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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll