Amarchand Mangaldas: past, present, future

Amarchand_mumbai_office
Amarchand_mumbai_office

Amarchand-Delhi-office-high
Amarchand-Delhi-office-high
Amarchand & Mangaldas, India’s biggest law firm, has all the trappings of a family-run enterprise including sibling rivalry. The Shroff brothers must quickly set their house in order, argues Forbes India magazine’s Shloka Nath.

If I hadn’t done law, I would have been a doctor,” says the quiet and diminutive man sitting on a plush chair at the Mumbai office of Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A. Shroff & Co. (AMSS), the firm that advises the bluest of blue chips in corporate India. In many ways, Cyril Shroff brought medical precision to the practice of law at the family-run firm, one half of which he inherited.

It is Saturday and the ace corporate lawyer is relaxing in a bold red shirt. He talks about the new thing that has him excited. He is helping draft the new Unique Identification (UID) Bill for the government. “Cyril has such a sharp mind. He cuts through complex regulations and he has such a good understanding. He is like a brain surgeon,” says Nandan Nilekani, chairman of UIDAI and one of the co-founders of Infosys.

The firm, jointly run by Cyril in Mumbai and his brother Shardul in New Delhi isn’t just the largest, but is also the most influential law firm in the country. It is reported to be raking in annual revenues to the order of $100 million. It employs over 470 lawyers across five offices. The firm has grown rapidly over the last decade, and it plans to double its size in the next two or three years. It has changed the way Indian law firms operate by pioneering new models in recruitment and partnership. It is the firm of choice for many of India’s top business houses including Reliance Industries, Tata group and ICICI Bank. Amarchand’s lawyers are often present in the most influential boardrooms mapping out the most powerful deals. Its managing partners are regularly involved in framing government policy and regulation. You can see why the firm has a formidable reputation in India and abroad. “The Shroffs have briefed me on many matters, and I find them excellent to work with,” says lawyer-turned-politician P. Chidambaram, union home minister, in an exclusive chat with Forbes India.

Life, it would seem, is perfect for the hoary Amarchand. Except that it isn’t. The problems of India’s family-run firms that grow large are catching up with Amarchand. The Mumbai operations run by Cyril and the Delhi operations run by Shardul have two distinct operating cultures. This means daily operations are not standardised across the firm and the two offices don’t always agree on the future plans.

Some clients say they feel comfortable being advised only by the senior management because of a lack of mature talent at Amarchand. Many lawyers at the firm feel that the family wields too much control over the business and doesn’t share enough of the profits, which in turn is stifling their own career growth.

This problem is exacerbated because foreign law firms have already begun to circle the Indian market. Even though they are not allowed to practice in India, they have formed alliances with local firms and set up liaison offices. Over the last few years Amarchand has lost very senior people to these firms. In three to five years, a full-fledged entry of foreign firms is quite likely and a new generation of domestic firms would have come into their own. In other words, the time for solving the internal issues is now. Otherwise, just like it challenged and beat bigger firms in the past, Amarchand too will be overtaken by the new firms that are either more entrepreneurial or global.

Founded by Amarchand Shroff, Cyril’s and Shardul’s grandfather in 1917, the firm made huge leaps in the 1980s and 1990s under Suresh Shroff, the founder’s son. But then, it wasn’t the biggest. The market was dominated by giants such as Mulla & Mulla and Crawford Bayley.

“The deadwood in these firms had started to pile up around then. They were failing to keep up with the times whereas Amarchand had started to enter into new practice areas,” says a former Amarchand partner. Suresh made a number of shrewd moves and weaned business away from his competitors.

The relationship with Reliance Group is just one example of his successes. “Cyril’s father, Suresh, was on our board. He advised my father and helped us start Reliance, and now his son advises me,” says billionaire Mukesh Ambani. “I’ve had the good fortune of growing up with Cyril.”

In 1980, Suresh Shroff sent his elder son, Shardul, who had already qualified with his LLB (till then, Cyril hadn’t), to Delhi. Amarchand had taken over a firm there and that operation wasn’t yet doing well. “I had never appeared in a court [before that]. The day I landed in Delhi, I had 3,000 cases to argue. It was a baptism by fire,” says Shardul.

But it wasn’t until 1994 when Suresh Shroff died, that Shardul and Cyril formally took over the reins of management.

In the preceding years, Suresh Shroff had capitalised on the liberalisation of the Indian economy and expanded the business. ICICI Bank’s K.V. Kamath recalls those days. “They grew and so did we. A whole lot of new institutions got built in this country in the Nineties and Amarchand was there guiding us and holding our hand,” he says. ”Every new business we built we relied on them to provide us that stamp that this is what we could do, and how to do it.”

By the time Cyril took over at Mumbai in 1995, Amarchand had offices in Bangalore and Kolkata (Hyderabad would be added later) [correction: The earlier version had inverted Kolkata and Hyderabad]. While Shardul had fought his way up, Cyril had the benefit of having worked under his father for nearly 14 years. And this perhaps explains the different ways they look at the business. “What I have been through and what he (Cyril) has been through has been a totally different style of functioning,” says Shardul.

Their colleagues didn’t fail to see the distinction. “They are two very different types of people. One fought and maintained the office on his own, and one had the office bequeathed to him. So of course their inter-personal relationships and personalities are different,” says a former partner at Amarchand.

Some who know the brothers closely say the situation between the two has not always been rosy. Sometimes, it was compared to the feud between the Ambani brothers especially when their mother came in for the mediation. When asked about it, Cyril laughs dismissively and says he has also heard this comparison.

Shardul Shroff won’t entertain any such talk. He can be reticent and guarded — it took this magazine three months to obtain an interview. He is a dreamer, an astrologist, emotional and by his own admission moody, and is a believer in Satya Sai Baba. He is currently finishing a book of poetry due for release in September. He loves buying jewelry and has over 70,000 books in his personal collection. Former employees say he isn’t very expressive and that could hamper his ability to emotionally connect with his partners.

The younger sibling, on the other hand, is slightly more irreverent; loves to sketch frequently; enjoys MAD magazine; watches every newly released Bollywood film, often back to back over weekends; is a master at SMSing. He is detail-oriented. And he is known for his legal brilliance. “He can draft an agreement by dictating from start to finish, to a steno, about 60-70 pages,” says a former employee at Amarchand.

The personality differences, over time, have also come to represent the respective characters of the Mumbai and Delhi offices. They have even led to internal competition between the two offices in going after big nation-wide clients.

Sometimes, the firm was unable to put up a unified front for its clients. One former employee at Amarchand recalls a meeting with an ICICI division a few years ago when a junior partner from Delhi told the client that something was ‘not our view, but Bombay’s view.’ The clients were reportedly stunned.

In April this year, after the International Financial Law Review (IFLR) Awards ceremony in New Delhi, Cyril Shroff sent out a firm-wide email congratulating all employees. Within 30 minutes, there was a ‘reply-all’ mail from Shardul’s wife Pallavi Shroff where she highlighted the awards won by the Delhi office out of the 10 that the firm won. One of the overall awards pertained to the subject of dispute resolution. And Pallavi wrote tongue in cheek, “Dispute resolution is not one of Amarchand’s best-kept secrets!!!”

Operationally, Amarchand is virtually two firms in one. While staffing policies and internal auditors are the same, Delhi and Mumbai also work out their individual profit & loss account in addition to the firm-wide P&L account. The Delhi office earns more revenue than the Mumbai office and has more lawyers. But the region that comprises Mumbai, Bangalore and Hyderabad brings in more revenues than the one comprising Delhi and Kolkata.

“Either they choose to coordinate. Or they split and go their separate ways,” says one industry observer. While the Shroffs admit they may not always see eye to eye, they say their differences do not fundamentally affect the firm. “Put us in separate rooms, we have totally different styles, but we’ll come to the same thought,” says Shardul Shroff. They say that both the internal competition and lack of coordination are systemic and natural in large firms spread across several locations.

But large firms do make sure that processes are standardised and variations do not upset employee orientation. At Amarchand that is not yet the case. There is disparity in how support functions are run under the two brothers. Shardul Shroff has a nine-headed hydra system, with different chiefs for everything from corporate communication to library management. Cyril, meanwhile, has a chief operating officer from London and seven administrative heads report to her. The COO in turn reports to Cyril who handles strategy. Delhi has hired Cliff Challon, an Australian HR consultant in change management and Mumbai is similarly advised by a professor of Indian origin from Harvard Law School. “Getting a transfer from Bombay to Delhi and vice-versa is practically impossible. It just doesn’t happen,” says an associate.

If having two cultures wasn’t complicated enough, there is also the two-engines of growth theory. Cyril Shroff uses many variations, including the “two pilot” theory and the “two-wheels-of-a -bicycle” theory. So one engine, pilot or wheel (take your pick) is the family: The Shroffs. The other is the professional lawyers working for the firm. On this, the two brothers agree completely. They believe that the family presence allows for a greater appetite for risk and clients feel a sense of stability and comfort in the perception of continuity. At the same time it is crucial to promote a managerial class of able professionals who also have a stake in the firm’s success.

Many employees, especially at the lower rungs, don’t buy the two-engine theory and feel there is a glass ceiling for non-family members. They say the firm is run by the Shroffs, for the Shroffs, and point to the fact that the Managing Partner’s son is in his early twenties, but has both his own cabin and a peon. The Shroffs explain Rishabh was removed from the associates’ area because it is fashionable to talk about your bosses and you can’t do that when the boss’s kid is right in front of you.

Recognising his employees might have a different perception of things, Shardul Shroff has done the opposite and made sure his daughters sit right in the pool of associates, he has deliberately held back their rise in the firm. “This is not a parachute; they have to earn the respect of people senior to them in the firm.” But both sets of Shroffs are clear however, that provided their children earn their stripes, “they’d be incredibly stupid not to make use of their legacy.” Members of the younger generation have frequented the office since they were young and celebrated their birthdays there. And this closeness can sometimes be a bit strange.

For instance, On Wednesday, April 24, 2008, at 6:02 p.m., the Mumbai lawyers of Amarchand, the country’s supreme corporate legal minds who routinely dispense advice to clients worth billions of dollars, received an unusual email in their inbox. Paridhi Shroff, at the time the 18-year-old daughter of managing partners Cyril Shroff and his wife Vandana, had put out a firm-wide alert, a desperate plea for help from the lawyers who worked for her father. Paridhi was looking for someone to do her homework.

“She ended with ‘I won’t forget this [help]’, and her parents were copied on the mail!” one Amarchand associate says with a chuckle. What if someone had actually helped her with her homework? “Will they remember at the time of our assessment?” Paridhi was pulled up by her parents. She promised to be careful in the future and says it was a lesson learned in separating home and office. “The law firm is home. I’ve been coming here since I was really small. And both my parents are working at the firm so you’re sort of hearing it day in and day out, it gets into your bloodstream.”

Disengaging the family from the professional environment is the biggest challenge Amarchand faces now. “If they are able to handle the transformation from a family firm to a broad based firm and encourage professionalisation, it will be very significant for the future of the firm,” says Uday Kotak, managing director, Kotak Mahindra Bank. An old college buddy of Cyril Shroff, he has observed the firm’s growth for the last 20 years.

Where is the Wealth?

One way to remove the “glass ceiling” concern is to make sure employees have a stake in the rewards. For most of Amarchand’s 90 year history, all of its profits went to the Shroffs. In 1995, the firm started allowing non-family members into the profit pool when respected litigator M.P. Bharucha and his wife, corporate lawyer Alka Bharucha, entered the firm. Still, this meant only 10 per cent of the profit pool went to non family members, the remaining 90 per cent was split amongst the brothers, Cyril and Shardul, their mother Bharati and their wives, Vandana and Pallavi.

This has cost Amarchand. Many within the legal industry point to the case of Rahul Guptan, who joined Amarchand’s Mumbai office in 1999 and soon became a rising star. A capital markets genius, he was appointed partner there in April 2006. He quit in 2008, one month before turning equity partner. “It’s pretty well known in the firm that he left because he had issues with the amount of equity he was due to receive. Apparently, it was too little,” says an associate at Amarchand, who asked not to be named. “Although the official line was he left for personal reasons, we didn’t buy that for a minute. He was doing so well, for someone at his level; it had to be a bigger reason.”

Worse, Guptan left and joined Clifford Chance, a huge UK based global firm, making the threat of losing talent to increasingly aggressive foreign law firms more real. “Top tier talent will never play second fiddle to ownership structures that are not merit based, says Dilhan Pillay Sandrasegara, managing partner at Singapore-based Wong Partnership. “When your market is a closed one — you can do that. But don’t forget, in terms of transportability of talent it’s an open market — that person knows he or she is the best, and they will leave.”

Guptan wasn’t the only one to take issue with the Shroff’s inability to relinquish ownership. The Bharuchas, a husband and wife team who had been with the firm since 1994, also left in early 2008 to set up their own practice. Employees say they walked out because they were dissatisfied with the management of the firm.

Both were equity partners and it was a huge blow to Amarchand, creating a lacuna in the firm’s senior management. A space, many say, is still to be filled. “They are insecure with letting partners grow beyond a point. The Shroffs handle the business development and they’re reluctant to let the goodwill of clients pass down to others,” says a partner in an international firm.

Shardul Shroff disagrees. He points to the fact that two out of every three initial public offers of shares last year were handled by Amarchand and they were all executed by people other than family members. “These are full time capital market lawyers, each managing 60 lawyers under them, and these are the people executing, not us!” But what the lawyers really want is a higher percentage of profit sharing.

The Shroffs have over the last two years conceded this demand through an ambitious project called Project Moses. Since Project Moses, the family pool now holds 75 per cent and the number of equity partners have increased to 17. The non-family share is distributed through a seven step lockstep process and top of the equity pile is about $2 million. The lockstep will most likely pause when profits are split 50:50 between non-family and family members.

“This is a modified lockstep in the sense that if somebody is not performing as well as expected, they can be halted and if somebody is really performing well, they can be advanced quicker,” says Nick Jarrett-Kerr, a consultant specialising in strategy, governance and leadership development for law firms and who advised Amarchand on the overhaul of its lockstep “But even though the family share will eventually dilute over time, it will become a smaller slice of a bigger pizza.”

The move is welcome. Equity partners like L. Viswanathan and Ashwath Rau, both contemporaries of Guptan, feel the lockstep is a sign that the Shroffs want them to have a real stake and sense of ownership in the firm. They never left because they feel adequately rewarded, have strong client relationships that were allowed to develop and they maintain Amarchand is the best law firm to work for. “The legal profession in India continues to be dominated by individuals. Just like Jack Welch of GE dominated his space. But he didn’t do it at the cost of others — he was a giant among giants. You have to build other giants, “says Dinesh Kanabar, Deputy CEO of KPMG, India. Accounting firms like his went through similar challenges in professionalising about 30 or 40 years ago.

But the decision to relinquish control was a tough one. “I was in a despondent mood,” admits Cyril. “It was a huge emotional decision. Some of that tension is still there in the mind because you don’t know what will happen, but we have no choice, given our ambition. Having taken that decision, it’s a one way street and we have to move forward.”

The Shroffs have clearly decided to stay independent and not tie up with foreign firms as some of their competitors have done. Over the next few years, liberalisation will hit the legal sector. “Before foreign firms arrive, there is a window of opportunity for Indian firms to strengthen themselves. Other firms are looking to see how Amarchand does it,” says Ashish Nanda, professor at Harvard Law School, who is preparing a case study on premier Indian law firms including Amarchand.

The Shroffs understand the gravity of the situation. “This is a key phase for us,” says Cyril. “Now is the time to make that transition to becoming the national champion.” This independence is essentially a function of the talent in the house and the brothers have to make sure it doesn’t go away. Sharing the wealth the firm creates with its employees has thus become imperative.

Competency Building

Clients from large industries often complain that at Amarchand, 80 per cent of the work is done by 20 per cent of the people. “When I go to Amarchand, I ask for this lawyer on this project — it is very personality driven. And that’s because I don’t feel comfortable unless it is being supervised,” says the general counsel for a leading corporate firm. For Mukesh Bhavnani, group president, legal at Essar group, one handicap that the profession currently faces is the inadequate availability of mature talent which puts enormous pressure on the senior partners because all clients would like the comfort of dealing with them.

The Shroffs are aware of that. In an attempt to create a leadership pipeline and to solve issues of quality dilution, they have invested a great deal in knowledge management and training. This year, they have created a formal career track whereby employees can opt out of transactional work and focus instead on knowledge creation for the firm.

The final frontier would be to integrate all the offices into a single organisation. For that BCG has been called in. Over the next 3-4 months, the consultancy will attempt to work out a broad roadmap for the firm. This is BCG’s second assignment. “We made specific recommendations for Amarchand’s path to institutionalisation,” says James Abraham, former director at Boston Consulting Group. Abraham was in charge of the first reconstruction the consulting firm did for Amarchand back in 1998. In 2000, a management committee was formed comprising four members in all: Three family members (the mother and the two brothers) and one non-family member, MP Bharucha. In 2008, the MC was expanded to a seven-member committee (three family members and two partners each from Delhi and Mumbai) to oversee governance and operational issues in the firm.

Now, different Indian law firms have tackled these issues differently and Amarchand will have to ensure that while it professionalises the operation, it doesn’t throw out all things family. Like the close, personal touch of Cyril’s wife Vandana.

She is often called Anna Wintour by her employees. One of the many reasons is because she regularly asks them about their relationships via text messages. “I always say, if I don’t know the love life of Amarchand, it’s time for me to step down, she says with a smile. Many employees have migrated from smaller cities to Mumbai and Delhi. “They miss that home touch. And I always believe unless you feel emotionally stable and happy you never can give your best to the workplace.”

In Delhi, a family oriented structure has meant each female employee receives a box of chocolate from their managing partner every Valentine’s Day. Cake smashing is a common pastime amongst the Delhi lawyers and they claim to be No. 1 when it comes to hosting the best parties “firm-wide.”

“My greatest source of comfort is that this family lives and breathes the firm. To choose between the firm and their own future - They would always choose firm over personal priorities,” says Rau.

This article was republished with permission from Forbes India magazine - click here for the original.

Also listen to Forbes’ podcast - Amarchand Mangaldas - Laws of Distraction, and

An opinion piece: Elite Indian Law Firms Unlikely To Be Family Dominated in the Future

An interview with Cyril Shroff: Our problems are no different from other growing firms.

Podcast:Amarchand Mangaldas - Laws of Distraction: http://business.in.com/audio/magazine-extra/podcastamarchand-mangaldas-laws-of-distraction/15392

  1. Elite Indian Law Firms Unlikely To Be Family Dominated in the Future: http://business.in.com/interview/magazine-extra/elite-indian-law-firms-unlikely-to-be-family-dominated-in-the-future/15642/1

Comments

Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 18:30
+5 -1
Paridhi Shroff asks associates to do her homework....yawn. That's hardly the most shocking AMSS gossip I've heard.

Anyway, if foreign law firms come in AMSS will be a relic of the past.
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 18:54
+1 -0
What complete nonsense. I wonder how much was spent to have this published in forbes... Great way to get around the prohibition on advertising...!
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 19:36
+1 -1
I am wondering how much money AMSS would have paid to Forbes for getting this published. They might be brilliant at what they do but the bottom line is that they restrict the management to the family giving no significant advancement opportunities for the outsiders.
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 20:00
+1 -0
A lot of it is old gossip from the days when I was around. Nothing new to most people like me...
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 20:04
+1 -0
On the subject of homework assignment, I can't stop laughing when I hear the anti-British propaganda being spread by SILF supporters on this site. As someone who has lived in the UK let me tell you that the British are very fair employers and treat everyone with dignity, including sweepers. In India senior advocates have made juniors perform tasks like buying vegetables and watering plants in their garden. This is unthinkable in the West. You cannot imagine a Magic Circle partner's daughter asking people to do her homework.

Please at least visit the West before getting swayed by the remarks of the anti-foreign law firm lobby. Someone on this site suggested that Stuart Popham and Clifford Chance were racist marauders like the East India Company. I wonder if that person has heard of something called the caste system.
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 20:27
+0 -0
Delhi office hardly promotes SA, PA to full-fledged partnership. And, yes its the Delhi office that does more billing and earns more revenue than the Mumbai office which is quite ironical as Mumbai is the commercial glitzy hub. SS's way of functioning is good but would get better if he sincerely classifies and detaches the office from the 'burdensome' Mumbai office completely.
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 22:10
+1 -0
Hang on...you people think this is positive publicity??? The article mentions how one family controls a law firm, how the boss's daughter asks associates to do homework, how the firm refuses to tie up with foreign law firms ... this sounds like flattery and praise to you guys??? If this is the publicity AMSS gets after allegedly paying journalists then I hate to think what would happen if they did not pay journalists!!
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 22:16
+0 -0
Forbes please check your facts. LI, I expect better cross-checking of facts! The hyderabad office was not established at least until 2006...
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 22:23
+0 -0
@5 this is the 'guru-shishya' parampara which is exemplary of Indian culture. I have done that for my senior and his family in my initial years of tutelage and would never ever regret it. Infact, now I feel that I was lucky to be able to do this. It taught me a lot of tolerance and specially the art of work-life balance as it became a way of life. But its a dying out tradition now and even the seniors don't have time to encourage junior lawyers or take any genuine interest in this concept.
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 22:44
+0 -0
@9: wow, so you're actually proud that your "guru" treated you like a naukar? people like you symbolise everything that is wrong with this country.
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 23:20
+0 -0
#9 - I like you very much. You make my life worth living and give it a sense of purpose. You bring great credit to litigators everywhere, may their tribe prosper. Will you please let us build you a statue which we will garland every day? Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as you walked the earth ... and all that jazz, don't you know? Please? Pretty please?
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 23:53
+0 -0
USD 100 million is clearly inaccurate. LI, didn't you have a report on this - wasn't the number much much lower.

There's just way too much hype being created about India's 'elite' law firms. This is not sustainable.
Anonymous guest 27 Jul 2010, 23:57
+0 -0
It's perfectly clear why firms like Amarchand are opposing foreign law firms. The fact that they have to relinquish control and give away profits and if they don't, then they would lose their talent to the foreign firms. Let Moily read this.

It's high time that foreign law firms should be allowed. Apart from creating more jobs, they would also ensure that best global practices would be brought in India and thereby would ensure that lawyers get proper respect and recognition for their work.
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 02:24
+0 -0
@10. Thanks. Yes, a shishya not a naukar (but even if its naukar then whats the harm). Its all in the mind my friend. Quite fascinating how the mind interprets a person's way of life and outlook towards 'classifying' life. This is a profession of patience, perseverance, tolerance, sustenance and discipline but I could probably comprehend with your frustration of the system even if it is not minuscule. I have a standing of 15 yrs in corporate litigation now and would not entirely take-away the credit of this achievement from my guru.
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 02:30
+0 -0
@11 Interesting comment, thanks. Reminds me of an interesting quotation: "We should all learn from the deeds of great men who have made our lives more sublime, so that you may leave our footprints for ages to come, on the shifting sands of time!!"
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 11:50
+0 -0
It is not only family nut loyalty to an individual as well. There are people at both the Delhi office and Mumbai offices of AMSS who are there simply because they are experts at cozying up to the boss. AS an example, the [...] team at the Delhi office simply twiddles its thumbs and does not add to the firm's bottom-line.
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 15:35
+0 -0
I somewhat agree with "a litigator". The guru sishya parampara was indeed a part of the legal profession in India. However, of late, modern trends have almost made that parampara redundant. For my dear friends who compare a sishya to a naukar, I have to say that there is a difference. A sishya may serve out of respect and admiration without there being any compulsion. However, a naukar is obliged to serve or quit - which is very much prevalent in present day set-ups. Not only the sishya served the Guru - the senior but the senior also from time to time helped the sishya-junior in various ways. In fact the sishya became a part of the Guru's family.

I have not been a sishya to anyone, but I have had the opportunity to assist and be guided by an able senior who I could not help but respect. I owe a lot to him. That is an emotional process where you are mentored and inspired to prove that what you got from your senior was really a treasure upon which you can build your profession and life. Anyone looking only for quick money cannot ever understand that process which matures a young lawyer to be a class act.
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 17:42
+0 -0
My comment was censored twice earlier so I am reposting it using "safe" language that LI will hopefully not find offensive:

The article says that person Y at firm X sends SMS messages to associates making enquiries about their "love life". In my humble lowly opinion, a line should be drawn between professional and private life at the workplace. However, it is not my intention to speak in derogatory terms about firm X, and I apologise unreservedly to all the employees of firm X (past, present, and future) who may unintentionally be offended by my remarks. Firm X is the best firm in India and has won many awards etc etc.
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 17:45
+0 -0
I agree with most comments. However, working with AMSS adds to your career. Working with AMSS for 3-4 years means a lot after which most of these start up boutiques will hire you.. There are several start ups which call them specialized firms who would run around to hire you. Dont go by the fancy glamour which a few start ups show and attract u..
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 19:50
+0 -0
say whatever...but how many of you if given a job today by amss will say no?
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 20:46
+0 -0
@20: ppl will not say no but if the magice circle firms are allowed to open offices i guarantee you that all NLU students will put those firms as their first preference instead of amarcand during campus recruitment
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 22:39
+0 -0
@ 21, NLSIU students are not the legal fraternity.. There is much more beyond NLSIU.. NLSIU guys would start their own firms after 5-7 years of work exp. Then they will start screwing their juniors in the same fashion.. AMSS is anyday better..
Anonymous guest 28 Jul 2010, 23:46
+0 -0
There are similar problems in many of the family run firms. Why single out AMSS which has steadfastly held on to its number one position with no one in close hindsight. I believe the Shroff's, who are the advisers to many brilliant entrepreneurs and business houses, will be wise enough to know that "United we Stand - Divided we fall." However, one cannot say anything about the Shroff's future generations. It is better to leave aside ego issues and focus on building a strong and resilient brand identity - which is not difficult for the AMSS considering its present position.
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 01:20
+0 -0
Considering that there has obviously been a fair amount of input in this article from the Shroffs, Forbes (and of course Shloka Nath, the author of the story) has done a fine job of producing this objective and balanced article. Despite the various pitfalls of the firm (some of the significant ones have been highlighted in the article), it is undoubtedly one of the best (if not the best) places to go to for (i) sound legal advise, and (ii) learning the art and science of transactional lawyering (especially if one is fresh out of law school). Sure the pressure is mind boggling and the hours often inhumane but it does teach you to swim in the deep end and stay afloat. Disclaimer: I worked in the Mumbai office (as part of one of the largest teams within AMSS- in terms of revenue and manpower) as an associate for 4 years. Quit because "80 per cent of the work is done by 20 per cent of the people" - you, smart reader, would have undoubtedly guessed that yours truly was part of the "20 percent"!
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 04:03
+0 -0
rahul guptan a capital markets genius?? [...] the firm's capital markets profile has risen after guptan's exit, and most clients have forgotten about him. he was living in the reflected glory of his boss. wonder where the journalist gets her inputs.
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 04:10
+0 -0
amarchand is by far the top attraction for bright graduates at college. thier recent recruitment's at campuses and their reputation in the employment market is awesome. every returning indian qualified lawyer will first knock at their doors and will ask to work directly with the shroffs. those who are fooling themselves that amarchand will be a relic after foreign firms come in and if they do, have got their facts wrong. they have no idea of the power of the amarchand brand in the talent market or the client market. its just professional jealously and frustrated mediocre lawyers who did not make it that love to have a go at amarchand. they are too big and powerful to be impacted by the petty comments.
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 04:19
+0 -0
ironically, this coverage clearly confirms that #1 status of amarchand and the shroffs. everybody likes to talk about the #1. who talks about #2 ?? its a bit like the ambanies. you can love them or hate them, but you cant ignore them and they rule the imagination of corporate india. so do the shroffs. as they say, there is nothing like bad publicity. although, parts of the article were clearly yellow and childish. poor show on the part of forbes. the shroffs should be loving it though, despite some of the trivia.
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 04:23
+0 -0
I think it would actually be cool to have a friendly boss with whom you can discuss your love life etc. perhaps he/she can arrange dates for me with the [women] of the firm!
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 04:27
+0 -0
i have used amarchand for complex work over two decades and no other firm comes even close when there is a real challenging problem. i would not trust my problem to any one other than the shroffs though there are a lot of other excellent partners who i would use for normal problems. i think most of corporate india will think on the same lines and whether foreign firms come or not, it is going to make no difference to indian clients for their complex work. why would i trust some joker with an english accent who knows nothing of indian law or hires some junior lawyers. the best indian advice will still come from people like the shroffs. and that is the truth.
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 04:30
+0 -0
delhi - bombay problems are quite rampant even in AZB and everybody knows it! Even AZB is two firms in one, and not even joined by blood at the top. *Sigh*
