header-logo header-logo

Decision makers v practising lawyers

25 March 2016
Issue: 7692 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Mid-sized law firms are struggling to let go of traditional ways of working despite laudable intentions to be progressive, according to a report commissioned by LexisNexis.

The report, Mind the Gap, exposes a major disconnect between what practising lawyers working at the coalface think their firm’s priorities for change should be, and the views of decision-makers on the subject. It is based on interviews and surveys with more than 150 law firms.

Nearly half of the decision-makers acknowledged that they found it difficult to let go of conventional values and adopt new ways of working. Decision makers ranked information sources as their number one priority change for this year, but lawyers would prefer to increase investment in processes and technology.

The report revealed optimism about the future. Four out of five firms are “quite or very” confident about future growth. Nearly three out of five believe their size gives them a competitive advantage.

 
Issue: 7692 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll