Dear Council

I have decided to leave the Law Society. It has been a great honour to be the Law Society's
Chief Executive and I do believe that over the course of the last two years we have moved
the organisation on and that it is in much better shape than it was when I took over.
The future
It is my firm belief that the Law Society will not be perceived by its members and other key
stakeholders to have changed and to be representative of solicitors and the diverse solicitor
profession, without changing the way it is governed.
The Law Society's governance is costly, (over 2 million per annum not taking into account
my time or my executive's and staff time in reporting), bureaucratic and does not reflect how
successful modern organisations, including membership organisations, operate.
The Law Society, in my view cannot, because of its current governance arrangements,
operate in a responsive and agile way. It is impossible, as an effective Chief Executive
Officer, to navigate the complex and often overlapping boards, (and sometimes committees),
in a way which best serves the organisation and its members. This is not news to Council.
When asked to describe the Law Society, you chose the words moribund, old fashioned and
bureaucratic, (to name a few), and wanted (as I do), for the organisation to be less
bureaucratic and more responsive and agile.
Yet, when Council was given the opportunity to bring about a change as to how the
organisation is governed, regrettably from my perspective, it chose to vote against and/or
delay such change - even though I know that many of you want to see meaningful change
within the Law Society. Council voted against limiting terms - which would have enabled
more members of the profession to get involved and critically decided that we cannot start
implementing a new main board until council seats have been reviewed.
It had taken Council nearly a year to get to a point where a decision could have been made
to start making changes to governance. As any implementation of a main board will not now
start until further work has been undertaken on council seats, as optimistic as I am, I fail to
see how this work can be completed in a timely way - particularly taking into account the
external pressures on the Law Society to demonstrate effective and modern governance
arrangements, which should not be underestimated.
I truly believe that the longer term future of the organisation rests with it having in place an
effective governance structure. It is competing against hostile organisations which already
have agile and effective governance structures in place. If the external environment was not
so hostile, the Law Society could take its time to review its governance and make any
changes at its own pace. However, the organisation does not have this luxury. Others are
intent on harming it and the profession it serves. We should not give them any ability to be
critical of us - and yet we have, as our failure to change means that we don't have the right
governance arrangements to enable us to effectively respond to this hostile environment,
leaving us vulnerable at this critical time.
I have agonised over my decision to leave the Law Society and it is with much regret.
However, I do not believe that I can ensure that the Law Society is truly valued by its

members, seen as relevant and its longer term future secured, without changes to
governance.
I and my executive team, spend a disproportionate amount of time navigating our way
through our governance, often reporting and seeking approval at multiple boards and at
council. This wastes time and precious resources - which are currently funded by our
members (of which I am one). I cannot in good faith continue to be CEO of an organisation
which is seemingly not mindful of this and not prepared to change. I want to be part of an
organisation with a board and council which works effectively and collaboratively with its
executive. I want to take responsibility as CEO and be accountable. For me this means being
part of a board which has the expertise, experience and skill sets to oversee a complex
multi-million pound organisation. I believe that boards should make collective decisions
which their senior executive are party to and which the board stands behind and is
accountable for. I don't see the role of a CEO as merely attending and reporting to a board.
If this is how council sees the role of the Law Society CEO, (which the agreed main board
structure suggests it does), then unfortunately this is not me.
It is for this reason and because of the failure to agree to progress with the creation of a
main board that I have decided to leave the Law Society. I cannot in good conscience
continue to act as the CEO of an organisation when I do not support the decision by Council
not to rigorously pursue governance reform in what I believe is in the best interests of the
profession and the organisation. Therefore, just like any accountable board member who
does not support a critical decision of that board, I feel that I am left with no option but to
resign.
Thank you
It truly has been an honour to serve the Law Society. I have nothing but the greatest respect
for all those members who get involved and for the staff who I know are committed to the
organisation's success. I do hope that my departure will prompt you to reconsider the
current governance arrangements and to progress with making the changes I do believe you
all recognise need to be made. I believe that this will help to set up the future CEO for
success. However, without meaningful change you will be setting up any future CEO for
failure.
I take this opportunity to thank you for your commitment to the solicitor profession of which I
am proud to be a member. Please rest assured that whilst I remain CEO, I will continue to
discharge my responsibilities to the best of my ability.
I wish you all the best for the future.