A senior Partner at Kenndy’s global law firm, was asked to take ownership of the firm’s early-stage data agenda alongside their legal responsibilities. While highly experienced as a lawyer and business leader, they were operating in an organisation with low data maturity and no dedicated internal data capability.
The firm’s data estate was fragmented and heavily siloed across departments, with most activity limited to management information and basic business intelligence reporting. There was no unifying data strategy, limited governance, and little alignment between data activity and wider business objectives.
Despite being the internal sponsor and champion for change, the Partner themselves did not have a data background and needed expert support to move the organisation forward with confidence.
Prior to engaging us, the firm had attempted to appoint this role independently and later through a Preferred Supplier List (PSL). While both routes progressed activity, neither delivered the right outcome. Internally, the organisation lacked the data leadership experience required to fully articulate what the role needed to be, not just in title, but in scope, capability, and impact. As a result, the brief focused on what was visible rather than what was necessary for an early-stage transformation.
The PSL search was faithfully executed against that brief and progressed a candidate to the offer stage. However, the offer was ultimately declined, and it became clear that the process had surfaced a deeper issue: the organisation didn’t yet know what it didn’t know. Both the internal team and external supplier optimised for the role as it was described, not for the role the business actually required. Without the experience to challenge assumptions, recalibrate expectations, or advise on the realities of building data capability in a legacy environment, the search delivered exactly what was asked for, but not what was needed. This created delay, frustration, and uncertainty, reinforcing the need for specialist guidance that could bridge the gap between ambition and practical execution.
The Global Head of Data Strategy role carried responsibility across the firm’s operations in approximately 68 countries, requiring the ability to navigate regional variation, regulatory complexity, and differing levels of data maturity. Despite its global remit, the role needed to be UK-based, with a strong preference for London or Manchester, to ensure close alignment with senior leadership and the firm’s strategic decision-making hub. This combination of global accountability and local presence significantly narrowed the viable talent pool and increased the importance of appointing a leader with proven experience operating at scale—without losing sight of practical, on-the-ground delivery.
