{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03529411764705882, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.828767123287672, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Within Legal, Should You Always ‘Think Globally, and Act Locally?’ or Should It Be the Opposite?

Globalization is a reality in every growing company, and the statement “think globally, act locally” has been echoed by many corporate leaders to maintain the sustainability of their businesses, in particular in the tech industry. Within legal departments this assumption is also promoted - in-house counsels are constantly pressured to reinvent themselves to operate in an efficient, optimized and automated way in a global spectrum. But does it mean that in-house counsels should always "think globally, and act locally", or the opposite is actually true? Ugo Draetta once said that "an in-house counsel has no choice but to be a global lawyer" and a "multi-cultural" one, but one could really do that all times and in all his or her daily decisions?