Key takeaways:

• • • Structural change in firms 鈥� The traditional law firm pyramid, in which junior lawyers perform high-volume work at billable rates, is losing its foundation as AI compresses tasks that once took hours and clients increasingly bring more work in-house.

    • Finding new ways to train 鈥� AI-powered simulations are emerging as a concrete answer to the associate training problem, allowing new lawyers to build courtroom skills faster and fail safely behind closed doors.

    • The associate role isn’t dying, it’s being redefined 鈥� Those law firms that figure out the right mix of legal training, technological fluency, and management skills will have a significant edge over those that are still debating it.

NEW YORK 鈥斅燨n more than one occasion, I have written seriously and at length about the death of the billable hour. I’ve argued that alternative fee arrangements (AFAs) are the future, that the economic logic of hourly billing is irreconcilable with AI-driven productivity gains, and that the industry needs to prepare for a fundamentally different pricing model. I meant every word. I still do.

Yet, at last week鈥檚 one attendee pointed out they鈥檝e been hearing about the death of billable hour since the 1990s. At this point, it’s less a prediction and more of a tradition. Indeed, Matthew Kohel, a partner at Saul Ewing, said despite the legal press coverage connecting AI to the billable hour’s demise that narrative is now entering its third or fourth decade. And Kohel said his firm simply isn’t seeing meaningful client-driven movement toward AFAs.

So let鈥檚 be honest: the billable hour is not dead, and in fact, it may not be even close to dead.

However, if you’re looking for something that is facing a genuine existential reckoning 鈥� something the legal industry whispered about in the early days of generative AI (GenAI) and is now discussing openly 鈥� Legalweek 2026 may have found it. It turns out the billable hour was never the thing in danger, rather it鈥檚 the person billing the hours.

It’s the associate.

The question nobody wanted to ask out loud

The future of the junior lawyer surfaced in virtually every breakout session across the three-days event, and while it may not be the point of inception for the question, it was certainly the moment this idea graduated from a half-whispered aside to main-stage conversation.

Moreover, the problem has grown more urgent since its inception in the early GenAI days, when the question was simply whether a firm would need fewer associates. Now, that question hasn’t gone away, but it’s been joined by harder ones concerning training, hiring, and legal and technical skills. For example, what if AI is already better than a junior associate at some of the tasks that defined the role in the past? And what happens if someone says it out loud?

Someone said it out loud.

If you’re looking for something that is facing a genuine existential reckoning, Legalweek 2026 may have found it. It turns out the billable hour was never the thing in danger, rather it鈥檚 the person billing the hours.聽It’s the associate.

During a panel on Measuring What Matters, the conversation turned to client trust. Clients want to know: How can you be sure AI will catch everything? How do you trust it to find what matters across 5,000 pages of documents?

The response from the panel was direct, and it landed like a brick in the room: it’s 5,000 pages, and someone was reading those five thousand pages. That someone is an associate. If that associate 鈥� who, more often than not, is one of the least experienced lawyers in the building 鈥� is the one reading all those pages, why would you trust them to do it better than a machine?

While that question hung in the air during the panel, it does deserve to sit with you for a moment afterward. Because embedded in it is the uncomfortable arithmetic that drives the entire associate question. The traditional law firm pyramid is built on a base of junior lawyers performing high-volume, lower-complexity work such as document review, due diligence, first-pass research, and doing so at rates that generate revenue while the activity is simultaneously (in theory) training the next generation of partners. If AI can do that base-layer work faster, cheaper, and with accuracy that one panelist described as “beyond very good,” then the pyramid doesn’t just shrink. It loses its foundation.

Barclay Blair, Senior Managing Director of AI Innovation at DLA Piper, noted that tasks like due diligence on some types of financial contracts are already being compressed to two hours, down from 15 to 20 鈥� with zero hours being a realistic possibility in the near future.

Further, as one attendee observed, clients increasingly are adopting AI internally, and they’re bringing work in-house that was previously sent to outside counsel. Clearly, the work that trained generations of associates isn’t just being automated 鈥� in some cases, it’s leaving the firm entirely.

Fewer reps, greater weight

Yet here is where it would be easy (and wrong) to write the doom-and-gloom version of the future, in which AI replaces associates, the pipeline collapses, nobody knows how to train lawyers anymore, civilization crumbles, etc. It’s a clean narrative, but it’s also not what Legalweek panels actually said.

Because alongside the anxiety, something else was happening. People were building answers.

In another panel, Developing the Future Lawyer, panelists spent an hour in the weeds of what associate training actually looks like when the old model breaks down 鈥� and the conversation was far more concrete than you might expect.

Panelist spent an hour in the weeds of what associate training actually looks like when the old model breaks down 鈥� and the conversation was far more concrete than you might expect.

Panelist Abdi Shayesteh, Founder and CEO of AltaClaro, laid out the core problem with precision, noting that there’s a growing gap in critical thinking among associates. Templates getting copy-pasted without relevance analysis, and there is a lack of knowing what you don’t know. And the traditional training methods such as videos, lectures, and passive learning, don’t fix it. Indeed, those outdated models may be making it worse. Shayesteh鈥檚 analogy was blunt: You don鈥檛 learn to swim by watching videos 鈥� you need to jump into the deep end.

His solution is AI-powered simulations. Not hypothetical ones, but working deposition simulations available today, with real-time AI feedback, in which associates can practice cross-examination, deal with opposing counsel objections, and build the muscle memory that used to require years of live experience.

Kate Orr, Managing Director of Practice Innovation at Orrick, picked up the thread with two observations that reframed the stakes. First, AI simulations allow associates to fail behind closed doors, a radical improvement over the old model, in which blowing it had real consequences because failure often happened directly in front of the partners Second, the tool isn’t just for juniors. Even experienced lawyers are using simulations to test different approaches, tweak personas, and sharpen arguments. Orrick’s own Supreme Court team had a lawyer use AI to review a draft brief and identify paragraphs that could be tighter.

Todd Heffner, Partner at Smith, Gambrell & Russell, said the real question isn’t whether associates will use AI, but rather whether it gets them to lead at trial in year 10 instead of year 20. Right now, most associates are lucky to see the inside of a courtroom in their first seven years, and even then, they spend most of their time back in the hotel prepping for the more experienced attorneys instead of arguing themselves. If simulations can compress that learning curve, the associate’s career doesn’t disappear, rather, it gets accelerated.

The dinosaur that adapted

During the Measuring What Matters panel, Mitchell Kaplan, Managing Director of Zarwin Baum, introduced himself with a memorable bit of self-deprecation: He’s a dinosaur 鈥� but one, he clarified, who understands how AI can revolutionize what he does.

Kaplan’s perspective threaded through both days of programming like a quiet counterweight to the anxiety. He’d seen this before 鈥� not AI specifically, but the fear of it. He watched the legal industry transition from physical libraries to digital research tools, and he watched attorneys adapt. And his message was consistent: the work changes, but the need for lawyers doesn’t disappear. Associates may be taking shortcuts, but they still need to read, still need to review, and still need to think.

They’re developing differently than his generation did, Kaplan said, but it鈥檚 the same way every generation develops differently from the one before it. And different doesn’t mean wrong.

The work changes, but the need for lawyers doesn’t disappear. Associates may be taking shortcuts, but they still need to read, still need to review, and still need to think.

It’s a perspective that found an unexpected echo in the Enterprise Alignment panel. Mark Brennan, a partner at Hogan Lovells, relayed a comment he heard at a previous AI conference: The next generation of entry-level jobs will be managers 鈥� because they’ll be managing agents and other tech tools. Brennan admitted he didn’t have all the answers on what that means for legal training, but the implication was clear. The associate role isn’t dying, instead, it’s being redefined. And the firms that figure out what that redefined role looks like, what mix of legal training, technological fluency, critical thinking, and management skills it requires, will have a significant advantage over those firms that are still debating it.

Another panelist, Andrew Medeiros, Managing Director of Innovation at Troutman Pepper Locke, made a prediction that felt like the sharpest version of this idea. He said that at some point, new lawyers are going to be doing simulated matters as a standard part of the development process. Eventually, there’s going to be a generation that walks in as new attorneys and finds themselves litigating right away.

That’s not the death of the associate. Rather, that’s the beginning of a different kind of associate 鈥� one who arrives at the courtroom sooner, with different preparation, carrying different tools.

The billable hour, for all the prophecies, refuses to die. The associate, it turns out, has no intention of dying either 鈥� just evolving. Mitchell Kaplan called himself a dinosaur 鈥� but Legalweek was full of dinosaurs, and every one of them was adapting and in that adaptation, thriving. The harder question is whether the firms that forged them will be brave enough to follow.

You can find more of聽our coverage of Legalweek events听丑别谤别

Key takeaways:

• • • LFFI dip driven by slowing demand 鈥� The small dip in the LFFI was driven almost entirely by decelerating demand growth, which slowed to a still-strong 3.3% in Q4.

• • • Changing of the guard聽鈥� M&A work slammed on the brakes while counter-cyclical practices surged, with bankruptcy re-emerging as a major engine of demand growth 鈥� a shift that often signals broader economic turbulence ahead.

    • Rate increases, client pressure builds聽鈥� Firms fielded strong rates at the beginning of 2025, which helped power profits; however, with client budgets stretched, firms must demonstrate value to justify their higher rates.

Law firms ended 2025 in an enviable position, even as the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 Law Firm Financial Index (LFFI) score dipped 2 points to 61 for the fourth quarter of 2025, snapping a yearlong upward streak as demand growth slowed from its Q3 pace. The final quarter of 2025 delivered one of the strongest finishes in recent memory, with profits surging and margins cresting above 40%. Yet even as the champagne flows, the winds may already have begun to shift.

Jump to 鈫�

Q4 2025 Law Firm Financial Index

The LFFI’s slight decline was driven almost entirely by decelerating demand growth, which slowed to a still strong 3.3% in Q4 from 3.9% in Q3. More telling than this headline figure, however, was a quieter changing of the guard beneath the surface.

Transactional practices began cooling from their Q3 peaks, with M&A work falling 5 percentage points from its prior pace. Filling the void, bankruptcy work surged in Q4, particularly in December, as counter-cyclical practices re-emerged as the dominant engine of demand growth. If this signals a greater shift for the United States economy, as it often does, law firms may find something far more important than just their demand threatened 鈥� their rates could come under pressure.

The rate question

Rate increases have historically been the primary power behind law firm finances, and 2025 proved no exception. Firms broke through a two-decade-old threshold, with the average firm seeing 7% growth in worked rates. Since the end of 2022, every 1% increase in worked rate growth has correlated to about a 0.9 percentage point increase in profits.

Where things may become less comfortable is the increasing potential for client pushback. Legal services buyers’ budgets are under more pressure than ever, and 2026’s new rate increases 鈥� expected to be as strong or stronger than 2025’s 鈥� are already in effect. If the legal industry continues raising rates at this pace without delivering corresponding increases value 鈥� and communicating that value to clients 鈥� they may see clients shift work to cheaper firms or move more legal work in-house entirely.

We’ve seen this movie before, in 2008 immediately after the global financial crisis, and the result was a stagnant decade of law firm growth.

Preparing for changing weather ahead

The good news is that none of this spell immediate trouble, and there is more than enough time for firms to avoid the worst of the long-term threats. A brighter future, one in which firms use advanced AI tools to deliver more value per hour and thus strengthen their surging rates even further, is just as possible.

By effectively locking in their revenue before the winds shifted and practicing disciplined expense management, law firms have bought themselves some breathing room to invest in technology and talent, at least in the short term.

For law firm leaders, this is a moment for preparation, not for a victory lap. The firms best positioned for whatever weather lies ahead will be those that solidify their efficiency gains and demonstrate value now, ensuring that when the next wind shift comes, they’re positioned not just to survive, but to thrive.

You can download

a full copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute’s “Q4 2025 Law Firm Financial Index” by filling out the form below:

Key findings:

• • • Expense growth is accelerating 鈥� Both direct and overhead costs are rising faster than in Q1, posing a potential risk if revenue growth slows.

    • Law firms are adapting strategically 鈥� With Am Law 100 firms leveraging pricing power over headcount expansion, other firm segments are investing in technology and smarter resourcing to manage costs.

    • Overhead spending trends are shifting 鈥� Increased investment in tech and benefits, and a decline in occupancy costs are signaling a move toward hybrid work and operational efficiency.

The story of 2025 has been the ongoing trade war, which has driven uncertainty around global economic and policy matters. Coupled with rising geopolitical instability, the situation has left economists and business leaders holding their breath. Yet the US legal market鈥檚 second quarter was unexpectedly calm 鈥� and surprisingly prosperous, according to the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 Law Firm Financial Index for Q2, which rose as more clients turned to their outside counsel for guidance.

This rise can be attributed to an increase in legal demand of 1.6% and robust worked rate growth of 7.4%. Together these gains offset a 1.3% productivity decline. While these topline gains are encouraging, law firm leaders should remain vigilant on the expense side.

Both direct and overhead expenses saw a modest increase in growth this quarter compared to Q1, rising to 7.9% and 6.6% respectively, continuing a trend underway since the second half of 2024. Revenue growth is still outpacing expense growth, keeping profits strong, but any slowdown in revenue could leave firms in a lurch, just like we saw in 2022.

After the robust level of demand and rate growth of the first half of 2025, an increase in spending might have been expected heading into the rest of the year, as law firms continue to chase the opportunities in front of them. However, the broader instability shows no signs of easing, suggesting continued volatility across the global market that will eventually impact firms.

This may leave firms stuck between a rock and a hard place 鈥� the strength of the legal market offers opportunities for growth; however an increase in spending in that push for growth could leave firms overexposed to a slowdown if clients may become reluctant to spend. This means firms should consider ways of slowing expense growth in other areas, in order to be able to continue to invest in their growth strategies.

Breaking down direct expense growth

When looking at how firms can limit their direct expense growth, one option that should be considered is to adopt the same strategy observed among Am Law 100 firms since 2023. While direct expense growth is at 7.9% for the market, the Am Law 100 firms saw a slower growth rate at 6.9% as these firms have limited their headcount growth.

Reducing hiring classes and stricter performance management is one of the easiest ways to slow direct expense growth, but it has opportunity costs. As previously mentioned, legal demand remains strong so law firm leaders will not want to miss out on the chance to increase their market share. Indeed, the Am Law Second Hundred and Midsize firms have seen much greater success by seeking to expand their market share in recent years.

Other options such as reducing compensation packages or cutting benefits are unlikely to be successful solutions for firms because those solutions may see talented individuals leave and dampen firm morale amid an ongoing talent war. With very little wiggle room on the direct expenses to maneuver, one way to slow expense growth will rely on leveraging process improvements, technology, and smarter resourcing 鈥� not pay cuts.

Changing overhead expense trends

Over the past three years, the proportion of firms鈥� overhead expenses has seen shifts as well, indicating a change in priorities. The proportion going to occupancy and office expenses has been trending downwards, while technology and benefits expenses have been on the rise.

Rising technology spend will not surprise firm leaders; it鈥檚 widely seen as essential to long-term efficiency and profit margins. In fact, many law firms have shown a willingness to invest, especially in AI driven tools. Certainly, leadership will want to see a return on these investments 鈥� and if results are not produced or are not at the levels expected, firms could be tempted to cut their losses and scale down investment into technology, especially in the event of an economic downturn. Given the arms race brewing around these tools, however, such pullback may reduce the long-term competitiveness of the firm.

Occupancy鈥檚 share of overhead expenses has decreased by 1.9 percentage points in recent years, suggesting that even while firms pushed for a full return to the office, commercial real estate costs have not kept up with revenue growth. With long鈥憈erm office leases up for renewal and negotiation, leaders may again embrace a shift toward broader hybrid work to further increase those savings.

Support staff compensation has remained at almost one-third of all overhead expenses, maintaining essentially the same proportion of overhead expenses over the last three years. That does not tell us the full story, however, as support staff covers several different functions for law firms and the growth and the changes in those areas tell us about what business functions firms are prioritizing.

The 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 Staffing Ratio Survey indicates that the growth of full-time equivalent (FTE) support staff per lawyer mirrors broader overhead trends 鈥� one which emphasizes technology, business development, and management roles. Firms are focusing on improving internal business processes to better support lawyers, with the aim of enhancing efficiency and quality across their operations. At the same time, functions that are declining are in more manual-task roles such as word processing and research, signaling that technology investments have been delivering tangible results to the bottom line. This shift is particularly significant because word processing staff constitute the largest share of support staff at 28%, down from 36% in 2016.

What is next for the legal market?

Despite 鈥� and partly because of 鈥� a turbulent economy, the US legal market remains resilient, posting another quarter of continued demand growth and robust worked rate increases. Yet the memory of rapid expense inflation is fresh for law firm leaders, and with ongoing trade tensions and geopolitical uncertainty, the threat is real.

As firms choose expense strategies, they must balance supporting short-term opportunities with long鈥憈erm sustainability. Actions such as cutting headcount can lift near鈥憈erm margins but risks leaving firms under鈥憆esourced when growth returns, given the time required to ramp up headcount. Data suggests that firms are willing to invest in process and productivity improvements, which may increase near鈥憈erm pain to secure longer鈥憈erm gains.

In the second half of 2025, leadership decisions made amid volatility will be pivotal. Firms that pair disciplined cost control with smart, forward-looking investment will be best positioned not only to weather the pending storm but to accelerate when conditions improve.

You can get a fully copy of the聽成人VR视频庐 Institute鈥檚 Law Firm Financial Index聽for the second quarter of 2025 here

Key insights:

• • • Seeking cultural clarity 鈥� The satisfaction of lawyers in a firm is not dependent on whether the firm is traditional or innovative, but rather on the clarity and consistency of the firm’s culture across the organization.

    • Achieving strategic alignment 鈥� A firm’s strategy is only effective if it is clearly understood and embraced by its lawyers. This alignment helps avoid the risk of the firm trying to be everything to everyone and ultimately being known for nothing.

    • Ensuring compensation alignment 鈥� Compensation models should align with the firm’s culture and strategy to reinforce desired behaviors. Misalignment can erode trust and engagement, especially in larger law firms.

In a legal market defined by rapid change and rising expectations, law firms are rethinking what it takes to attract and retain top talent. A new research report from the 成人VR视频 Institute, Law Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement, offers a clear takeaway: Law firms that align their culture, strategy, and compensation are better positioned to engage lawyers, reduce attrition, and drive long-term performance.

Culture: Clarity over type

The research shows that lawyer satisfaction doesn鈥檛 hinge on whether a firm is traditional or innovative, high-intensity or work-life balanced. Instead, what matters most is cultural clarity 鈥� a shared understanding of what the firm stands for and how that shows up in day-to-day decisions.

The report identifies four common cultural footprints, shaped by two key dimensions: work environment and innovation approach:

• • • Traditional / Work-Life Balance 鈥� Conservative, short-term focused, and opportunistic
    • Innovative / Work-Life Balance 鈥� Collegial, collaborative, and mission-driven
    • Traditional / High-Intensity 鈥� Competitive, performance-driven, and profit-focused
    • Innovative / High-Intensity 鈥� Strategic, formal, and experimental

Satisfaction levels are consistent across all four. The differentiator? Whether lawyers experience the culture consistently across the firm.

Law firm leaders must take deliberate steps to understand their firm鈥檚 culture and how it might support 鈥� or hinder 鈥� long-term strategic goals. This effort involves evaluating whether internal values, behaviors, and norms align with the brand the firm aims to project externally. Structured tools, such as cultural mapping and alignment assessments, can help bring clarity to these elements, which often feel intangible but have a direct impact on client experience, talent retention, and market positioning.

Strategy: From vision to execution

A firm鈥檚 strategy is only as strong as its ability to execute it, and that execution depends on cultural alignment. When lawyers understand and embrace their firm鈥檚 strategic direction, they become its most effective advocates 鈥� both internally and in the market.

Without that alignment, firms risk falling into the trap of trying to be everything to everyone 鈥� and ultimately being known for nothing in particular.

Defining a clear strategic focus and reinforcing it consistently across the firm is essential to avoiding dilution and driving market differentiation.

Compensation: The reinforcer of culture and strategy

Compensation is more than a financial lever 鈥� it鈥檚 a signal of what the firm truly values. Yet, 4-in-10 stand-out lawyers say their firm鈥檚 compensation model is only moderately aligned or is in fact poorly aligned with the firm鈥檚 culture and strategy.

This misalignment can erode trust and engagement, especially in larger firms where complexity increases and consistency becomes harder to maintain. Firms that align all three 鈥� culture, strategy, and compensation 鈥� see a 66% increase in lawyer satisfaction and a significant drop in flight risk, according to our research.

From insight to action

To move from intention to impact, firm leaders should ask themselves several questions, including:

• • • 鈥淎re our lawyers aligned on what makes us different?鈥�
    • 鈥淚s our compensation model reinforcing the behaviors we want to see?鈥�
    • 鈥淚s our strategy clearly understood and consistently communicated?鈥�

These questions aren鈥檛 just reflective 鈥� they鈥檙e foundational to building a law firm in which talent thrives.

The bottom line: Alignment isn鈥檛 a nice-to-have 鈥� it鈥檚 a competitive advantage. Firms that bring culture, strategy, and compensation into sync don鈥檛 just retain talent, they unlock its full potential.

You can download the full report, Law Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement, from the 成人VR视频 Institute here.

Key insights:

• • • Law firms need to align their strategy with their culture 鈥� To achieve sustainable long-term growth, law firms need to align their strategic goals with their culture.

    • Make a values and behaviors assessment 鈥� Establishing a foundational understanding of the values and behaviors of partners, non-partner attorneys, and other employees through a full assessment is essential.

    • Consensus over unanimity 鈥� The goal is to achieve consensus on the firm’s values rather than complete unanimity, ensuring that leadership and employees generally understand and agree on what those values聽comprise.

Culture eats strategy for breakfast, goes a popular business maxim that鈥檚 variously attributed to Peter Drucker or Giga Information Group. As discussed previously, consistently achieving strategic goals requires a cohesive firm culture that aligns with and supports the firm鈥檚 growth initiatives. Often having a culture that鈥檚 poised for growth can trump having a top-flight strategy that鈥檚 tied to a culture that makes achieving the strategy a near-impossibility.

How can we align everyone to move in the same direction with shared enthusiasm and urgency? For some law firm leaders, culture is an abstract, intangible concept. They may question its relevance compared to hard metrics like profits per partner, revenue-per-lawyer, and leverage metrics.

However, make no mistake about it: culture is both measurable and just as essential to achieving sustainable long-term growth as any financial or performance metric 鈥� and analyzing culture and turning its development into actionable steps requires the right mindset as much as it requires the right tools.

Conducting an assessment

The first imperative for law firm leaders looking to cultivate a culture of growth is a willingness to take a hard, unbiased, and critical view of their own firm. Don鈥檛 assume that just because a firm is successful in terms of its finances, talent acquisition and retention, book of business, or long-standing client relationships that its culture is fully aligned with its mission. As we discussed in the first part of this blog series, culture may be more important than strategy in determining the long-term success of a firm; yet cultural clashes may be subtle and difficult to discern.

Every firm has a mission and strategies for carrying out the mission. The bigger question is whether everyone in the firm 鈥� from leadership down through the ranks 鈥� is committed to a unified set of core, firm-wide values and is willing to hold each other accountable to those standards. Only a thorough analysis of a firm culture can reveal that.

First, establish a foundational understanding of the values and behaviors of partners, non-partner attorneys, and other employees through a full assessment of those values and behaviors. While many tools are available, they are often designed for the broader business world and lack specificity and applicability for law firms.

Every firm has a mission and strategies for carrying out the mission. The bigger question is whether everyone in the firm is committed to a unified set of core, firm-wide values.

The process doesn鈥檛 need to be complicated, but it does need to be specific enough to yield the right insights.

Some of the questions that we use in our surveys seem basic. For example, we鈥檒l say, Pick 10 words that you would use to describe the current state of the values of the firm; or Pick 10 words that best describe your personal values and beliefs. However, even this simple structure can reveal much about whether the culture of the firm is aligned with the values of its leadership and employees.

Surveys such as these also aim to capture the current values and behaviors within the firm and identify which ones need to evolve for future success. Comparing these insights reveals alignment or gaps. If future values and behaviors align with the present, it indicates strong cohesion and a shared drive to succeed; however, if discrepancies exist, firms will need to implement mechanisms to reconcile differences, resolve contradictions, and reinforce the values that will propel the firm forward.

Moving toward the right culture

Here are some clear steps to take when trying to foster the right firm culture:

Cover the entire firm 鈥� In addition to exploring the personal and professional values of partners, senior partners, practice group leaders, executive committee members, and managing partners, it鈥檚 also prudent to include associates and staff, as their contributions significantly influence firm culture.

Seek consensus not unanimity 鈥� There will never be 100% agreement on values with members of any organization. The goal is to achieve consensus. To achieve this, ask whether leadership and employees in the firm generally understand and agree on what the firm鈥檚 values are and whether they feel that the firm lives out those values in its policies and operations.

Look for variability between groups 鈥� If values don鈥檛 align between managing partners and associates, or practice group heads and their teams, firm leaders need to determine if their growth strategy can bridge these conflicting values or if a compromise strategy is necessary.

Go beyond values 鈥� Effective culture is more than just having common values. There are many firms in which people broadly share the same values but remain siloed from each other. Lack of interaction across a firm can leave untapped opportunities for collaboration, cross-selling, and pursuing new avenues for growth.

Watch for changes in culture 鈥� Culture is dynamic and constantly evolving. Ask whether the values and behaviors of the firm鈥檚 influential partners and leaders evolved over the years or whether the values and expectations of attorneys throughout the firm have changed.

Values are crucial because they influence the behaviors of firm leaders, attorneys, and staff. These behaviors are observed by clients, external lawyers, judges, and potential hires. To succeed in today’s competitive environment, it’s essential for everyone within a firm to align with the firm鈥檚 shared values, as this alignment paves the way for accountability and growth.

Of course, every firm is different, and every group of lawyers within a firm is different 鈥� and the culture that each firm will need to achieve sustainable long-term success is different. It鈥檚 far from one-size-fits-all; but therein lies the challenge and opportunity that each firm faces: to identify and cultivate the unique culture that will allow the firm and its lawyers to perform at their very best and to thrive together.

You can find out more about law firm culture in a new 成人VR视频 Institute report, Law Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement 鈥� based on the latest research from the Institute鈥檚 2025 Stellar Performance / 2025 Stand-out Lawyers Survey 鈥� here

Key insights:

• • • Leveraging culture for success 鈥� A well-defined strategy alone cannot guarantee law firm success; firms need to pay close attention to crafting a firm culture that reflects the firm鈥檚 values, goals, and practices.

    • Alignment of culture and strategy 鈥� A law firm’s culture must align with its mission and the values set by its leadership and attorneys to be able to execute a strategy successfully.

    • Impact of cultural misalignment 鈥� Cultural misalignment can lead to unintentional friction and disrupt a firm’s success, even if the firm has a bold and innovative strategy.

As a robust 2024 for many law firms has turned into a more uneven, unpredictable 2025, the question increasingly turns from whether firms will be as successful this year in finding ways to achieve more sustainable growth. Potentially transformative disruptions also loom, including the uncertainty of how generative AI (GenAI) will continue to impact the legal industry and the announcement earlier this year that KPMG has won approval to become the first of the Big Four consulting firms to . And all this came after firms managed to first weather the pandemic and then the subsequent talent wars.

As firms scramble to map out new strategies, however, they may not even be looking at the right factors. Maybe they don鈥檛 need a better strategy, maybe they need a better culture that fits their strategy. Firm culture is not just a trendy buzzword 鈥� it鈥檚 a key strategic lever that can determine whether a firm is on track for sustainable success, or whether it will face struggles to keep up with more agile competitors and a rapidly evolving market.

I鈥檝e witnessed lack of cohesive culture derail many a strategic framework, merger, lateral acquisition of a practice group, geographic expansion plan, or succession roadmap.

The importance of culture

All firms will claim to have a strategy; yet executing a strategy successfully requires more than merely selecting the right direction. It requires operational excellence, and that happens most often and most effectively when a firm鈥檚 culture aligns with its mission as well as the values of its leadership and attorneys.

As firms scramble to map out new strategies, however, they may not even be looking at the right factors. Maybe they don鈥檛 need a better strategy, maybe they need a better culture that fits their strategy.

Firm culture comprises shared values, goals, attitudes, and practices that influence how an organization functions, according to the Harvard Business Review. This includes several attributes of the firm: for example, the operational norms the firm exhibits in getting things done on a daily basis. Also, the character or collective personality of the firm; and the cohesiveness of all the members of the firm acting in common towards mutually agreed-upon goals.

Having a strategy may matter less than having an effective culture that enables strategies to be more likely executed successfully. Where mismatches, clashes, or lack of alignment exist between a firm鈥檚 culture and its strategy, even the boldest, most innovative strategies can be rendered moot and powerless. For example, if a firm鈥檚 lawyers sense that what the firm leaders are saying does not align with the daily practices of how the firm operates or with the lawyer鈥檚 personal values, this misalignment produces a disruptive culture more prone to dissonance and discord than long-term success.

Managing culture clashes

Cultural clashes don鈥檛 necessarily mean conflict or hostility. Cultural misalignment can take on the form of unintentional or even unseen friction that can nevertheless grind the gears of seemingly otherwise successful firms. I worked with a major global law firm in which practice group leaders in one office, without realizing it, were often competing for business that the firm already held in another office. They simply weren鈥檛 communicating with each other. A simple re-alignment of firm values that expressed that each office was not in it for themselves but instead contributing to the success of the entire firm was all it took to unlock a culture of true growth.

While each firm鈥檚 culture is unique, firm cultures can often be classified as falling into one of several major buckets. Certainly, money is often one such bucket. There are firms that, at the end of the day, are simply focused on profit above all else, and that drives values and behaviors. Some firms are practice-driven and want to be market leaders in given specialties; and other firms are driven by innovation and the desire to be seen as being on the cutting edge.

Further, there are firms at which the culture values collaboration. Each member of the firm wants to feel that they are contributing to its success, and that they, in turn, feel that they are valued for it. Similarly, an increasing number of firms are built around the well-being of their lawyers as much when they鈥檙e working as when they鈥檙e away from work.

Having a strategy may matter less than having an effective culture that enables strategies to be more likely executed successfully.

In the end, it鈥檚 less important what a firm鈥檚 specific culture is, and more important the way by which the firm lives out its culture every day. In this way, culture becomes how a firm expresses its values and how closely those values align with the personal values of its attorneys as well as their expectations for the firm.

That drives not only the success of a firm鈥檚 strategy, as mentioned earlier, but also brings important new perspectives to help determine which strategies the firm ultimately pursues. Does a firm really want to open that new office in Denver? Is the firm better off growing organically or pursuing a merger? What are the avenues of growth that make the most sense for it 鈥� and for what it is as a firm?

The recent lies in something far more fundamental: firm culture.

A new 成人VR视频 Institute report, Law Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement 鈥� based on the latest research from the Institute鈥檚 2025 Stellar Performance / 2025 Stand-out Lawyers Survey 鈥� explored how top lawyers feel about the importance of firm culture, and how it can impact talent retention and productivity.

In our next installment, we will look at how a firm can determine what its culture will be, and how that impacts its strategies for talent, firm growth, and more.

You can find out more about the issues the legal industry faces around talent and culture here

Key insights:

• • • Firm culture as a catalyst 鈥� The culture of a law firm is a fundamental driver of growth and lawyer engagement, often more critical than strategy.

    • There are 4 cultural archetypes 鈥� The report identifies four distinct cultural archetypes in law firms: Traditional/High-Intensity, Innovative/Work-Life Balance, Innovative/High-Intensity, and Traditional/Work-Life Balance, each with unique strengths and challenges.

    • Disconnect exists with compensation alignment 鈥� There is a significant disconnect between firm values and compensation structures, which impacts lawyer retention and satisfaction. Aligning compensation with firm values can lead to higher satisfaction and positive behavioral changes.

In the competitive landscape of legal services, it鈥檚 not just about servicing prestigious clients or racking up billable hours that separate successful law firms from ones that struggle. According to new research from the 成人VR视频 Institute, the secret weapon lies in something far more fundamental: firm culture.

Jump to 鈫�

Law Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement

A new 成人VR视频 Institute report, Law Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement 鈥� based on the latest research from the Institute鈥檚 2025 Stellar Performance / Stand-out Lawyers Survey 鈥� reveals compelling insights into how law firm culture serves as both a catalyst for growth and a cornerstone of lawyer engagement. Based on responses from more than 2,200 client-nominated stand-out lawyers across 60 countries, this comprehensive study uncovers the critical relationship between organizational culture and firm performance.

