"The legal sector changes and evolves with the ballistic certainty of a juggernaut and does so irrespective of the preferences and choices of the participants almost as if they were peripheral to the process of delivering legal services. We are, because of what we do, entirely focussed on the personnel involved in legal practice. The purpose of this survey was to discover their views on the present direction of law as well as how the profession is viewed by those within it and what individuals want to get out of their legal career..." Mark Husband, Managing Director, Cogence Search.

1. The Future of Law
A Brave New World
Cogence Search Survey Results: Future of Law Survey

2. About
Cogence Search is a leading London legal
recruitment agency specialising in lateral legal
moves.
The Future of Law survey was carried out
between 3rd December 2015 and 29 January
2016. The survey was distributed to 12000
lawyers.

3. Contents
A BRAVE NEW WORLD
Cogence Search
Were you to change your employer, where would you go?
A Brave New World: The Future of Law
Do you expect to be in the same place of employment in 5 years’ time?
Who responded?
From your perspective, what firm structure would improve legal practice?
Your career: What does the practice of law mean to you?
What do you expect to gain from your career?
What frustrates you most about the current structure and operation of your firm?
What one change in law firm operation would change your life the most?
“...Reality, however utopian, is something from which people feel the need of taking pretty frequent holidays...”
Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
The legal sector changes and evolves with the ballistic certainty of a
juggernaut and does so irrespective of the preferences and choices
of the participants almost as if they were peripheral to the process of
delivering legal services.
We are, because of what we do, entirely focussed on the personnel involved
in legal practice. The purpose of this survey was to discover their views on the
present direction of law as well as how the profession is viewed by those within
it and what individuals want to get out of their legal career.
The last several years have seen an endless sequence of mergers and mega-
mergers, coupled with cost saving measures such as near-shoring and off-
shoring; project management; and the use of “resource managers” to ensure
that utilisation rates are as high as possible. Now City based firms are pro-actively
seeking to reduce their London footprint to take account of the increased rental
costs of a city office coupled with the ever present pressure on fees. This does
not seem to equate to a reduction in headcount but rather to the more efficient
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Have a rant and a rage against the machine. What have we missed?13

4. ... A Brave New World
use of space by moving to open plan offices which, while often unpopular,
can equate to an overhead saving of £21,800 per lawyer (http://www.
telegraph.co.uk/property/commercial/uks-biggest-law-firms-downsize-as-
london-rents-increase/). Whether this saving is off-set by decreased staff
retention and/or engagement only time will tell.
Client attraction
At the time of writing this note a very useful article has been published
on The Lawyer website by Tony Besse; formerly of Freshfields and now a
career coach (http://www.thelawyer.com/my-career-story-i-worked-at-
freshfields-for-33-years-now-im-a-career-coach/). He echoes a large part
of the content of our blog dealing with career progression (http://www.
cogencesearch.com/blog) in suggesting that firms primarily wish to attract
people who are able to attract [and retain] clients. He says
“Law firms are strange organisations in that your ability to become
a partner or move up the partnership ladder is dependent on
ability to bring in clients and revenue. It’s every man for himself,
to some extent tempered by people working in teams, but at
the end of the day it’s very much about what you bring in”.
He is absolutely right. But, for individuals who wish to progress
and enjoy career longevity and success this need to
bring in work clashes with the desire of large firms to
institutionalise clients within Nationally or
Globally agreed Panel appointments.
Asserting that you have worked on
panel appointments for several
years will not assist in a lateral
move process should you seek
such a move!
Brave new world
So where do lawyers fit into this Brave New World? Do we decant an “Alpha”
to be a Partner; a “Beta” to be a career associate, etc. and by doing so
ensure that each person is satisfied with their station? Do we fix the length
of a legal career in the bottle? Could we drip-feed Soma into the coffee
pots of the document review team? Clearly we cannot. The fact is that law
firms are businesses – they are not constructed to provide the entertaining
and stimulating environment envisaged in Huxley’s chemically maintained
totalitarian utopia.
Law firms are and always have been a Darwinian environment, each firm
its own ecosystem. For the individual lawyer whose aspirations are not, or
cannot be, met by the firm this can be uncomfortable or even manifestly
unfair. In such circumstances, these lawyers may either elect to seek a
more congenial environment, adapt to the environment they are in or
leave private practice altogether. Our survey results indicated that 27%
of responders would not wish to work in a firm similar to their own if they
were to change employer. A considerable 40% of this group would elect
to work in an in-house position rather than continue in private practice.
The responses shown in the charts on the following pages indicate that
lawyers are very aware of the vast array of career alternatives open to
them. Pleasingly, we found that a very large proportion of responders still
consider law to be both “a vocation” and “a prestigious profession”.
written by Mark Husband, Managing Director
Tel 0207 264 4909 | mhusband@cogencesearch.com

5. What stage have you reached in your career?
Who responded?
The ‘Future of Law’ survey was disseminated on 3rd December 2015 to private lists of partners, associates, general counsel and barristers
in addition to being promoted to relevant groups on social media sites. Approximately 12,000 individuals were reached.
Over 66% of respondents were from City, national and global
firms
17% of respondents were from high street firms
23% of respondents had attained partnership 13% of respondents were in-house counsel, including directors
How would you describe your present place of employment?

6. What does the practice of law mean to you? ‘Other’ responses:
Your career: What does the practice of law mean to you?
The results
Almost 60% of respondents hold the belief that practising law is
a vocation or prestigious profession, with 34% of all respondents
believing that prestige defines the profession. 11% of respondents
viewed the practice of law as secure employment.
‘Other’ responses
Although less than 10% of our respondents opted for ‘other’
meanings of the practice of law, we felt that it would be interesting
to understand just what motivated this small segment to practice. The
results were analysed and categorised into four areas: those who had
altruistic motives; those who viewed law as a business opportunity;
those who were motivated by interest; and those who simply viewed
it as gainful employment. It could be argued that the responses in this
last category could be grouped with those who viewed law as ‘a
means to an end’. However, it appears our respondents chose this
alternative interpretation.
► 66% of those viewing law practice as an altruistic notion were
from High Street firms. 50% of this group were newly qualified.
The remaining 50% were 10+ years’ PQE
► 50% of those viewing legal practice as a business opportunity
were senior lawyers within boutique firms
► Over 30% of respondents used the terms ‘intellectually stimulating’
or ‘interesting’ in their responses
%
%

7. What do you expect to gain from your career? ‘Other’ responses
Job satisfaction
“An affective (that is, emotional) reaction to one’s
job, resulting from the incumbent’s comparison of
actual outcomes with those that are desired
(expected, deserved, and so on).”
Cranny, Smith and Stone, 1992
“The pleasurable emotional state resulting from
the appraisal of one’s job as achieving or
facilitating one’s job values”
Locke, 1969
► 100% of those responding with comments categorised as a
‘combination of options’ in ‘other’ emphasised the term ‘job
satisfaction’ in their responses
► 87.5% of those respondents whose comments were categorised
as a ‘combination of options’ were 7 or more years PQE. 50% of
these respondents were partners
► ‘Job satisfaction’ appears as a category in ‘other’ as a result of
our interpretation of the language employed
What do you expect to gain from your career?
What do you expect to gain from your career?

8. Were you to change employer, where would you go?
27% of respondents selected ‘Move to a different firm/employer type’. We asked where they
would go if they had that option.
A staggering 30% of our respondents said
they would leave law altogether
The results:
70% of those who specified they would
leave law altogether were less than 6
years PQE. 15% of respondents were 10+
years PQE
Almost 40% of those selecting ‘other’ would prefer to move in-house. This group of
respondents comprised:
PQE % PQE %
4 - 6 10 Trainee/1-3 29
7 - 9 21 10+/Partner/Director 39
33% of respondents wishing to move in-house were from Silver Circle firms. A further
33% of respondents were from Magic Circle, global and multinational firms
60% of respondents wishing to move in-house were 7+ years PQE or more
If you were to change firm, where would you go if not to a similar firm type?

9. Do you expect to be in the same place of employment in 5 years’ time?
Do you expect to be with your current
employer in 5 years’ time?
44% of respondents believe they would
leave their current employer
It should be noted that 33% of these would
be retired in 5 years’ time
18% of the sample completed the comments section for this question. The comments were
again categorised according to theme:
The word ‘retirement’ appeared in 25% of the comments.
31% of respondents’ comments were categorised under ‘Career development
change’. 33% of these respondents were from those describing their roles as Counsel/
Legal Director and 80% of these currently worked in-house
Only those in private practice provided comments classified as ‘Directional
uncertainty’. Interestingly, 50% of these also said they would leave the law altogether
in 5 years’ time
‘Legal practice is changing’ was a concern for NQ and 1-3 PQE individuals at private
practice firms. Common themes also included the notion that the environment is not
what it was thought to be; and that aggressive changes would probably result in cuts
Reasons for leaving your current employer in 5 years’ time

10. How would you improve law firm structure for better legal practice?
From your perspective, what firm structure would improve legal practice?
The results
‘Less emphasis on maintaining or increasing PEP’ was considered the
best way to improve legal practice by respondents. However, despite
those organisations adopting the barrister’s chambers model widely
promoting the fact that the emphasis on PEP is eliminated and profit
share is more fair, only 11% respondents believed it would improve legal
practice. 15% of respondents would work for less if it meant fewer hours.
‘Other’ responses
14% of respondents provided alternative solutions to organisational
structure. The categorisation of these suggestions was as a result of
inference and frequency of words used.
Note that there was a distinct difference between the categories of
‘employee ownership/JL model’ and ‘Business model diversification’.
The latter called for innovation, whereas the former was more specific,
seeking either a ‘corporate’ focus or seeking a partnership to include
all employees.
► The John Lewis Model appealed mostly to senior level and
partner employees at global firms. This is an interesting
juxtaposition with the antipathy towards the partnership model
suggested by the main set of results
► 50% of those citing ‘better processes/better management’ were
senior lawyers within boutique firms
%

11. What frustrates you about the structure and operation of your current firm?
Analysis of ‘Other’
The ‘Other’ frustrations
Although only 12% of respondents felt that they were ‘more process
led than they would like’, ‘poor process management’ and ‘poor
management[people]’ were the predominant frustrations.
‘Poor management’ comments made reference to poor change
management, lack of initiative on the part of managers, perceived
incompetence, and lack of decision making or clarity in decision
making. 80% of respondents citing ‘poor management’ were senior
solicitors and included in-house counsel.
‘Poor process management’ comments made reference to lack of
processes and failure to implement change processes. The responses
in the majority were from senior solicitors in high street firms, but a small
proportion respondents came from US and Magic Circle firms.
► The emphasis on PEP (profit per equity) frustrates more than a
third of respondents
► ‘No career planning or support for people seeking advancement’
frustrated almost 20% of respondents. Previously we asked
respondents to explain why they might consider leaving their
current employers. Almost 40% proposed to leave for career
development purposes, corroborating this frustration
► In our previous question pertaining to structure, 20% of
respondents cited the John Lewis/employee partnership model
as a potential structural improvement. This would appease the
20% of respondents who cite ‘no staff engagement in strategy’ as
frustrating
%
What frustrates you most about the structure and operation of your
current firm?

12. What one change in firm operation would improve your working life the most?
Better working hours, flexible and agile working was the most
common theme amongst responses. The majority citing this
potential improvement were less than 10 years PQE and from
national and Silver Circle firms
The category, ‘better resources management’ referred to people
in respect of appropriate skills for appropriate roles; engaging staff
in decision making; and providing appropriate administrative and
marketing support
Processes have been a subject of dispute in previous responses
but they were not mentioned in detail here

13. Note: Responses were analysed according to general themes. As you will see on the following pages, some comments were of considerable length
and could, subject to individual interpretation, fall into two or more categories.
Have a rant. What annoys you most about the industry?
35% of respondents felt that the emphasis on profit within the
firm resulted in a degradation of quality of advice
The 5% of respondents citing funding issues as a major concern for
their industry were barristers
‘Flexible/agile working’ was a leading operational change
that would make life better for lawyers (see pg. 12) but only 5%
of respondents were excised by its absence
50% of those respondents citing ‘Management issues’ commented
on a lack of respect/trust/equality for non-lawyer roles

14. What annoys you most about the industry? Some of your comments.
Billing:
“The worst thing to have befallen the legal profession
in the last 30 years has been time recording.”
“The partner thing is out of date, as is hourly billing. Law firms need
to become law companies. It is a business not a vocation.”
Diversity:
“A recognition of skills, experience and good character does not
appear to be factors that are considered by recruitment panel when
applying to join law firms/barristers chambers, compared to factors
such as nepotism and race. This is because when black applicants
are interviewed, they are often unsuccessful in securing a position and
provided with weak feedback and unfounded reasons they didn’t
get the position, when the real reason the applicant is unsuccessful is
because ‘face- don’t - fit this office!’”
“Too many old men in charge who don’t relate easily
and constructively to “women” in their teams/firms”
Lack of opportunity:
“The requirements for securing jobs in the legal profession, especially in
London, have become farcical. Firms either hire very young individuals
(with little or no legal experience) that they feel can be moulded, or
expect academic and professional credentials to rival some of the
most brilliant minds this world has ever seen. There needs to be a middle
ground for the people that work hard and attempting to enter the legal
profession at a later stage, as opposed to ‘fresh out of university life’.”
“...The associate to partner route does not acknowledge the
range of partner types, so it is not possible to easily identify where
opportunities for different types of partner are available.”
Poor Pay:
“The pay is just not good enough for the level of work we
are required to do. This is partly down to the over emphasis
on expansion and growth for the sake of it rather than
consolidating and rewarding the current employees so that
they stick around. ”
Poor management:
“If my firm is anything to go by there are still partners who want to
micromanage everything and if what you say does not fit, even if you
are the Risk And Compliance Manager, it is just ignored.”
“The job is fundamentally an interesting one with good prospects. Firms go
wrong in treating associates like children and with inconsistent approaches
to work allocation, etc. Good people then leave. That approach just isn’t
sustainable”
“Got a 2:2 and a place on the BPTC which seems to be bad joke in
practice. Training is taking too long as a mature applicant...My age
group an untapped female resource, granny grad, I’m not going on
maternity leave and now free to work considered past it. I began my
degree at 50 got onto the Bar training and hit the buffers...no one
wants to change.” “Firms need unified leadership and objective management that
provide a vision for staff with which they can engage, contribute
and be recognised and rewarded. Effective (what is done) and
efficient (how it is done) risk managed working practices. These
will deliver what the client wants, where they are wanted and
at a price that is valued by the client and a margin to the firm.
This will enable firms to deliver both job satisfaction to their teams
and generate profit that can be invested to the future of their
business.”

15. Business models:
Quality of advice is compromised by
drive for profit:
“I work an endless amount of hours, with a decreasing prospect
of equity. The prestige of the profession is being undermined
- quality will be reduced in pursuit of the bottom line. Profit is
important but not merely achieved by cutting from the bottom.”
“I have been in the law for nearly 40 years. The rewards have been beyond my
wildest dreams at the outset. However, I do get depressed by the behaviour
of those who seem to be motivated entirely by personal profit rather than the
interests of their clients”
Poor management:
“Real client awareness with proper project management skills. The only
way to address this is to hire professional project managers who can then
structure a framework of managing out-sourced and in-sourced activity
on a cost effective and risk mitigated basis. This is the view of an in-house
lawyer of 20 years standing.”
“Ridiculous appraisals; the inability of lawyers to see
their profession is a business; inability of lawyers to relate
to their clients’ needs and understand their businesses;
the inability to understand the concept of and need for
bus/dev; their arrogance; “lawyers - the only profession
you pay by the hour to fall out with themselves”; their
greed; their narrow-mindedness; their inability to work
as a team; their self-importance; their inability to face
up to the future and plan strategically.”
“50% of law firms are staffed by non-lawyers, increasingly able to innovate and add
significant value in areas like AI and project management. Yet they and the legally
qualified members of senior support are still ‘them’ and not ‘us’ in partner eyes. All
personnel in firms starting to pull together, as they do in the best corporates, will
generate increased productivity and profitability.”
“Law is a very individualist profession. Law firms,
despite protestations to the contrary, do not
operate as joined up organisations and there
is far too much reliance on individual partners
hitting their financial targets. At the same time,
these partners have no incentive to properly
train and develop their staff in succession
planning, as for many their only focus is
maintaining their position until retirement.”
“Law Firms do not seem to be properly preparing for the
arrival of big data and the effect that will have on business
models. It will be a very different model in 10 years’ time.”
“The partner thing is out of date, as is hourly billing. Law firms need to
become law companies. It is a business not a vocation.”
Process management:
“Technology - lawyers are so averse to using technology (or fear upending
the leaky billable hours model) that they appear to be like storks hiding
their head in the sand.”me.”
“The social contribution made by the great professions such
as law, engineering, medicine and science - all of which
have vocation as a base - is a quest for knowledge and social
improvement. This has been lost as the drivers of management
and profit, particularly HR, have driven out focus on quality.”
“it’s not just the bottom line. People and clients matter.”

16. Cogence Search. Leaders in London Legal Recruitment.
1 Alie Street, London, E1 8DE
+44 (0)207 264 4920 info@cogencesearch.com
www.cogencesearch.com