header-logo header-logo

09 April 2024
Issue: 8066 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

Associates show loyalty, like money and don’t yearn to be partner

Partnership is no longer the driving ambition of the majority of solicitors, according to research by legal information provider LexisNexis Legal & Professional

Moreover, associates are both more loyal and more money-driven than law firm leaders assume.

Only one in four current associates want to make partner at their current firm in the next five years, and only 3% aspire to partnership at another firm, in a reversal of traditional law career goals.

This comes as no surprise to almost half of law firm leaders (rising to 63% of leaders at large law firms), who say they have noticed a decline in partnership ambitions among associates. Most of those leaders (71%) attributed the shift to a desire for a better work-life balance.

However, the report, ‘Disloyal lawyers: has the partnership model lost its lustre?’, published this week, also found associates have a strong sense of loyalty to their firm. More than half plan to be at the same firm in five years’ time, with only 12% planning to exit private practice for in-house roles, academia or other career opportunities. This contrasts with the perception of law firm leaders, 72% of whom believe associates are less loyal than previous generations. In fact, some 69% of large law firm leaders cite attracting and retaining talent as one of their biggest challenges.

So, what makes associates stay put? About seven in ten associates would be encouraged to stay by an offer of more money, whereas only 36% would stay for a better work-life balance.

Stuart Greenhill, senior director of segment strategy at LexisNexis, said: ‘The current generation of workers are disruptors, not conformers.

‘If they see something they don't like, they'll push back. To meet growth goals and retain a feasible talent pipeline, law firms will need to find a middle-ground. They cannot rely on what has worked well in the past, especially with the AI revolution well on its way.’

The report, which is based on a survey of more than 500 associates and senior leaders, can be viewed here

Issue: 8066 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll