Between July and September this year, Pallavi Gopinath Aney's team completed four IPOs, filed seven documents, closed three debt deals and two QIPs. She only noticed when she sat down to work out year-end leave for the team.

Gopinath Aney has completed 20 years in Singapore. A few months ago, she joined A&O Shearman's 11-member Global Board. She co-chairs the firm's India practice with Sheila Ahuja KC. And this week, she published her second novel.

In conversation with Bar & Bench's Pallavi Saluja, she speaks about the firm's India strategy two years after the merger, how Indian capital raising has grown up and the novelist's habit of jogging slowly past strangers.

[Watch Video]

Edited excerpts follow.

Pallavi Saluja (PS): You studied at National Law School, Bangalore and started your career at Indian law firms before moving to Singapore. Was that always the plan?

Pallavi Gopinath Aney (PGA): Absolutely not. Those were the early years when English firms had started hiring directly from India, having realised there was a pool of common law-trained, English-speaking associates. A couple of opportunities opened up and honestly, it was just curiosity. I was toying with an LL.M. and had got into a few places. Then one of these opportunities came up in Singapore. The idea was to base myself abroad for three or four years, travel a bit, see how international firms train associates and then come back and pick up working in India. It wasn't a very well thought-out plan!

Coming back never happened. At least twice in my career I evaluated it quite seriously, but something or the other came up. This August, I completed 20 years in Singapore.

PS: You worked at a couple of international firms before joining Allen & Overy, now A&O Shearman. How has that experience been?

PGA: It's been a great learning curve. India is an exciting market, deal-making there has become sophisticated and law firms have grown. But international firms have their own charm, advantages and scale. At every stage, as a junior associate, senior associate and then partner, the access to clients, the geographical breadth and the sheer number of talented colleagues across practice areas has been incredible.

PS: How do the Indian law firms you left compare with Indian firms today?

PGA: Today, I see Indian firms across the table all the time and work with them as relationship firms. 20 years ago, it was very different. The firms were so much smaller; there was no comparison in size and scale with a firm overseas. Most had one office. I think Amarchand may have been the only one with two. My experience back then isn't comparable to what the firms are like today.

PS: You recently joined A&O Shearman's 11-member Global Board. What does the role involve and what does it mean to you personally?

PGA: The board is responsible for the stewardship of the firm: its values, its culture and the implementation of its strategy. It's a geographically diverse group that includes our senior management team. We meet regularly through the year to discuss strategy, governance and culture. Personally, culture and governance are closest to my heart.

It's very early days; I only took over the role a few months ago. Much of that time has gone into realising what a big beast this firm is, with its geographical spread and practice areas, and understanding the issues we deal with day-to-day. It's been really interesting and I'm enjoying it very much.

PS: Is there a change you want to push now that you have a seat at the table?

PGA: I'm still very much in watch-and-learn mode. It's been a little over four months, so I'm listening to fellow board members, some of whom are on their second terms. We just had our global partner offsite. I couldn't attend, but one partner described the mood to me as "joyous", which is great to hear two years after the merger. I hope to drive change in the future.

PS: A&O always had a strong India presence. Has the merger changed the firm's focus on India?

PGA: There's been no change in our commitment. India remains a core market for the firm. If anything, our depth is greater in some areas and we can offer clients a trans-Atlantic footprint. For Indian companies, knowing they have that resource in both London and New York is really great. It is a key market for us and we've always embraced that.

For the last two years, we've had these colleagues in the building. We pitch together, talk regularly and refer work between the US, New York and Texas, to India and Singapore. That has been a really accretive strength. When I first spoke to some of the legacy Shearman partners after the merger, their takeaway was that it was great to have this platform. In the last two years, we've seen that go-to-market together come to fruition in India.

PS: How do you plan to deepen relationships with India's new generation of startup founders?

PGA: Most of that falls in my camp: the investing activity, then the exits and IPOs. It truly is a brave new world. For much of my career, you had the big promoter groups and industrial families. Now you have the unicorns and a whole ecosystem of companies coming forward.

The young founders I've worked with represent new India in their growth, energy and drive. They are plain-speaking and direct. They want things done and they have big plans for their companies. I've found them surprisingly easy to deal with and I've really enjoyed those deals. They're keen on getting the job done, getting business done and I've really enjoyed some of the deals I've done with them. It's a new India and we all adapt and go along with it.

PS: You and Sheila Ahuja KC co-chair the India practice; you focus on capital markets, she on arbitration and disputes. How do you divide responsibilities and how do you resolve disagreements on strategy?

PGA: The admin doesn't need two people and we both run very busy schedules, so we simply take turns covering it.

On strategy, we sit down, talk and debate. We're both strong-willed people with views and we loop in the wider India group - Gautam Narasimhan and Harsh Pais. It's a very active, vociferous debate. We argue and sometimes we disagree, but we both acknowledge that we bring very different lenses. She has a stellar reputation as a disputes lawyer and a King's Counsel; my experience is entirely transactional. We talk it out until we reach agreement and that debate has really shaped our strategy. When one of us faces an issue, even in our individual practice, the other is usually the sounding board.

PS: Two women at the top. Was that a deliberate structure?

PGA: Honestly, no. What the firm consciously wanted was a half-transactional, half-disputes lens, because the India market had grown and clients had different needs. Sheila and I happened to be at the right place at the right time. The gender was a happy by-product, which I'm personally very happy about, but it isn't what we were going for. We're also lucky that our younger generation of India partners includes women, as the practice always has.

PS: International firms are all ramping up their India practices. Why should an Indian corporate pick A&O Shearman?

PGA: I sometimes tell clients that they won't go wrong picking from a certain tier of firms, because they're all very good. But we do think we're unique, for two reasons.

First, we're not dabbling in India. We didn't set up our practice five years ago. We are one of a handful of firms that have committed to this market for decades. That shows in our partnership: how many partners are from India and how many have done India work at the firm for two to three decades. It shows in the next generation of partners we're bringing up. This is commitment, not a hobby. We didn't notice two years ago that India was booming and there was money to be made and we didn't pivot to India because our strategy in other regions changed. We have always been present and we are slowly deepening.

Second, the depth of our verticals. Gautam's market-leading leveraged finance practice, Sheila as a King's Counsel covering India, me in capital markets, Harsh on M&A, Rishi Hindocha in restructuring. Every key vertical is represented, so we can truly walk with the client. You don't have to switch firms every time you have an issue. We're not here in a transactional sense. We're here to grow a relationship and walk with you right up to the boardroom.

Those are the two key reasons. Of course, individually we're all very skilled lawyers, but if you ask me, those are the two biggest reasons why a client should choose us.

PS: Are there plans to open an office in India?

PGA: Not at present. It's a very valuable ecosystem for us and we're happy with how it works. We'll always keep an eye out and talk to clients on the ground, but it would ultimately be a client-led decision. Unless we hear that we need to be there for clients and the business, we wouldn't want to disrupt what we have strategically.

PS: You've spent more than two decades advising on international debt and equity offerings and IPOs. How has India-related capital markets work evolved?

PGA: The obvious one is volume. When I started, you did maybe two big IPOs a year - three if you were lucky - and a couple of GDR offerings, which no one does anymore.

I was recently taking stock because it's been such a busy period and I need to sort out leave allocations with Diwali and Christmas coming up. I realised that between July and September alone, we completed four IPOs, filed seven documents, did three debt deals and two QIPs. That would have been unheard of 20 years ago, even 10 years ago.

The second is the sophistication of clients. They run entire in-house treasury and strategy teams that assess whether they need debt, equity, hybrids, a QIP, a follow-on public offering, a sale by selling shareholders or a block trade. That constant analysis of capital raising, at that level of sophistication, was not there 10 to 12 years ago.

Many of these companies now have people who worked abroad and came back. The same goes for in-house counsel: many GCs have worked overseas and best practices flow both ways. Many companies are now absolutely comparable to the best in class. As a practitioner, it has been a joy to watch that ecosystem grow.

PS: What developments in India's regulatory framework would make cross-border capital raising more efficient?

PGA: India's regulations change every six months, whether it's the labour codes or, most relevant to us, the overhaul of the entire ECB framework, which has genuinely contributed to ease of doing business. In the last few years, the framework has been very responsive and adaptive to market needs, from the ECB changes to the FCNR window that just came, which many companies took advantage of to raise funds overseas.

I can't think of one specific thing we need. But I hope that DNA remains. It's one of the things I love about Singapore too: it reads between the lines and moves ahead, rather than just reacting. I see that at the India end as well. When that ecosystem exists, business thrives.

PS: What would you tell a young Indian woman lawyer who wants to be part of an international practice?

PGA: I feel really old answering this; people younger than me should be doing it! Male or female, invest in yourself and your skills. Too often we get caught up in whether we're in the right practice area or city, when we'll make partner, when the next title comes. With the benefit of two decades, I genuinely feel those things follow your investment in your skills and your practice.

Keep it about the clients and your skills. That's easier said than done, because we all live in our heads to an extent. But if you build your ecosystem, show up and do the work, the rest becomes clearer on its own.

PS: You've written two novels over the course of a demanding career; the second released this week. Where did the desire to write come from and how do you find the time?

PGA: I've always wanted to write. As a kid, I wrote short stories and little essays. I come from a family of keen readers and my dad writes too: tourism articles for newspapers, short stories, even fiction in Malayalam that won prizes back in the day. When I told my parents at about 25 that I'd started work on my first novel, they just said, okay, you do you. It was never dramatic.

Someone once asked me why I write and I said it's because it's easier than not writing. It's my de-stressor, my me-time. Transactional law is very interactive and collaborative; we're always in rooms, on calls, negotiating. Writing is the absolute opposite. On weekends, I sit in my study with my dog and put my head down. It's the counterbalance in my personality.

As for time, you make it for the things you love, whether it's your work, your hobby or your family.

PS: Tell us about the new book.

PGA: It's called Good Family. My first book had two male protagonists; this time, the protagonists are female. It follows three generations of a family: a grandmother, her two daughters and her granddaughter.

Structurally, it's close to me. It's about a family that moves from Kerala and settles in Delhi, which is my family's history. That's where the autobiographical part ends. It runs from the early 1970s to the 2000s, through the Emergency. I don't want to give any spoilers, so please read it.

PS: How do legal practice and creative writing influence each other?

PGA: I think lawyers make naturally good writers. We are all obsessive about detail. People say you shouldn't edit until you've finished writing. I've tried for years, but inconsistencies really irk me and I blame the day job for that.

Most lawyers I know are well-read, well-travelled and keen observers of life. As you get more senior, you practise nuance and reading between the lines in boardrooms and negotiations. You realise that what is not being said is as important as what is. Writers deploy the same skills.

When I put on the writing hat, I'm basically a people-watcher. I like jogging outdoors and my husband jokes that I just like jogging slowly past people so I can overhear their conversations!