GCs Using to Evaluate Outside Counsel?”<\/span> explored how in-house legal teams work with and assess external law firms. Moderated by Mori Kabiri<\/span>, Founder of Legal Operations KPIs, the session featured Olga Dmytriyeva<\/span>, Head of Legal & Compliance — Americas at IMI, and Aminata Ba<\/span>, Head of Legal, Europe at Menzies Aviation. Drawing on their experiences working with external counsel across different jurisdictions and business environments, the speakers discussed the qualities they value in legal advisers and the factors that shape long-term professional relationships.<\/p>\n Mori<\/span> opened the discussion by inviting the panellists to reflect on the qualities they value in outside counsel and the factors that influence how in-house legal teams assess external legal support. Drawing on their experiences across different industries and jurisdictions, the speakers discussed communication, business understanding, trust and the practical aspects of building long-term working relationships with external advisers.<\/p>\n Against that backdrop, Olga<\/span> emphasised the importance of advisers understanding the organisations they serve and contributing to successful outcomes within the business.<\/p>\n Responding to the discussion, Aminata<\/span> reflected on the qualities she values in relationships with external counsel. She observed that it is important for external counsel to understand not only what her organisation does but also what matters to it. She remarked that an organisation’s risk appetite, for example, extends beyond a purely legal assessment of risk.<\/p>\n Turning to communication, Aminata<\/span> observed that communication is another important consideration because it underpins mutual understanding. Referring to her responsibility for approximately 20 countries, she noted that English is not her first language and remarked that it is therefore important to find ways to ensure clear understanding between in-house teams and external advisers.<\/p>\n According to Aminata<\/span>, communication should also be business-oriented. She observed that she does not want to receive highly legalistic memoranda that then require her to translate the advice for the business. Instead, she remarked that external counsel should demonstrate business understanding and commercial awareness. In her view, this forms part of effective collaboration between in-house legal teams and external lawyers.<\/p>\n Aminata<\/span> further identified speed and flexibility as important considerations. Reflecting on the pace of her working environment, she remarked that legal advice is sometimes required quickly. At the same time, she observed that flexibility is equally important and noted that not every follow-up question requires a substantial response. According to Aminata<\/span>, the relationship should be viewed as a long-term partnership rather than a one-off engagement.<\/p>\n Responding to those remarks, Mori<\/span> observed that communication, expertise and business understanding are often discussed as important elements of the relationship between in-house legal teams and external counsel. Turning the discussion to the issue of trust, Mori<\/span> invited Olga<\/span> to share examples from her own experience and asked how trust is built between clients and law firms. He also reflected on the factors that can weaken professional relationships and asked what circumstances might cause that trust to be lost.<\/p>\n Responding to Mori’s<\/span> question about trust and the factors that can weaken relationships between in-house teams and external counsel, Olga<\/span> shared an example from her own experience.<\/p>\n Olga<\/span> observed that she had worked with a particular law firm for several years and had developed a strong relationship with one of its partners. However, she remarked that the relationship began to change over time. According to Olga<\/span>, one of the first signs was reduced responsiveness, but the principal issue arose when she received an invoice that was approximately three times larger than any invoice she had previously received from the firm, without any prior communication or warning.<\/p>\n Reflecting on the situation, Olga<\/span> observed that while she does not seek to save every dollar for the company, outside counsel must understand the internal approval processes that businesses operate under. She remarked that the invoice in question ultimately required approval from the company’s president and left her in a difficult position internally because no advance discussion had taken place.<\/p>\n According to Olga<\/span>, this experience reinforced the importance of communication. She observed that if external counsel anticipates sending an invoice that is significantly larger than usual, they should communicate that in advance and discuss the circumstances with the client. In her view, such conversations may allow both sides to work towards a solution before concerns escalate.<\/p>\n Olga<\/span> further remarked that she gave the firm an opportunity to address the issue and discuss possible ways of resolving it, including discounts or credits for future work. However, she observed that the response was defensive and lacked a willingness to work collaboratively towards a resolution. According to Olga<\/span>, that ultimately led her to stop instructing the firm, despite the positive relationship that had existed previously.<\/p>\n Continuing the discussion, Mori<\/span> observed that it was unfortunate to see long-standing professional relationships deteriorate. Referring to points raised earlier in the discussion, he noted the importance of understanding the client’s business as well as the value of speed and agility. Mori<\/span> then invited Aminata<\/span> to share an example from her own experience and referred to a previous conversation in which she had spoken about repeatedly having to explain the same issue to different people within a law firm.<\/p>\n Responding, Aminata<\/span> shared an example that she described as particularly frustrating. Returning to the subject of invoices, she observed that while clients may engage a particular lawyer on a matter, they also expect law firms to be able to draw upon expertise from across the organisation when necessary. She noted that, for example, a merger and acquisition matter may require employment-law advice as part of the broader engagement.<\/p>\n Reflecting on one experience, Aminata<\/span> remarked that she later discovered that internal meetings within the law firm had been billed to her. According to Aminata<\/span>, the lawyer handling the matter had explained that discussions with colleagues in other departments were necessary to obtain relevant information. However, Aminata<\/span> observed that clients should not be expected to pay for repeated internal explanations of a matter that has already been fully explained to the law firm.