Four distinct cultural footprints

While innumerable elements compose a law firm鈥檚 culture and numerous cultural types among law firms themselves, the report identifies four distinct cultural archetypes that define today’s legal landscape, each with their own unique strengths and challenges:

Traditional/High-Intensity 鈥� These law firms excel in strategic planning and quality client service. They also command premium fees through exceptional expertise and communication skills. However, they face increasing pressure from competitors that can offer similar services at lower costs or with enhanced technological capabilities.

Innovative/Work-Life Balance 鈥� These firms represent the ambitious disruptors of the legal world. They prioritize both innovation and employee well-being, drawing in clients through competitive pricing and attracting talent through collaborative work environments. These firms may, however, experience a challenge in ensuring their innovations translate into measurable efficiency gains and sustainable profitability.

Innovative/High-Intensity 鈥� These firms combine ambition with performance-driven cultures. While they rank highly across multiple client-valued attributes, these firms struggle with differentiation. In fact, less than 1% of their clients cite innovation as the primary reason that they chose the firm, despite the firm鈥檚 self-perception as an innovative leader.

Traditional/Work-Life Balance 鈥� These firms emphasize relationships and conservative approaches. They excel in professional rapport and client-value perception but may struggle with prestige and strategic agility in today鈥檚 rapidly changing market.

Lawyer engagement & compensation

The report鈥檚 findings also highlight three critical factors that drive lawyer engagement across all cultural types: long-term focus; collegiality; and cultural consistency. However, while the existence of these factors is key, what is perhaps even more critical is the consistency of how firm culture is expressed 鈥� with consistency proving particularly crucial for client relationships.

鈥淚f a firm’s lawyers aren’t all on the same page, the clients aren’t going to know what the firm stands for,鈥� creating risks for client retention and business development, the report notes.

The report also highlights an eye-opening finding on the disconnect between firm values and compensation structures. While 56% of stand-out lawyers said they considered their firms innovative, only 9% report that their compensation models reward innovation. Similarly, despite 70% viewing their firms as client-centric, merely 25% see client feedback incorporated into compensation decisions.

This misalignment carries serious consequences. Lawyers who perceive poor alignment between compensation and culture are at a substantially higher risk of leaving their current law firm, thus hurting the firm鈥檚 attorney retention efforts. And these dissatisfied lawyers also are significantly less likely to advocate for their firm as a good place to work, potentially hindering recruitment efforts. On the other hand, lawyers who report that their law firms are making changes to improve the alignment between compensation and culture, report 66% higher satisfaction scores when alignment improves.

What鈥檚 more, firms making compensation adjustments see real behavioral changes. Nearly half (48%) of lawyers who said their firms modified compensation models in the past three years report changing their behavior accordingly, focusing more on business development, collaboration, and profitability.

A blueprint for success

For law firm leaders seeking to strengthen their firm鈥檚 cultural foundation, the research suggests several actionable steps:

• • • Integrate culture into strategic planning at every level
    • Evaluate cultural impact on organizational structure and accountability processes
    • Establish dedicated processes for assessing culture and engagement
    • Conduct regular cultural reviews across all firm levels
    • Align compensation structures with stated firm values and priorities

The message is clear: In an increasingly competitive legal market, firms that invest in building strong, consistent cultures will outperform those that don鈥檛. Simply put, culture drives engagement, engagement drives performance, and performance drives sustainable growth.

As one stand-out lawyer noted about recent compensation changes at their firm: 鈥淐hanges in my compensation model have made me more focused. I now prioritize work that drives value and efficiency, ensuring that my efforts contribute to both the clients鈥� success and the firm鈥檚 objectives.鈥�

As the report explains 鈥� through detailed insights, case studies, and actionable strategies for building a law firm culture that drives success 鈥� those law firms that master this cultural alignment will be the ones that thrive in tomorrow鈥檚 legal landscape.

You can download

the complete 鈥淟aw Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement鈥� report by filling out the form below:

To explore this topic further, the 成人VR视频 Institute has published the 2025 Government Legal Department Report, which gathered the responses of 150 legal professionals from various government law departments and agencies at the federal, state, and municipal levels. Respondents included public defenders, prosecutors, attorneys general, district attorneys, and city attorneys, all of whom had been in their position for at least one year. The survey was conducted in March.

The results of the annual survey suggest that many of the chronic issues that have plagued government legal departments in the past continue to challenge the dedication and resourcefulness of government attorneys today. Nevertheless, 90% of the survey鈥檚 respondents said they felt their efforts over the past year have been successful, and 80% of agency representatives report being confident they have the tools and technology they need to do their jobs effectively.

Top challenges: Talent and budgets

Despite this high level of confidence in their work, government legal professionals at all levels report that they continue to struggle with staffing and budget issues. Attorneys also remain frustrated that the technological resources available to them are inferior to those in the private sector and even in other parts of the public sector.

Yet, when asked to name the biggest challenges facing their agency or department, three out of the top four responses were related to talent. Indeed, attracting and retaining top talent remains the most pressing challenge for government legal departments, followed by the difficulties of recruiting new talent and the loss of institutional knowledge due to retiring staff.

On the technology side, the bright spot in the report is that 42% of respondents said their government law agencies and departments saw an increase in tech investment over the past two years. Somewhat less encouraging is the fact that most government agencies are still working with outdated systems and are trying 鈥� but only partially succeeding 鈥� to upgrade their tech portfolio. In fact, the average agency wish list includes technology solutions to address matter and case management systems, document management and automation, legal research, evidence management, scheduling, discovery, contract compliance, and analytics and reporting.

As always, lean budgets and rising costs are the biggest barriers cited by respondents to the adoption of any new technology; and more than half of respondents also cited organizations鈥� highly bureaucratic approval processes as an additional obstacle.

Still, the report indicates that many agencies will loosen their purse strings and invest in new tech if the price, need, budget, and cost-effectiveness of the purchase are all aligned. Otherwise, approval for additional tech purchases remains frustratingly difficult to obtain.

Feeling the squeeze

In general, the report paints a picture of government legal departments that are valiantly trying to get their work done in an environment in which resources are scarce, workloads are increasing, and the volume, complexity, and variety of cases with which attorneys must deal are all on the rise.

Not surprisingly, these and other factors are contributing to a stressful work environment in which many attorneys say they are feeling squeezed from all sides.聽For example, more than half (51%) of survey respondents said they don鈥檛 have the time they need to adequately research novel or complex cases, and three-quarters (75%) expect their workload to increase over the next two years. Further exacerbating these issues is the fact that a majority said they do not expect to receive any additional resources over the next two years, and more than a third (37%) said they actually expect a decrease in the resources available to them.

