header-logo header-logo

Shattering the training myth

26 January 2018 / Melissa Hardee
Issue: 7778 / Categories: Features , Training & education , Profession
printer mail-detail
nlj_7778_hardee

Melissa Hardee explains why training shouldn’t just be for trainers & trainees

A commonly held myth in law firms is that selecting, arranging and delivering training is the exclusive province of those in learning and development (L&D) or human resources (HR), and that it is not something that management or the fee earning population need to worry about.

The reality is somewhat different. Training involves a range of people in a firm: supervising someone’s work and giving feedback is ‘training’; fee earners who give a talk on a new legal development are delivering training. Practice areas may decide the legal technical training that should be undertaken in their group, in addition to deciding how to keep their lawyers up-to-date with legal developments.

The problem is that lawyers, although highly skilled and knowledgeable about the law, are rarely skilled and knowledgeable about training—although they may assume they are. With this in mind I set out to write The Legal Training Handbook and, later, its companion publication The Legal Training Toolkit (both available from

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ben Daniels, DAC Beachcroft

NLJ Career Profile: Ben Daniels, DAC Beachcroft

Ben Daniels, newly elected as the next senior partner of DAC Beachcroft, reflects on his leadership inspiration and considers an impish alternative career

Osbornes Law—Lee Henderson

Osbornes Law—Lee Henderson

Family team bolstered by latest partner hire

Freeths—Graeme Danby & John Jeffreys

Freeths—Graeme Danby & John Jeffreys

Firms strengthens national restructuring and insolvency practice with leadership appointments

NEWS
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
In NLJ this week, Ian Smith, emeritus professor at UEA, explores major developments in employment law from the Supreme Court and appellate courts
Writing in NLJ this week, Kamran Rehman and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Operafund Eco-Invest SICAV plc v Spain, where the Commercial Court held that ICSID and Energy Charter Treaty awards cannot be assigned
Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School highlights a turbulent end to 2025 in the civil courts, from the looming appeal in Mazur to judicial frustration with ever-expanding bundles, in his final NLJ 'The insider' column of the year
back-to-top-scroll