<\/p>\n According to Aminata<\/span>, this type of practice can undermine trust because clients should not be concerned with the firm’s internal processes. She remarked that, once the facts and context have been provided, it should not become the client’s responsibility to bear the cost of repeated internal discussions.<\/p>\n Turning more broadly to the issue of trust, Aminata<\/span> observed that simple professionalism and courtesy are important. She remarked that while lawyers and clients do not need to become friends, it is important to maintain a friendly and approachable working relationship. According to Aminata<\/span>, clients should be treated as people rather than as brief time entries on a billing record.<\/p>\n Aminata<\/span> further observed that engagement and genuine interest in the client’s business are important aspects of a strong relationship. She remarked that external counsel should seek to understand what the client does, where the business is heading and the issues affecting it. In her view, this can be demonstrated through proactive engagement, including organising workshops, inviting clients to relevant events and drawing attention to developments that may affect the business, such as new regulations or significant legal decisions.<\/p>\n According to Aminata<\/span>, these actions contribute to a partnership-based relationship rather than one that operates solely as a client-supplier arrangement.<\/p>\n Turning to the audience, Mori<\/span> observed that relationships between in-house legal teams and external counsel are not solely business relationships but also involve a human element. He invited audience members to share their own experiences and reflections before returning to the discussion of metrics, trust and the changing role of technology.<\/p>\n Referring to the growing use of AI, Mori<\/span> observed that technological developments are changing the legal profession and returned to the central theme of the session: the metrics used to evaluate outside counsel. He invited Olga<\/span> to reflect on the factors she would measure when assessing the health of a relationship with a law firm and asked whether any considerations had become more important in the age of AI than they had been previously.<\/p>\n Responding, Olga<\/span> observed that a number of factors were relevant, including AI, metrics and billing practices. Drawing on her previous experience in private practice, she remarked that she has a general understanding of how long particular legal tasks ordinarily take. According to Olga<\/span>, questions may arise if clients are billed for substantially more time than would typically be required for a particular task.<\/p>\n Reflecting on the impact of AI, Olga<\/span> observed that certain tasks can now be completed more quickly than before. She remarked that if a law firm continues to bill the same amount of time for work that technology can significantly accelerate, clients may begin to question those charges. According to Olga<\/span>, transparency remains closely linked to trust, and concerns may arise if clients do not understand how work is being performed or what technologies are being used.<\/p>\n Turning to confidentiality, Olga<\/span> observed that data security is a significant consideration in relationships with law firms and other vendors. She remarked that clients need to understand what AI tools are being used, what security measures are in place and whether confidential information may be exposed through those systems. According to Olga<\/span>, this is particularly important where legal advisers may have access not only to a company’s confidential information but also to confidential information belonging to its clients.<\/p>\n Reflecting on the metrics that may become increasingly important, Olga<\/span> identified transparency regarding the use of software and security measures as key considerations. She also returned to the issue of billing and observed that, if law firms are investing in AI, clients may reasonably expect greater efficiency and cost-effectiveness as a result.<\/p>\n Concluding her remarks, Olga<\/span> observed that while technology and metrics are important, the human relationship remains a central consideration. According to Olga<\/span>, practical advice, transparency and trustworthiness continue to be among the most important factors in evaluating outside counsel.<\/p>\n Building on Olga’s<\/span> remarks, Mori<\/span> observed that the discussion had moved beyond traditional considerations of legal expertise and increasingly focused on issues such as human relationships, transparency and the use of technology. He invited the panellists to reflect on the importance of understanding how law firms use AI tools and asked why it matters for clients to know whether particular outputs are generated by lawyers, AI systems or a combination of both.<\/p>\n Responding, Aminata<\/span> observed that she routinely asks both prospective and existing law firms about the tools they use. According to Aminata<\/span>, the purpose is not to be intrusive but to better understand how those tools affect collaboration. Reflecting on the efficiencies created by technology, she remarked that tasks that previously required many hours can now often be completed more quickly.<\/p>\n According to Aminata<\/span>, the primary consideration is not necessarily the amount of time spent on a task but rather the way in which the work is performed and the value delivered to the client. She observed that transparency regarding the use of technology is important because it allows clients to understand how work is being undertaken and how that affects the overall engagement.<\/p>\n Reflecting on the issue further, Aminata<\/span> remarked that she is generally less concerned about confidentiality and security considerations in this context, as she would expect law firms to use tools that are appropriate for their organisations. However, she observed that transparency remains important. According to Aminata<\/span>, some firms readily explain the technologies they use and provide information about how those tools support both the firm’s work and the client’s objectives. Others, she remarked, appear less willing to discuss their use of technology, creating what she described as a degree of opacity around how the firm operates.