The report also features an in-depth look at how government agencies are attempting to address their top challenges, including staffing issues and the ensuing gap in skills and resources.

To meet the talent challenge, many government agencies are being more flexible than their private-sector counterparts about offering hybrid work schedules.

As past surveys have confirmed, moving the needle on the talent issue is difficult primarily because of the pay disparity between the private and public sectors. However, more than a third (35%) of agencies said they had succeeded in adding attorney staff over the past two years.聽Still, more than half (57%) of respondents said they expect their staffing levels to stay the same over the next two years. Many also expressed concern about potential cuts in the future. And as a practical matter, maintaining current staffing levels basically means a continuation of the under-resourced, over-worked status quo.

To meet the talent challenge, many government agencies are being more flexible than their private-sector counterparts about offering hybrid work schedules. Federal agencies with more generous budgets also outsource more work than agencies and departments at the state or municipal levels. Indeed, 42% of respondents overall said their agencies use outside counsel at least once a year, and one in five said they rely on outside counsel every week.

Access to justice

The report also asked respondents to reflect on whether they think access to justice has increased or decreased over the past couple of years.

More than half (54%) of respondents said access to justice has been stable for the past two years, but the rest disagreed on whether access has increased or decreased. Those who thought access has increased cited support services and internet tools that have enabled more remote court attendance and legal research. Those in the decreased camp pointed to budget constraints, human rights violations, a growing disrespect for the law, and chronically over-worked attorneys who are unable to give cases the time and attention they deserve.

Government legal professionals also appear to be increasingly skeptical about the prospects for justice in the future. Last year, only 22% of federal and state attorneys thought access to justice would decline over the next two years, whereas 60% said they think that now.

An uncertain transition

The 2025 Government Legal Department Report comes at an uncertain time of transition for government attorneys, which is made more uncertain because a new administration means priorities are likely to change.

While this year鈥檚 report offers a snapshot of the challenges government legal professionals are currently facing and the strategies they are using to meet those challenges, it also makes clear that legal work at government agencies will not get more efficient or effective unless agencies are willing to invest more in new technology and talent, two areas that have gone under-resourced for a very long time.

You can download a full copy of the 2025 Government Legal Department Report here

This article is part of an ongoing series titled , by Maya Markovich and others in consultation with the 成人VR视频 Institute. This series aims to not only explore how justice technology fits within the modern legal system, but how technology companies themselves can scale as businesses while maintaining their access to justice mission.

Despite the historic domination of business law in the field of legal tech, the industry has begun to include mention of access to justice in discussions of tech application, entrepreneurship, and investment in solutions that aim to narrow the justice gap through technology. The opportunity is vast, with a total addressable market of 5 billion people worldwide.

Like any nascent sector, startups on the crest of this breaking wave of justice tech must work through this lack of market awareness and stakeholder inertia toward new models. Further, they also face a gauntlet of regulatory obstacles in an antiquated profession that is reluctant to release its monopoly on the market. These restrictions hamper progress toward universal access to justice. With the advent of widely available AI tools, however, technology can and should be part of the solution, and clearing roadblocks to scale innovation in access to justice is essential.

Legal advice and services in the US and the UK

Regulations differ across regions of course but often have the same effect of hampering progress and market growth. In the United States for example, the American Bar Association鈥檚 Model Rules of Professional Conduct 5.4 prohibits unauthorized practice of law, precluding non-licensed attorneys from delivering legal services. Each of the 50 states have adopted some form of Rule 5.4, but there is no bright line between providing legal information and legal advice, leaving those who help pro se litigants just making their best guess.

Given the scale of the access to justice gap, lawyers alone cannot narrow it. Not only will there never be enough lawyers in the US to represent everyone who needs help with their legal issue, it does not make economic sense for them to take on clients in certain types of matters. Pro bono and legal aid organizations are doing incredible work, but they are under-resourced and overwhelmed. As tech tools reach true viability in the legal sector, the profession needs clarity on what constitutes unauthorized practice of law and where and how technology can fit in to address the access issue.

In the United Kingdom, legal advice and services are similarly regulated. Legal advice is defined as guidance on legal rights and obligations, while reserved legal services include activities such as litigation and conveyancing (property transfer), which can only be performed by authorized professionals. This regulatory framework, while designed to ensure quality of legal services, also limits their accessibility to those who can afford them.

Clients often face overwhelming legal jargon and documentation, with no support for implementation or follow-up once a case concludes. This lack of transparency and continuity further alienates individuals seeking resolution to their legal problems. Moreover, costs can spiral without a clear ceiling, often leaving clients worse off than they were before they engaged legal services.

The UK and US have thriving legal tech communities, yet their impact on access to justice has been limited. Current first touchpoints for legal advice, such as UK.gov and Citizens Advice in the UK and local bar associations in the US, simply direct users to lawyers rather than offering self-serve solutions. Collaboration is essential: government bodies, courts, legal aid organizations, and lawyers should work with justice tech companies to harness the potential of generative AI (GenAI) to promote access to justice.

Exploratory frameworks like go beyond just providing innovators with access to regulators for Q&As and instead can provide a platform for joint learning, user testing, and feedback-gathering that will enable evidence-based policy changes. This approach not only fosters trust and understanding but also paves the way for AI-driven legal services to gain the recognition needed to transform the sector.

The knotty state of current regulations

Without regulatory change, direct to consumer justice tech companies cannot help the millions of Americans who need it 鈥� because they are stuck. Indeed, some of the challenges that justice tech companies face are very well laid out in in New York, especially around outdated rules of professional responsibility, which includes hurdles such as:

• • • vagueness of unauthorized practice of law statutes and revenue-sharing restrictions;
    • the inability to hire lawyers directly to provide legal advice;
    • the fact that, with very limited exception, only law firms can collect fees directly from clients seeking legal advice, otherwise it is 鈥渇ee splitting鈥� or revenue sharing, which is prohibited;
    • also, companies cannot hire paralegals with decades of experience to give any sort of public-facing advice to consumers unless they are supervised by a lawyer in a firm. What is allowed, however, is a lawyer with zero years of experience in an area of law supervising a paralegal within a firm structure to deliver the same advice; and
    • justice tech companies live under the constant threat of looming lawsuits for the unauthorized practice of law, which are threatened monthly and can easily bankrupt a startup.

These outmoded regulations governing unauthorized practice of law and revenue-sharing are standing in the way of ameliorating the access to justice crisis. And while their principles are incredibly important, there are no clear standards. Often unauthorized practice of law situations are subjective and oversee by legal bar groups that are often set up to protect lawyers鈥� market share, not the consumer.

