Once a leading player in marine and insurance work, Ince & Co has been hit by discord and an ailing core market. Legal Business assesses the high-risk course the firm is charting in response.
Blue, purple and pink LED lights flash on entering the doors to Ince & Co’s new home at London’s Aldgate Tower. Inside is a spacious office decked out with the latest tech, contemporary meeting rooms and a communal café. Around the corner is an open-plan office where leadership duo Jan Heuvels and Paul Herring sit among their teams. There are no phones in this office; each desk boasts a Surface Pro – the latest Microsoft tablet – with a built-in phone integrated with the firm’s e-mail.
The modern look is a symbolic shift for a conservative institution whose previous home was surrounded by boats at Tower Hill, a location steeped in history. But the maritime and insurance specialist has more to contend with than presentation.
If the post-Lehman years were generally good to the City’s insurance and shipping specialists, from 2013 Ince has faced far choppier seas, with a tougher market and margin pressure on volume work seeing falling revenues and job cuts. The 2014/15 financial year saw a punishing 8% fall in revenues to £79.4m, the worst income drop of all of the UK’s top 100 law firms that year.
‘This firm is now more aligned to where I want to go than 12 months ago. There are great opportunities and I need to make a convincing case to the partnership.’
Jan Heuvels, Ince & Co
In response, Ince’s management has banked on an abrupt shift in course. Behind the incongruously bright lights and large screens is the leadership’s bid to modernise Ince’s culture, a change backed by flexible working and a merit-driven remuneration model.
More ambitiously, senior partner Heuvels and chair Herring are aiming to build a broad transactional practice as a means of rebalancing the firm’s niche focus, having leant heavily on disputes. Getting there will be a huge challenge requiring an aggressive lateral hiring programme and probably a major merger.
Both are alien to what was – at least until recently – a traditional partnership with decades of history behind it.
Heuvels pledges to press on despite a period that has seen a stream of partner exits. ‘I am ambitious. This firm is now more aligned to where I want to go than 12 months ago. This keeps me motivated. It’s nice to make changes and move forward. There are great opportunities that we can pursue and I need to make a convincing case to the partnership.’
Golden Years
Ince’s history goes back to 1870 when shipping lawyer Francis Ince founded the firm. It was not until the 1940s that it began to appoint partners outside the Ince family but by the 1960s the firm was established as a major London practice. In 1979 Ince launched its first international office in Hong Kong. Singapore was launched in 1991 followed by Piraeus (1993), Shanghai (2000), Hamburg (2001), Le Havre and Paris (2002), Dubai (2006), Monaco (2011) and most recently Beijing (2012).
In a lucrative shipping sector, Ince had a history of handling some of the most high-profile work – in 1967 advising on the UK’s Torrey Canyon disaster, one of the world’s most serious oil spills, and advising on the Piper Alpha explosion in 1988.
The firm’s growth continued through the 1990s, accelerating through the 2000s. In 2000, Ince generated revenues of £31m. By 2010, Ince’s fee income had surged to just over £86m, a remarkable result achieved without a major merger.
One former partner recalls the firm’s glory years: ‘Ince was like a first-class premier league football team which was very well managed and wasn’t tolerant of prima-donnas.
‘It was the most collegiate firm in its field and that was the cornerstone of its success, particularly in the big admiralty and oil spill cases. The firm did not take in lateral hires and only grew organically. We all knew each other; there was a very high level of trust.’
| Ince & Co: five-year financial overview | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Lawyer headcount | Partner headcount | Revenue (£m) | PEP (£k) |
| 2011 | 296 | 89 | 86.2 | 311 |
| 2012 | 313 | 96 | 91.6 | 332 |
| 2013 | 322 | 100 | 93.2 | 250 |
| 2014 | 307 | 96 | 86.7 | 244 |
| 2015 | 278 | 88 | 79.4 | 275 |
As a go-to-firm for shipping and insurance advice, Ince had a team that functioned as a tight-knit and profitable unit with productive partners like Peter Rogan, James Wilson, Michael Volikas, Bob Deering, Nick Shepherd, Faz Peermohamed, Chris Kidd, Heuvels and Herring.
The practice advises on big-ticket shipping disputes, regulatory compliance, ship-building and casualty work and represented international ship-owners on matters like the restructuring of Israeli shipping company ZIM, alongside clients like Gard, BW Maritime, Fred Olsen Cruise Lines, Golar LNG and Petrofac.