<\/p>\n According to Aminata<\/span>, this lack of visibility can make it more difficult to understand how teams are structured and how work is being performed. She observed that transparency, value and pricing are interconnected considerations because they all contribute to cost-effectiveness and stronger collaboration between clients and external counsel.<\/p>\n Turning to the issue of pricing, Aminata<\/span> remarked that legal work should be evaluated in the context of the particular project involved. According to Aminata<\/span>, factors such as complexity and scope influence the appropriate level of cost. She observed that clients should ultimately be paying for value and output rather than simply the amount of time spent on a task.<\/p>\n Aminata<\/span> also identified cultural intelligence as an important consideration when evaluating external counsel. Referring to her responsibility for multiple jurisdictions across Europe and the wider global operations of the business, she observed that approaches to doing business can differ significantly from one country to another. According to Aminata<\/span>, effective external counsel should be able to explain those differences and provide practical guidance on local business practices, administrative expectations and contractual norms.<\/p>\n Concluding her remarks, Aminata<\/span> observed that a more structured framework for evaluating law firms and managing relationships could be useful and expressed interest in learning more about legal operations KPIs and their potential application in assessing outside counsel.<\/p>\n 1. Value, pricing and practical advice<\/p>\n As the discussion drew towards a close, Mori<\/span> reflected on the various factors that had emerged during the conversation and observed that evaluating outside counsel involves more than considering hourly rates or legal expertise alone. Referring to what he described as a “spider chart” approach, Mori<\/span> remarked that organisations often assess a range of factors, including communication, business understanding and value.<\/p>\n Inviting the panellists to share their final reflections, Mori<\/span> asked what two or three measures they would prioritise when determining whether a law firm delivers value and is a firm they would want to continue working with.<\/p>\n Responding, Olga<\/span> observed that practical advice and professionalism were among the most important considerations. She remarked that several factors contribute to the assessment, but noted that effective communication remains particularly important. According to Olga<\/span>, a law firm adds value when it provides practical advice, communicates well and helps in-house counsel present issues effectively before senior leadership and the board.<\/p>\n As the session approached its conclusion, Mori<\/span> returned to the subject of value and pricing. Referring to Aminata’s<\/span> earlier remarks about transactional work and the importance of speed, he asked whether law firms should make greater use of the data available to them in order to provide more predictable pricing and reduce unexpected variations in cost.<\/p>\n Responding, Aminata<\/span> observed that this is an area she is actively working on, although she noted that not all law firms are receptive to such arrangements. According to Aminata<\/span>, her focus remains on building long-term relationships with external counsel. Reflecting on the fact that she oversees legal matters across approximately 20 countries, she remarked that she works with a significant number of external advisers and would prefer not to repeatedly negotiate pricing issues. Instead, Aminata<\/span> observed that she seeks established ways of working built on trust and long-term relationships, where both sides understand the nature of the advice required and the way in which they work together.<\/p>\n Adding to the discussion, Olga<\/span> observed that flexibility in fee structures is an important consideration. While acknowledging that litigation can be difficult to predict, she remarked that fixed-fee arrangements for particular projects can be effective where there is a reasonable understanding of the time required to complete certain tasks. According to Olga<\/span>, such arrangements can also make internal approval processes easier to manage.<\/p>\n Concluding the session, Mori<\/span> thanked the panellists and audience members for their participation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" How do in-house legal teams assess outside counsel beyond legal expertise alone? At LegalTechTalk 2026, Mori Kabiri<\/span>, Olga Dmytriyeva<\/span> and Aminata Ba<\/span> explored the role of communication, trust, transparency, AI usage, pricing and business understanding in shaping successful relationships between clients and law firms.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":388366,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[97664,107243,107259],"tags":[105559,108029,108031,108034,108033,59395,108037,91803,19321,78025,108032,107464,108036,108035,19511,108030,43930,107438,108025,108023,108024,108038,108027,108028,108026,17481,14611],"class_list":["post-388346","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-events-collaborations","category-international","category-legaltechtalk","tag-ai-in-legal-practice","tag-aminata-ba","tag-billing-practices","tag-business-understanding","tag-client-law-firm-relationships","tag-general-counsel","tag-imi","tag-in-house-counsel","tag-law-firms","tag-legal-industry","tag-legal-metrics","tag-legal-operations","tag-legal-operations-kpis","tag-legal-procurement","tag-legal-services","tag-legal-spend","tag-legal-technology","tag-legaltechtalk-2026","tag-legaltechtalk-london","tag-ltt-2026","tag-ltt-london","tag-menzies-aviation","tag-mori-kabiri","tag-olga-dmytriyeva","tag-outside-counsel","tag-transparency","tag-trust"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/12-30_Metric-to-Evaluate-external-counsel-1.png\")
<\/p>\nUnderstanding the business, communication and long-term relationships<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/12-30_Metric-to-Evaluate-external-counsel-2.png\")
<\/p>\nTrust, invoices and managing client relationships<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/12-30_Metric-to-Evaluate-external-counsel-3.png\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/12-30_Metric-to-Evaluate-external-counsel-4.png\")
<\/p>\nAI, transparency and evaluating outside counsel<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/12-30_Metric-to-Evaluate-external-counsel-5.png\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/12-30_Metric-to-Evaluate-external-counsel-6.png\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/12-30_Metric-to-Evaluate-external-counsel-7.png\")
<\/p>\n