You are a management consultant for a 30-year old partner in a large law firm. In a meeting, your client says: "According to an article in the New York Times, 57 percent of large law firms have a mandatory retirement age for partners in the firm. Before they retire, partners are paid directly for the work that they do, and, as owners, they are entitled to a share of the profits of the firm. Once they retire, partners do not receive either form of compensation. In light of this, I think we should eliminate mandatory retirement in order to gain a ‘competitive advantage’ in attracting high-quality lawyers to work for our firm. Of course, you are the expert."

The firm should eliminate mandatory retirement clause as it would be beneficial for the firm to gain competitive advantage over its competitors.

What is competitive advantage?

A competitive advantage refers to the phenomenon that allows the firm to perform better than its rivals in the market. The competitive advantage helps the firm to attract more customers and achieve a competitive position in the market.

In the given case, the lawyers' retiring age is fixed. This would make the firm loose its experienced partners. If the firm eliminates the clause of mandatory retirement, it can have a team of experienced and most capable lawyers.

This could help the firm to gain a competitive advantage and help to achieve a bigger market share.

Hence, as a management consultant, I would suggest that the clause should be eliminated to achieve an economically dominant position.

Learn more about competitive advantage here:

https://brainly.com/question/5647002