With a wave of disputes hitting the shipping industry in the late 2000s, the shipping practice expanded under the reign of litigator Wilson, who led the firm as senior partner from 2008 and stepped down in January 2015 to resume a client-facing role.
Over this expansive period, lawyer numbers swelled to over 320, across 11 worldwide offices. The firm’s global turnover reached an all-time high of £93.2m in the busy post-banking crisis disputes market for the 2012/13 year.
A shipping litigation partner at a rival international firm recalls the period of high-stakes disputes: ‘Charters were going bust, contracts defaulted. After Lehman there was a ripple effect. The banking system ground to a halt so buyers of cargo could not get credit and couldn’t buy cargo.
‘Clients who were worth billions could not get a letter of credit to buy cargo for $50m because the banks had no money so international trade almost came to a halt. This was a good time for law firms.’
In 2008 a revenue target of £100m was set for 2012, although management puts this down to ‘one of the numbers floated during an aspirational working session’. Herring says: ‘From the last quarter of 2008, we were spectacularly busy with lots of work involving ship-building, sale and purchase, and charter party disputes caused by the unexpected and dramatic fall in the freight market. These matters had a long tail taking us into 2012.’
‘From the last quarter of 2008, we were spectacularly busy with lots of work in ship-building and sale and purchase, and these matters took us into 2012.’
Paul Herring, Ince & Co
But by consensus, the expansion of shipping was increasingly sidelining Ince’s other core industry groups: insurance, trade, energy and aviation. The partnership was growing, as was the firm’s balance sheet, and management saw that changes were needed.
In 2012, Wilson introduced a new governance structure, creating a board comprising all five sector group leaders, two regional representatives, a non-executive director, director of operations and the senior partner.
Wilson also launched ‘In Combination’ – an initiative that outlined what the expected partner contribution was for each equity member. ‘The idea is to combine individual partner contributions into the business and encourage good technical lawyers to become good business-getters,’ says Heuvels.
One ex-partner recalls: ‘Shipping litigation shot up. There were a huge number of disputes and lots of fraud cases. There were lots of meetings in that same year about strategy and targets. This was the first time strategy was being talked about.’
The moment of triumph was not to last.
The predominant thing
Ince had evolved to be governed by its partnership culture but its culture was changing. Tensions surfaced almost immediately after the governance shake-up. Former global head of admiralty Peermohamed had a superb track record for bringing in new cases for the department, generating over half the team’s new cases according to several estimates. Peermohamed joined Ince in 1994 from Danish shipping and trade group Maersk, where he had been a master mariner. On joining, Ince put Peermohamed through law school and he soon qualified as a City lawyer and moved up the ranks to head the admiralty practice. (Peermohamed resigned from the firm at the end of 2015 to become the chief executive of Ince client Norwegian Hull Club.)
‘[Peermohamed] was for many the go-to person when there was a casualty,’ says Herring. ‘Clients wanted him because of his experience, his expertise, his ability to manage large teams, and his commitment to take the 3am call and be on a helicopter at 5am to fly out.’
Peermohamed’s ability to generate business meant he, along with a few other rainmakers, were rewarded bonuses for outstanding performance through an equity committee that was introduced by Wilson’s predecessor, Peter Rogan.
If that merger does not come, making a transactional breakthrough under its own steam looks to be a herculean task.
Wilson had overseen more generous awards for a handful of key business-winners. One of the most collegial law firms in London was evolving into a star system and one increasingly dominated by strong personalities – and resentment was building in other teams. There had been comments as early as 2010 that Ince was dangerously concentrated on shipping disputes and overly reliant on a small group of older partners.
Argues one former partner: ‘When the equity bonuses started to get used, it caused tension among the partnership and allowed the “superstars” to create mini empires. Shipping generated more than 50% of the firm’s revenues and while this work was supposed to be spread geographically – north and in the Far East – it was never done. It soon became a firm where others were controlling how much work you could or could not get. If you weren’t part of the shipping team, you were not worth much and were underperforming.’
Some felt alienated. ‘The tactic of rewarding people seen to be doing better than others created a terrible feeling of people influencing other people’s careers. You could be marginalised quite quickly and suddenly find yourself leaving,’ says one ex-partner. ‘It used to be a culture that was about the “we” and not the “I”, but it changed, and money became the predominant thing,’ agrees another.