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 17:50
+0 -0
@ 29 - completely agree with you. The approach mentioned by you is adopted by NLSIU guys who start their own practice after 5 years of work ex...
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 19:06
+0 -0
Ever seen the anamolies of law that exists in India? The new FDI policy, Press Notes, Takeover code or for that matter interpretation of grey issues. When Indian lawyers find it difficult to take a clear view, I wonder how any gora will even survive Indian legislative framework and its complexities. No one can shake the established firms of today on merit or advise. Esp JSA, AZB or AMSS. What say?
Anonymous guest 29 Jul 2010, 21:19
+0 -0
marriages between AMSS associates are quite common. it is indeed true that vandana shroff serves as an agony aunt to the young lawyers in love.
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 00:22
+0 -0
@31 - how much work experience did Shardull have when he started the Delhi office of AMSS?
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 04:12
+0 -0
unfortunately the most innocuous emails of family members have been picked up in the article. the real king of improper emails is [...]. [...] emails are popularly called weapons of mass destruction [...]
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 04:17
+0 -0
perhaps too much is made about the shroffs and the family angle to amarchand. as if the other firms are any better. AZB, the equity is concentrated with 2-3 individuals. Ajay's son has joined the firm, and so will zia's daughter. Khaitan and Co. is a complete family firm, and there is not even a pretense. there is no scope for non family in khaitan. Nishith desai is an outright proprietorship. crawford bailey is also very much becoming a family firm because all the kids have joined the firm. the hypocrisy of the london firms is so obvious that linklaters tied up with thakore talwar by offering shobhan's son Kunal a partnership and talwar's daughter as well. the hallowed bharuchas are unabashadely a family firm with husband, wife and son with practically no hope for non family. freshfields has a secret tie up with them. so why single out the shroffs?? just because they are most successful. we hope there is more moderation.
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 04:20
+0 -0
the real reason why a completely flat structure does not work in any indian partnership is because of ego and power struggles. a family firm atleast concentrates the source of power, and therefore survives. in indian partnerships, you take away the source of power and make everyone equal and the firm implodes in no time. in amarchands, can you imagine the infighting if the shroffs were not there?? everybody will want to be managing partner, and will kill the others. the shroffs are totally required to keep it together. same with all other firms. a single leader with continuity is needed for a market in transition.
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 04:22
+0 -0
god bless the shroffs for the employment opportunities they have created in the legal industry. they have single handedly done it. without them, there is no hope for young students. they still provide the best career opportunities, and the toppers will always flock to them, despite all the rubbish that it is printed by all the gossip sites and magazines. hail amarchand!
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 07:19
+0 -0
sorry but JSA and AZB are better than AMSS...well known fact
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 16:26
+0 -0
Hey AMSS loyalists if your firm is so great why have the Shroffs spoken against allowing foreign competition? Note that Zia Mody has welcomed foreign competition? Thsi proves AZB is better
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 19:04
+0 -0
The article is interesting and well written. Most of the comments on this website on AMSS / NLS can be summed up in two words - "sour grapes". The shroffs are visionaries in their own right and are also human.
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 23:40
+1 -0
in our country (or any other, for that matter), everything is family run- business conglomerates (reliance,tatas, birlas), law firms, your local mom-and-pop stores, builders, hotel chains, the mafia...even the current government. i think everyone tends harp on this issue so much because they feel like going on an equality overdrive all the time. i'm not advocating family control, but i'm just saying it is natural. Today, if i took a brand name to a wroldwide pedestal, i would want my prgeny to benefit out of it; that's human nature. For instance, JRD Tata may or may not have not have found a better successor than Ratan Tata, but teh fact remains that he still passed it on to the family. That's how everyone from Don Corleone to a Mukesh Ambani will think. that's how you will too.
Anonymous guest 30 Jul 2010, 23:53
+1 -0
Anyways read these too:

http://www.economist.com/node/16693882?story_id=16693882

and

http://www.in.com/news/business/fullstory-cyril-shroff-managing-partner-of-legal-firm-amarchand-mangaldas-talks-to-forbes-india-about-the-issues-the-firm-must-deal-with-as-it-grows-and-what-its-doing-to-manage-the-resulting-complexities-14867263-6bc73f753cb1cf5145801c197f36571c32b6aefe-1.html
Anonymous guest 31 Jul 2010, 01:42
+2 -0
my bet is 14, 15 and 17 is the same guy praising himself!!
Anonymous guest 2 Aug 2010, 20:07
+1 -0
Yes, 14 and 15 is me. But not 17. Thanks for the recognition.
Anonymous guest 4 Aug 2010, 23:55
+1 -0
@ 44 - looks like this guy is from NLSIU
Anonymous guest 7 Aug 2010, 16:52
+1 -0
Its interesting that the only two who can actually lead the firm forward into the next few decades both because of technical skills and leadership skills are not even mentioned in the article. Would have assumed they would fall under "Delhi power" but its good to see that they rather focus on being great lawyers first.
Anonymous guest 15 Sept 2010, 18:08
+1 -0
hey anyone please tell me does jugaad work for getting a job at amarchand ??