As General Counsel Roles Shift, ‘GC Plus’ Model Is All the Rage

Organizations traditionally have viewed their general counsel as the chief legal officer who provides strategic guidance, manages legal risk, and oversees the legal department.

But growing complexity in government regulations, heightened scrutiny of organizational decisions and actions, and diverse operational challenges have expanded the GC’s traditional responsibilities.

This shift has led to the “GC Plus” model—in which GCs assume multiple C-suite roles, such as chief human resources officer or chief operating officer. The model offers significant advantages, such as increased efficiency, stronger alignment between legal and business strategy, and potential cost savings.

As companies increasingly rely on GCs to balance risk, strategy, and operations, the boundaries of the role continue to shift. Rather than operating as isolated legal advisers, GCs are integrating legal expertise with broader business priorities.

The trend reflects the growing recognition of legal expertise as a vital component of executive leadership. A GC-COO, for instance, may oversee digital transformation, ensuring that new technologies comply with data privacy regulations while driving operational efficiency.

A GC-CHRO may play a pivotal role in designing workplace policies, aligning employment practices with governance frameworks and regulatory expectations.

You can see this play out in the real world. Last month, Owens Corning general counsel Gina Beredo added a chief administrative officer title to her other responsibilities, effectively consolidating legal and HR leadership into a single role.

And last summer, Kenneth Cole Productions promoted legal vice president Renada Williams to general counsel, assuming the additional responsibilities of senior vice president of human resources.

Challenges and Considerations

The title of chief legal officer is unlikely to change. Instead of rebranding the role, organizations are acknowledging the rising influence of GCs in other ways.

Some companies are increasing compensation to reflect the additional leadership responsibilities GCs now carry, though the link between expanded scope and pay remains uneven.

According to Major, Lindsey & Africa’s 2024 compensation survey, total actual cash compensation for GCs and chief legal officers declined by 4% since 2021, driven largely by a sharp drop in bonuses. Base salaries remained relatively flat, despite some outlying companies are offering premium packages to attract top legal talent.

Compensation also varies widely by company type—GCs at public companies, for example, report significantly higher bonus targets than their peers at private firms. While the GC role is becoming more strategic, compensation hasn’t consistently kept pace with its evolution.

Need for Support

More important, GCs taking on expanded roles are having more say over strategy, which may position them for future roles as CEO or vice chair. This consolidation of responsibilities has challenges, chief among them being a risk of burnout.

Without adequate resources and support, GCs are at risk of extending themselves as they absorb additional executive responsibilities. GCs can mitigate this with effective delegation and investment in leadership support structures.

Successfully managing these dual demands requires intention, structure, and the right team. GCs who succeed in expanded roles typically surround themselves with strong deputies, allowing them to delegate day-to-day legal operations while focusing on higher-level strategy.

Many are also turning to legal operations technologies to reduce administrative overhead, streamline workflows, and improve data visibility. Just as critical, seasoned GCs are setting and communicating boundaries around their scope of responsibilities—ensuring expectations remain realistic and aligned with available resources.

Regular engagement with business leaders further enables legal priorities to remain embedded in the broader organizational strategy, without overextending the GC’s capacity or compromising their effectiveness.

Potential conflicts of interest are another challenge. A GC-COO, for example, may face decisions that pit short-term operational priorities against long-term legal and compliance considerations. These dual roles can introduce subtle but significant tension.

The same executive pushing to meet performance targets also may be responsible for identifying and mitigating regulatory risk—responsibilities that don’t always align.

That dynamic becomes even more fraught when compliance reports through legal, raising concerns about whether compliance decisions are being made independently or shaped by business imperatives.

Successfully navigating these tensions requires not only sound judgment but clear governance structures that reinforce accountability and role clarity.

Education and Training

Without the necessary resources, training, and leadership support at a company level, these added responsibilities could be a burden rather than an opportunity.

One of the most effective ways to prepare for the future of an expanded GC role is through education and leadership training. To succeed in a dual C-suite role, GCs must expand their repertoire to include the intricacies of HR management, operations, finance, and corporate strategy.

This level of cross-functional leadership requires continuous professional development and ongoing education. Executive education programs should incorporate real-world case studies, allowing legal professionals to develop business acumen in a practical setting.

Companies should invest in mentorship and leadership development programs to help prepare GCs for broader executive responsibilities. By fostering the professional growth of legal leaders, organizations can ensure that their GCs are prepared to meet the demands of an increasingly complex business environment.