But one Ince veteran responds the firm needed a more performance-driven culture. ‘I am a believer in bringing junior people up in the partnership, but if a partnership is riddled with dead wood then how do you create an environment where you can hire and retain quality people when they can see that the people at the top are dead wood and will never move and they will never have a vacancy? It’s a typical problem for many firms and what James [Wilson] tried to do was break that by focusing on performance.’
Heuvels echoes that stance. ‘Paul [Herring], Faz [Peermohamed] and I were all beneficiaries. There were others who benefited from the equity committee and in any event it was a recommendation to the equity partnership who had to agree it.’
Another beneficiary of bonus payments was Ince’s former energy partner, Andrew Iyer, who was struck off the roll in 2012 for frauds involving more than £2.8m, including producing a spreadsheet detailing 400 fake invoices that included £2.5m of claims taken from clients, and a further £283,000 from the firm. Iyer was convicted in 2013 and sentenced to a four-year-eight-month prison term. (Upon early release, Iyer launched legal services firm IY Legal.)
While the firm can hardly be blamed for the action of an individual, that Iyer was viewed as a member of Ince’s in crowd unsurprisingly aggravated those who felt the firm was devolving into a sharp-elbowed ‘us and them’ culture.
Ince had some issues with partnership performance – the wider criticism was the tightening grip of shipping on the firm had allowed its other teams to drift and atrophy and that leadership had allowed it to happen.
Adrift
The increasingly lopsided nature of Ince’s business was causing increasing internal strife but was not enough to outwardly challenge its progress. By 2013, however, its core shipping market was facing a dramatic worsening of conditions.
‘Out of nowhere freight rates to charter ships dropped,’ recalls one shipping partner. ‘A vessel once charted at $100,000-per-day stuck for five days was a half-a-million-dollar dispute. When charter rates collapsed, this same vessel was now worth $5,000-a-day! It was this stark. That five-day delay is now only worth $25,000. Nobody is going to fight for that.’
It was a serious threat and unlike Ince’s maritime peers, the firm had no credible hedge in its other practices. Shipping disputes were by 2012 already drying up, reflecting the sustained pressure seen in the cost-conscious domestic insurance market, particularly at the volume end. In the 2012/13 financial year, Ince had 322 lawyers and 100 partners with £289,000 in revenue per lawyer.
In early 2014, Ince made ten shipping and insurance fee-earners and six secretarial staff redundant in London, citing ‘prevailing economic conditions in our core sectors’. Globally, the firm slashed 20 roles. The harder trading was in part due to large insurance clients squeezing panel terms, particularly in the firm’s financial lines team where the market was very price-driven. Aside from shipping, Ince’s well-regarded reinsurance practice was suffering. Across the board, major insurers were cutting costs.
Ince’s turnover fell from £93.2m in the year 2012/13 to £86.7m the following year. It was a dramatic shock to a firm that had outpaced most top 50 UK law firms since 2008.
Broadly comparable peers faced some impact, but nothing like Ince. Holman Fenwick Willan (HFW) posted some growth with revenues up 2%, while the broader practice offering of Stephenson Harwood saw an 8% increase. The more sizeable Clyde & Co saw an 8% rise to £365.1m with its UK insurance, professional lines, and property and liability practice enjoying double-digit growth. Even nationally-spread players like Kennedys saw top line grow 10% while revenues dipped 1% at Hill Dickinson.
‘Ince was betting the house on one sector staying strong and when that sector failed,’ says one partner at a rival firm, ‘they had no plan B to diversify, an ageing partnership, and no structured business plan, and there was no other market that they could quickly get into.’
‘If a partnership is riddled with dead wood, how do you create an environment where you can hire and retain quality people?’
Former Ince partner
Another adds: ‘Ince was very niche and focused on owner and P&I work. It had a mediocre international network and when the firm tried to branch out into energy and international expansion it didn’t work. Firms like Clydes, Reed Smith and HFW on the other hand, had a diverse shipping structure with strong overseas offices so when one or two areas struggle the others keep the firm afloat.’
With profits plunging, junior equity partners were reportedly earning £140,000 – a similar amount to senior associates – while plateau partners were earning not much over £300,000.
With Ince needing to cut costs, the firm turned to PwC to help transform its support functions. For the first time in Ince’s history, the firm borrowed a substantial sum – £7m – in part to cover the cost of the work, restructuring and implementing the recommendations when it moved to its new offices in Aldgate Tower.
A business services change programme led by Heuvels was launched, which focused on making service delivery across the firm’s HR, IT and finance functions as efficient as possible. ‘We mapped every process in the office and implemented a number of new systems that allowed us to reduce paper by 80%. This helped us make savings and work smarter,’ says Heuvels.
Wilson’s term ended at the end of 2014 and Heuvels and Herring were appointed as the first duo to lead in Ince’s history with the former senior partner and Herring as chair. This move also attracted some griping over lack of rival candidates.
Critics argue Heuvels, who had strong connections to the clique that had for years been driving Ince, was pressed on the partnership and there was pressure on other potential candidates not to run. Head of energy Jeremy Farr and aviation head Gillie Belsham are cited as credible contenders.
The appointment – which was held without a vote – saw Heuvels put to Ince’s partnership in two rounds of consultations over one month in the autumn 2014. According to two separate accounts of former partners, there was some resistance, but the firm pressed on with the appointment.
One former partner recalls: ‘I would have liked to have the choice and the debate, but this became typical of how Ince operated. It was like a state in Eastern Europe in the communist days where any debate and not toeing the line was looked down on massively.’
Ince’s leadership denies there was anything unusual about the process, as does one former partner, and argues that other candidates were encouraged to run. ‘Everybody was asked to put their hat in the ring, but nobody did. It was not an unfair process,’ says the ex-partner.
Heuvels and Herring’s leadership started with dramatic action. The firm announced its second round of redundancies as soon as the new heads took the helm in January 2015. Six partners from the shipping, insurance, aviation and energy practices were laid off, along with ten secretarial staff as part of a wider partner and secretarial services team restructure following a unanimous partnership vote.
Heuvels comments: ‘The restructuring committee reviewed the performance of partners over the previous three years and it looked at where they were sitting within the lockstep and whether partners fit against the firm strategy, and in some cases decided that partners should be repositioned within the lockstep.’
The reconfiguration saw the creation of senior and team personal assistant roles replacing legal secretarial roles. The new positions provided all fee-earners with one central point of contact for secretarial support. A new team was formed with operators to focus on the production of documents and transcription, and a new team of assistants was also created for basic administration, such as filing, copying and scanning.
Being one of the first tenants to move into Aldgate Tower, Ince managed to strike a rent-free period for several years. Ince says the firm remains in investment mode.
‘We now have one of the highest levels of tech and agile working environment of any City law firm,’ says Heuvels. ‘I want to encourage agile working. People don’t have to be at their desks – I just want them to be productive. The office move to open plan has been a revelation. People like it. The feedback that I have had about how much this has increased communication is remarkable. The uptick in productivity is palpable, even after only a couple of weeks, and will ultimately be reflected in our numbers. The energy levels were a concern in our last office, but here they have come through and it’s very exciting.’
Not all share that assessment. Since the new leadership came into force, 14 partners have departed (see box). Six left as part of the restructure; three retired, including Bob Deering, a previous global head of shipping, founder and senior partner of the Middle East office and head of international commercial arbitration – who along with former partners David McInnes and Nick Burgess launched a maritime law boutique in 2015 in response to the demand for lower cost legal services.
Five resigned, including managing partner and shipping head Richard Lovell, who joined Reed Smith as the firm’s head of admiralty in February this year.
Alongside Burgess and Peermohamed, Stephen Marais also quit in October last year to join HFW as the firm expanded its City asset finance practice, while in Singapore energy head Martin David left to join Baker & McKenzie as a partner in its Singapore energy practice.
Former leader Wilson is set to retire and Piraeus-based Nick Shepherd is also set to join Norwegian law firm Wikborg Rein.
‘Obviously it has been a transitional year for us,’ says Heuvels. ‘Fourteen partners have left but 18 new have joined [seven lateral hires and 11 internal promotions]. This does put your budget under strain.’
At the helm
Of the two leaders, it is Heuvels who is seen as more hands-on in shaping the direction of Ince. Described as a ‘straight-shooting guy who wants to drag the old-fashioned firm into a modern legal business’ by one rival managing partner, Heuvels gains some solid notices internally. ‘Heuvels is able to make the tough decisions and will be the one to deliver the hard messages,’ says one partner.
The firm’s management argues that the firm’s fortunes are changing, with profit per partner on course to be ahead of its 2014/15 figure of £275,000, though Ince’s revenue will be below last year’s £79.4m, around the £76m mark, despite leadership setting an £81m target for 2015/16 in March last year.
‘March has been phenomenal. I don’t want to count my chickens too soon, but we were 10% above projections in March, and also up in February and December, while January was just under. We are expecting a good month in April too,’ says Heuvels. ‘Volatility in the oil and gas markets has kept our contentious offshore partners busy, and this has made a huge difference to this financial year’s performance.’
But for all the brave words, Heuvels concedes that Ince is looking to secure a merger. This focus was drummed home last year when an e-mail intended for the partnership that called for suggested merger targets was accidentally sent to the entire firm.
Last year, Heuvels approached Watson Farley & Williams (WFW) management to discuss a potential combination of what would have created a shipping, energy and insurance powerhouse with revenues close to £200m, but WFW showed no interest beyond two meetings. It was a major disappointment for Heuvels.
Heuvels told Legal Business he has informally met with half a dozen firm leaders to discuss options. ‘We might look at a regional or an international merger, none of this is off. It would be foolish for anyone leading a firm of £80m-£150m and not seek to push through the £200m barrier.’
A key element of the plan is to grow a transactions offering comprising corporate, finance and projects expertise across the firm’s shipping, insurance, aviation, energy and international trade sectors.
Ince has recruited seven partners since the start of 2015, including corporate partner Tom Briggs from Charles Russell Speechlys in Dubai; Locke Lord’s Jennifer Donohue, who specialises in the insurance and reinsurance markets; and corporate partner Paul-Emmanuel Benachi in Shanghai from Gide Loyrette Nouel. The firm also promoted corporate and finance specialists in London, Hamburg and Singapore to partner.
It is also set to launch an office in Cologne with the hire of a five-lawyer team, including two partners to expand its insurance offering, giving the firm a total of 11 partners in Germany across Cologne and Hamburg.
The firm also sought to underline its progressive credentials with the launch of Ince Consultancy in April to offer non-legal services to clients across its five core sectors in a bid to compete against multi-disciplinary firms, like accountancy firms. The business is being run by Hamburg partner Jan Hungar. It is billed as further supporting the growth of the firm’s transactional business. The move comes as London rival RPC has already seen dramatic growth in its recently-launched non-legal insurance consultancy, which according to one internal estimate will generate around £2m for the 2015/16 year after substantial investment.
Heuvels says: ‘We are making sure we have the requisite transactional capability in our sectors to try to take the volatility out of our business. The massive disputes we are handling now will naturally come to an end and we need to be able to replace that.
‘I wish we had started diversifying a little earlier. But we are not just building a transactional capability, we are building it in our sectors.
‘We have always been a leading shipping, insurance and offshore firm right through. What we are saying now is let’s build expertise that is relevant, such as in the liquefied natural gas sector and capital markets. We need clear knowhow on the deal side and transactional practice, and for that I don’t think you are ever too late. But you need to persuade people to join, and that’s why changing our remuneration structure was essential.’
The firm will move further away from its lockstep model in May and introduce an uncapped bonus pool above the top of its equity to reward its highest billers. The new remuneration model will use a ‘managed’ or ‘hybrid’ lockstep that comprises elements of the traditional lockstep and a performance pool. Up to 30% of the firm’s profits will be used to fund the extra band.
Under the new system, partners will be awarded base pay on a ten-step lockstep ranging from £140,000 to £240,000, a relatively flat structure. That leaves a large discretionary element for strong performers, awards that will be made by a five-partner remuneration committee, which Heuvels sits on. The firm argues this flexibility will not only underpin a more entrepreneurial culture but help attract laterals. As Legal Business went to press the firm was finalising what is being touted as its biggest lateral hire yet.
