Adaptation is a Strength in Singapore
Singapore continues to be one of the world’s leading legal and financial centres, making it a highly appealing destination for international law firms looking to expand into APAC. Its strengths are well established: it is politically stable, business-friendly, English-speaking, has a high quality of life, and is strategically positioned at the heart of the region.
Yet Singapore has also proved to be a challenging market for some international firms to enter and stay afloat in. Over the years, a number have quietly underperformed or even left the market altogether. The reasons for this are varied, but they tend to stem from assumptions that the same models and approaches that succeeded in London or New York will translate equally well to Singapore, though the local market often operates differently.
Several key assumptions tend to continue to be imported from abroad and shape how international firms approach Singapore, despite the market having developed under a distinct set of commercial, regulatory and competitive conditions.
Pricing Assumptions
Expecting immediate profitability is often where tension arises. Singapore has, as most firms operating there will know intimately, historically rewarded a long-term approach. Building a sustainable presence requires investment of both time and capital, and a willingness to prioritise long-term strategic positioning over short-term financial returns.
Singapore and Southeast Asia have always been fee-sensitive markets, with very capable domestic firms offering extremely competitive prices to regional clients.
Global firms often assume that the fee levels they that are able to generate in New York or London will work in Asia, based on the idea that clients will be willing to pay the far higher rates demanded by big international firms. Many of the top-tier US firms now charge in excess of US$2,000 per hour, with London firms not far behind these rates.
But clients in Asia are far more price sensitive, and beyond a number of private equity firms, M&A firms, and financial institutions, most challenge the rising fees being asked by big-name law firms that, in other regions, can rely heavily on their reputation in New York to charge these amounts. Where reputation could win work elsewhere, relationship building takes precedence in Singapore. It is essential that firms do not underestimate the value of creating and maintaining relationships, as it is these efforts that make outcomes add up.
There is, of course, more nuance to this. Many US firms place emphasis on pure profit at the individual matter level, with limited appetite for discounting, write-offs, and reduced collection rates. Whilst that model is highly effective in markets where high prices are accepted, it creates challenges in Singapore, as headquarters encourage their Singapore-based partners to increasingly push for higher rates, potentially creating tension with the relationship-driven nature of much of the Singapore market.
In contrast, many UK-headquartered firms have been more willing to take a portfolio approach to client relationships. A partner may maintain a mix of premium matters billed at full rates, with lower-margin work that strengthens broader institutional relationships, with strategic clients receiving discounts.
This approach has historically aligned more closely with the commercial dynamics of the Singapore market. However, it is worth noting that increasing transatlantic merger activity and the increasing global influence of US merger partners are beginning to affect the flexibility of firms that underpinned that historical success. The growing focus on commerciality and bottom-line performance may alter the approach that has historically differentiated many UK firms in Singapore.
Beyond Technical Expertise
The requirements on partners are also different in Singapore, as competition and the all-important relationships needed for success require a hustle-for-work mentality with a strong business development focus.
In larger markets, such as New York and London, law firm offices often have space for technically brilliant partners whose primary role is the delivery of exceptional legal work. However, in a smaller regional office, that model is far harder to sustain. Only in the biggest regional offices in Singapore is there space for such lawyers.
Instead, partners are generally expected to combine technical excellence with strong business development capabilities, with the two often being closely intertwined.
Winning work in Asia requires trust, visibility, and long-term relationship building across multiple jurisdictions. Clients often expect regular interaction, and relationships can take years to develop. As a result, successful partners frequently spend significant amounts of time travelling throughout the region, maintaining connections with clients, intermediaries and referral networks. Technical excellence remains important, but in Singapore it is rarely viewed in isolation from the ability to develop and sustain relationships across APAC.
This creates a challenge for some international lawyers looking to work in Singapore. Without an established regional network and book of contacts (or a willingness to work very, very quickly to build one), lawyers will face an uphill battle to get on their side clients who already place their trust in well-established regional firms.
International lawyers who succeed in Singapore are often those who have worked extensively there as associates and have been promoted to partnership. Their business development skills have been honed, and their contact book is long.
The importance of established regional relationships can make Singapore a more difficult market for lawyers seeking to relocate than is sometimes assumed, and this is particularly true for lawyers who are keen to prioritise the technical as opposed to the social side of work. But in many cases, the strength of a partner’s network is as significant to the development of a practice as their technical expertise.
In Singapore and indeed Asia more broadly, commercial skills seem to have equal if not more weight than pure technical capability within the international law firm environment. As teams are small, it can be tricky to “carry” a partner who is technically brilliant, but cannot or does not want to develop business. The career trajectory for those individuals usually lies in-house. In most cases, lawyers come to realise what they like or are good at before making partner, and opt for the in-house path earlier, rather than set themselves firmly on the partnership track.
Relying on Compensation Alone
When entering the market, firms often assume that offering increased compensation will be enough to attract the best lawyers. Top Singapore-based partners are, however, increasingly wary of “uncosted” promises. Most partners are aware that accepting a position simply for the pay may leave them worse off in the long run, and the type and quality of work itself may be the greater reward.
Law firm partners are understandably reluctant to join firms that appear uncertain about their APAC strategy and commitment, or that may retreat from the market when economic conditions become challenging. Because partners have witnessed many firms arrive in Singapore with a splash, and then abandon the region a couple of years later, stability and long-term vision often carry more weight than just compensation packages.
Candidates will frequently ask: ‘What is the firm’s long-term strategy in the region?’, ‘What are the growth prospects for the practice?’ And, ‘how will moving my practice to your platform enhance us both?’ The best talent in Singapore and the region increasingly expect these questions to be answered before considering a move.
Culture is equally important. The best talent want to work collaboratively and with like-minded partners. In smaller offices, every hire has a disproportionate impact on team dynamics. A single poor partner hire can have a huge impact on morale and retention across an entire practice group. Technical ability is as valuable as cultural alignment and leadership qualities.
A Viable Plan for Retention
In addition to hiring, retention of top talent can also be a challenge, especially if the previously mentioned unique challenges of the Singaporean market start to collide with retention structures set out in head offices. The things that weigh most heavily on any lawyer’s decision to stay are generally law firm culture, the right platform, and collaborative behaviour.
For example, partnership benchmarks are frequently set by reference to larger and more profitable offices in London or New York. Non-equity partners must generate “X profit for Y number of years” to be eligible for equity. However, the realities of practising in Singapore mean that profit levels achievable in US or UK markets can be far more difficult to attain locally.
The consequence is that talented lawyers find themselves trapped in prolonged non-equity positions despite strong performances relative to their local market. Measurement against benchmarks that do not reflect the realities of the region can create frustration, and some firms have found that partners leave for competitors offering clearer progression opportunities. From a retention perspective, it is also important to not treat an office like it is simply an outpost. Global firms should make a greater effort to improve local office culture and attempt to connect more often, which includes helping local offices with better work and client referrals.
Retention challenges are therefore not simply a compensation issue. Pathways to equity partnership have become an increasingly important consideration in how partners assess opportunities, and firms’ approaches to this vary considerably.
Global partnership models are shifting to better accommodate and reflect talent competition, client demands and global economics: Singapore is no exception. Some firms have “localised” their Asian equity structures to reflect the different economics at play in Asia. This can cause some short-term frustration initially, but is usually effective in the longer term.
With more structural layers being introduced, the re-emergence of the non-equity tier particularly demonstrates how firms are treating the progression ladder as a strategic tool for attraction and retention.
Though some may feel trapped in prolonged non-equity positions, the badge of partner can lend crucial credibility for networking and work winning. Non-equity partnership gives lawyers the title that can help establish their contact books and reputations without being as much of a risky economic choice for firms that are still establishing themselves in the region.
Singapore on Its Own Terms
Singapore’s importance as a legal hub shows no sign of diminishing. Alongside the continued strength of markets such as Tokyo and Australia, the increasing resurgence of Hong Kong, and a rising international presence in the Middle East, it remains the cornerstone of any serious strategy in Asia.
However, the international legal market is also evolving. Clients globally are increasingly scrutinising their legal spending, and the high-profile emergence of AI-enabled service models is beginning to challenge assumptions about how legal services are delivered and therefore priced. Whilst AI adoption is still relatively limited in most Singaporean firms, its implementation will likely only increase the need for lawyers with brilliant business development over technical skills. This increased focus on personal and business development could see talent and competition gaps between Singapore and counterparts or competitors in major legal hubs close somewhat. Though that is a potential upshot, an inverse effect could take hold in the form of less commercially minded but technically brilliant lawyers getting squeezed out and left behind.
For international firms, Singapore remains a great opportunity, but it simply cannot be approached using a standard London or New York playbook. It is through a lack of patience to fully understand the region in all its peculiarities that firms often flounder. Singapore has tended to reward those that approach it as a market in its own right, rather than as just any other international hub.