The potential of GenAI

There is hope, however, in advanced technology. GenAI, particularly large language models (LLMs), holds much promise for the legal sector. By 2026, it is anticipated that 80% of legal cases will involve GenAI, significantly reducing time and resources. Further, GenAI has the potential to democratize access to justice by making legal advice affordable, accessible, and equitable. This scalability could provide exceptional value, far surpassing any incremental increases in the legal aid budget.

The UK and US stand at a similar crossroads, with the opportunity to lead the integration of GenAI into legal services and create a more accessible, affordable, and equitable legal system. The advent of Generative AI presents a chance to build upon alternative business models, transforming legal services in a way that benefits billions of consumers rather than merely increasing margins for law firms.

To effectively promote adoption and impact, however, regulators should transition from merely facilitating advocacy to instead establishing regulatory sandboxes. These sandboxes would allow consumers to safely experiment with new technologies, while innovators would gain visibility and a platform to build trust. Meanwhile, regulators could collect feedback and evidence from real users to guide their policy changes.

With the demand for legal access outstripping the supply of professionals, GenAI has the potential to transform justice tech by ensuring its applications are affordable, available at all hours, and equitable for every user. It is also critical to the future of the legal profession, which is desperately in need of new and creative ways to adapt to and survive in our changing world.

You can find out more about the impact of Justice Tech here

Many law firms have begun to restructure their talent pyramid even before the effects of generative AI (GenAI) have really even begun to be felt.

Most common among these shifts have been reductions in equity partner and associate tiers. At the same time, many law firms have been doing their best to keep up with the seemingly ever-increasing associate pay scales. And even those law firms that don鈥檛 feel the need to pay absolute top dollar to their associates (particularly the more junior ones) have still felt the need to increase associate salaries to some degree in order to recruit and retain talent.

And all of this has occurred in advance of what many industry observers and commentators consider to be an inevitable change in law firm talent models catalyzed by broader adoption of GenAI technologies with an even greater capability to perform legal-related tasks. Many believe this will lead to even greater contraction of the associate ranks within law firms.

The result of this has been generally fewer associates than in past generations who are used to commanding higher salaries. These factors have combined to create a rather vexing problem for corporate law departments.

W(h)ither the in-house talent?

Lawyers working in-house for corporate law departments are feeling the pressure. The average in-house lawyer repots working a 49-hour work week, yet 6 in 10 say they don鈥檛 have enough time to accomplish everything they would like to do. At the same time, most corporate law departments report but flat to declining budgets and attorney headcount.

Clearly, in-house legal teams need some relief. The question is, where will it come from?

At a recent event hosted in collaboration with the , several corporate general counsel (GCs) talked with me about the challenges they are having recruiting new in-house talent in today鈥檚 market. As noted above, law firms have been recruiting fewer associates on average. As a result, GCs who have followed the traditional recruiting path of looking for talent that is leaving law firms after gaining a few years of experience are finding a shrinking talent pool. And those lawyers who are looking to shift from a law firm to an in-house law department have very different salary expectations compared to those from even a few years ago, placing additional strain on already stretched corporate budgets.

At the same time, many in attendance at this event shared with me that the traditional argument in favor of better work-life balance by moving in-house is losing its effect. Many law firms have adopted more flexible working arrangements with some even allowing associates to into varying billable hour requirements. In-house lawyers, on the other hand, often find themselves working longer hours for comparatively less overall compensation. And today鈥檚 challenges may only increase in the future.

That鈥檚 chiefly because GenAI will almost inevitably work its way more deeply into lawyer workflows. If those who think this will mean smaller associate classes for law firms are proven correct, the recruitment challenges faced by GCs today will likely compound. The already tight recruiting market will shrink further; and fewer first-year associates in today鈥檚 class ultimately will mean fewer third- or fifth-year associates later.

So what can be done?

The likelihood that GCs will find themselves in an even trickier recruiting position in just a few years seems quite high. There are, however, a few potential solutions.

As an obvious starting point, GCs may have to take a close look at increasing the starting salaries for their law firm recruits. This option, however, will be a difficult path given the already high degree of pressure placed on law department budgets. Indeed, 20% of corporate C-Suite officers already say that continuing to cut costs is a high priority.

Another option many GCs are considering is changing who they recruit. Rather than waiting until an attorney has put in several years of service at a law firm and established a set salary expectation, many GCs are strongly considering more aggressive recruitment directly out of law school. Historically, this option was viewed less favorably because the sweat equity required to teach a junior lawyer how to actually be a lawyer (as opposed to simply how to think and act like one) carried high time and cost commitments. However, now with the advent of better technology to assist and train inexperienced lawyers, the sweat equity required may be considerably less. And that shifts the calculus more in favor of GCs who are looking to recruit greener lawyers.

The ability to leverage better technology could also help strengthen the case for why law firm lawyers would want to move in-house. Many law firms are engaged in a race to be second by choosing to wait for GenAI and other advanced technologies to become more proven before making a serious move to adopt. For GCs willing to be more aggressive, and frankly to do more to meet their C-Suites鈥� desires to be among the early adopters of AI, this presents an opportunity.

Law firms have been recruiting fewer associates on average; and as a result, GCs who have followed the traditional recruiting path of looking for talent that is leaving law firms after gaining a few years of experience are finding a shrinking talent pool.

In 2022, the 成人VR视频 Institute released a study looking at how law firms compete for talent and what makes attorneys want to stay at a firm. That study found those lawyers more likely to stay at their current firm cited factors such as the firm鈥檚 direction and strategy as well as the support they received from their IT teams. Interestingly, these factors often were cited more than simply the amount of money they made. Moreover, firms that were more likely to retain their attorneys also tended to be classified as innovators or early adopters on a technology adoption scale. Significantly, quality of work 鈥� meaning the perceived quality of the work the attorneys were assigned 鈥� was cited more than twice as often as a reason lawyers were likely to stay at their current firms or that they liked about where they currently worked.

For GCs, this presents an opportunity. One of the best early use cases for GenAI is its ability to absorb lower-value work. This is the type of work that can often be viewed as less engaging and stimulating by the lawyers that have to do it. As more of that work is handled by GenAI, in-house lawyers will have an increased capacity for more engaging, higher-level work.

Indeed, a move toward faster adoption of evolving technologies could give GCs several needed results: i) It will help them address team capacity and budget pressure; ii) it will create additional capacity for the in-house team without having to hire a large number of new lawyers; and iii) it could help create an environment in which the quality of the work lawyers get increases, even if the number of hours worked does not vary that much, which could certainly boost the attractiveness of the in-house role.

The future of talent recruitment for GCs promises to be challenging, and law firms do not appear poised to make it any easier. However, by leveraging thoughtful strategies in the short-term, today鈥檚 GCs could help create more favorable outcomes for their departments down the road.

You can download a full copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 just-published here