What makes a more-or-less happy, fairly remunerated lawyer decide to move to a new firm? The Brief investigates.

Lawyers switch employers for all kinds of reasons. Obvious ones are salary/remuneration, significant career advancement and, on the negative side, escaping difficult relationships with colleagues or toxic organisational politics.

Then, of course, there are underperformers who have decided to move on before they are fired.

But what about competent, fairly paid, non-burnt-out lawyers who are reasonably happy in their current situations? What might induce them to up sticks and move to a new firm?

The answer depends, among other things, on career stage.

Early career lawyers will, according to Kate Bennett, CEO and co-founder of the consultancy firm Arbor Law, “tolerate more friction in exchange for the right name on their CV.” Mid-level lawyers, meanwhile, “start pricing in sustainability, whether the workload is survivable long term and whether anyone senior is actually listening to them.”

By the time someone has been practising for 15 or 20 years, they generally have a fairly clear idea of what they enjoy about being a lawyer – and, equally importantly, what gets in the way of it.

Martin Finnegan, chief commercial officer at Punter Southall Law agrees that younger lawyers remain attracted by the traditional “pull” factors of new roles. He says, “For a younger lawyer, the attraction of a move may understandably be better training, stronger deal flow, faster progression, improved remuneration or simply the opportunity to acquire a particular specialism. Flexibility and technology will increasingly matter too.”

Tangible culture

However, Finnegan says, for more experienced lawyers, firm culture is the overwhelming factor that is likely to induce a move.

He explains, “By the time someone has been practising for 15 or 20 years, they generally have a fairly clear idea of what they enjoy about being a lawyer – and, equally importantly, what gets in the way of it. A move can therefore be less about escaping an unhappy situation and more about finding an environment that better reflects how they want to work.

“Culture is sometimes treated as a rather nebulous concept, but in a law firm it is very tangible. How much autonomy do partners have? How entrepreneurial can they be? Are decisions made quickly? Is collaboration genuine or simply something written in the firm’s values?

“Does management trust experienced lawyers to exercise their judgement? And is there space to develop client relationships and new ideas without everything being driven by internal processes and short-term financial metrics? Those questions become increasingly important with seniority.”

Time and professional fulfilment, he continues, become the most important factors as seniority increases: “Remuneration still matters – few people deliberately move backwards financially – but an incremental increase in earnings is unlikely, by itself, to justify disrupting established client and colleague relationships.

“The real pull is the prospect of enjoying the next stage of your career more: working with people you respect, having greater freedom to make decisions and spending more of your time doing the things that made you want to practise law in the first place.”

Passive candidates

Shaun Savory, chief people officer at Birketts LLP, agrees that “while salary remains important”, a combination of other factors, including career prospects, quality of work, flexibility, strength of firm leadership and platforms that support their long-term ambitions can often be key.

He says, “In my experience, genuinely happy lawyers rarely spend their time actively looking to move firms. Most are passive candidates rather than active job seekers, unless they have become particularly disengaged or are considering a change in location or sector.”

To attract these passive candidates, he says, his firm has enjoyed “considerable success” as a result of its ambition, the scope of the opportunities it provides and, “above all”, its culture.

Lawyers often make career decisions on the basis of a range of professional and personal considerations rather than remuneration alone.

He continues, “That success reflects the strength of our overall proposition and serves as a useful reminder that lawyers often make career decisions on the basis of a range of professional and personal considerations rather than remuneration alone.”

As well as being a “pull” factor, these can also help inoculate firms against losing too many staff to competitors, Savory continues. He explains, “Overall, while firms inevitably experience some regretted losses, the majority of approaches are ultimately rejected in favour of a known and, hopefully, rewarding environment.

“Indeed, the fact that many successful lawyers are regularly approached but choose to stay should give us confidence in the attractiveness of what we have built and continue to offer as a firm.”

Slow accumulation

For an increasing number of experienced lawyers the proposition offered by consultancy firms is particularly attractive. Arbor Law’s Bennett says, “What pulls a contented lawyer isn’t usually one big grievance but the slow accumulation of small ones like a real lack of control over your time, responsibility for a team, business development that has to run through someone else’s priorities, and technology that fights you rather than helping you.

“None of that shows up on an exit interview as ‘unhappy’ but it adds up to a career that feels like it’s happening to you rather than being built by you and that’s certainly what we hear from consultants.

“Big Law comes with a lot of baggage that often gets in the way of actually being a lawyer and I think that’s why different models can become increasingly attractive, particularly where they offer more control over how you work, who they work with and what you build.”

What pulls a contented lawyer isn’t usually one big grievance but the slow accumulation of small ones.

George Bisnought, CEO and founder of Excello Law, says the way fees can be structured at consultancy firms can also be a pull – and not just because of the headline percentage the consultant gets to take home.

He explains, “Where the firm is well run, each lawyer has greater freedom to have honest conversations with clients, so fees can reflect the value of the work rather than the number of hours spent on it.

“That freedom can fundamentally change lawyer-client relationships. The lawyer is able to think less about the clock and more about the outcome. Over time, that can create deeper relationships and stronger client loyalty.”

Flexibility and autonomy

Bennett and Bisnought would obviously be expected to extol the virtues of their platforms. But what does a lawyer who has herself become consultant say?

Alexandra Collett, commercial litigation lawyer at Excello Law, joined the firm after working for large national firms. She moved with a group of close colleagues, one of whom went on to become Excello’s first trainee solicitor, “demonstrating they were prepared to support my team’s development and ambitions”.

She says, “Moving firms was never about being unhappy where I was. It was about finding a firm that offered a better way of working for me, both professionally and personally.”

I have not had to miss important milestones with my family because of work, and that has made a huge difference.

Flexibility is, she says, “incredibly important” for her: “The firm has given me the freedom to work in a way that genuinely suits me and fits around my family life, without compromising the service I provide to my clients. I have not had to miss important milestones with my family because of work, and that has made a huge difference.”

Autonomy, though, is “the most important factor” for Collett. She says, “I have total autonomy over my work and how I manage my practice, while having the reassurance of great support from the firm when I need it.”

Adapting to AI

Alongside flexibility, autonomy and career development opportunities, another factor that can induce lawyers to move is the approach firms take to a changing world. Right now, that means AI.

Akber Datoo, founder and CEO of D2 Legal Technology, co-chair of the Law Society of England and Wales’ Technology and Law Committee, and Council member for Central London, says, “Through my positions at the Law Society and D2 Legal Technology, I see the conversation moving from whether lawyers should engage with AI to how they do so competently and responsibly.

Lawyers are seeking firms with the ambition to succeed in a rapidly changing legal industry.

“Lawyers are seeking firms with the ambition to succeed in a rapidly changing legal industry. The strongest will combine specialist excellence and inspiring people with secure tools, practical training, clear guardrails and a credible vision for legal careers in an AI-enabled world.

“They will show how AI can create more space for human judgement, strategy, relationships and differentiated advice.

“For an otherwise content lawyer, that promise of relevance, confidence and professional growth can be a powerful reason to move.”

Finally, Datoo points to an age-old “pull” facto that will be attractive to lawyers who are focused on developing a deep specialism. Because, he says, lawyers tend to move toward professional excellence, they will feel the gravitational pull of those firms or teams that are recognised for their specialisms in the areas in which lawyers want to build their careers, or are working on the leading matters in those markets.

Senior individuals also matter, he concludes, saying the key factor underlying a move can be “a partner whose judgement and reputation have a magnetic pull”.

Image generated using AI.