| Ince & Co’s revolving door since January 2015 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Partner name | Practice | Went to | When |
| Elliot Woodruff | Energy disputes | Managing director at JAEHA | March 2015 |
| Stephen Askins | Casualty and piracy | Tatham Macinnes | April 2015 |
| Charlotte Davies | Employment, personal injury and professional negligence | Unknown | April 2015 |
| Albert Levy | Global head of the yacht and superyacht | Retired | April 2015 |
| Fred Vroom | Shipping | Retired | April 2015 |
| David McInnes | Shipping, insurance and commercial litigation | BDM Law | May 2015 |
| Nilam Sharma | Insurance | Keystone Law | May 2015 |
| Carol Searle | Political risk and trade credit insurance disputes | General counsel at Texel Finance | June 2015 |
| Bob Deering | Litigation and arbitration | BDM Law | July 2015 |
| Stephen Marais | Banking and asset finance | Holman Fenwick Willan | October 2015 |
| Nick Burgess | Head of Ince’s Japan, Russian and Turkish teams | BDM Law | December 2015 |
| Martin David | Singapore energy head | Baker & McKenzie | January 2016 |
| Faz Peermohamed | Global head of shipping | Chief executive at Norwegian Hull Club | January 2016 |
| Richard Lovell | Managing partner and head of shipping | Head of admiralty at Reed Smith | February 2016 |
| Partner hired | Practice | From | When |
| Anna Anatolitou | Aviation (London) | Bird & Bird | March 2015 |
| Paul-Emmanuel Benachi | Business, finance, energy (Shanghai) | Gide Loyrette Nouel | July 2015 |
| Will Cooper | Aviation (London) | Export Credits Guarantee Department | November 2015 |
| Jennifer Donohue | Insurance and Reinsurance (London) | Locke Lord | November 2015 |
| Duncan Bateson | Superyacht and shipping (London) | TLT Constant & Constant | December 2015 |
| Balbir Bindra | Business, finance, energy (Shanghai) | Locke Lord | January 2016 |
| Tom Briggs | Corporate (Dubai) | Charles Russell Speechlys | March 2016 |
Leadership is also bringing in a more structured development programme for associates, backed by a merit-driven banding system that assesses its lawyers as they progress.
Heuvels comments: ‘No partner should be happy with just getting base pay. One of the problems we faced was that our equity spread was not wide enough. There were a lot of partners earning a lot of money as opposed to other firms. This spread is something we are addressing by changing the remuneration system.
‘The remuneration changes seek to reward longevity as well as performance. Moving away from something the firm has used for 20 years or so has been a major shift. But the partnership felt it was essential in order to push for growth because we need to be able to compete with other systems for lateral hires.’
Sink, swim or drift
If Ince has to be given credit for a proactive response in the last 18 months, a huge challenge remains for the firm given the malaise in its core market, its battle to unify the partnership and the reality that its financial performance has fallen so far behind its peer group. Having ducked the strategic dilemma facing it for years, that challenge is now much harder.
The hope for Ince must be that it can leverage a relatively productive business – the firm’s low per partner profits bely respectable per lawyer billings of £286,000 for 2014/15 – to secure a merger because its hopes of achieving its growth targets without a major deal look remote.
‘Ince was like a first-class premier league football team which was very well managed and wasn’t tolerant of prima-donnas.’
Former Ince partner
Says Heuvels: ‘We have done well this last year. We have been able to absorb people exiting the business. We have had those that have left by choice, those that were asked to leave, but more people have come into the business.’
The firm, however, rejects suggestions that a merger is its only option. ‘We don’t need a rescue merger, but we need to be more profitable. I am ambitious and want the firm to be successful. Eight months ago I was feeling positive, but I am feeling even better now.’
Better perhaps, but there is huge scepticism among peers about the hopes of securing an attractive merger in the UK. Conceding the options for a domestic union are limited, Heuvels says the firm has an open mind, saying Ince would also explore a union outside the UK with firms in a major shipping hub market such as Singapore or Norway. ‘Every means of growth is on the table.’
If that merger does not come, making a transactional breakthrough under its own steam looks to be a herculean task. While some insurance and marine peers such as Clyde & Co and Stephenson Harwood have had success widening their practice, the pair made such moves well over a decade ago and from stronger positions.
The obvious alternative cited by peers of narrowing the practice down to a lucrative shipping and insurance boutique has been ruled out. That is surprising since stripping back the practice would give Ince better odds of regrouping as an independent operation while also allowing the option of agreeing a merger or sale on good terms down the line as a more manageable trophy acquisition.
It is a very risky bet for a very conservative law firm. As a leader, Heuvels cannot be faulted for vision or a willingness to chart an uncertain course. But if that bold gamble on growth doesn’t pay off, the captain will be going down with the good ship Ince, shiny new decks, cabins and all. LB
jaishree.kalia@legalease.co.uk