Firms Stemming the Tide? More Like Polishing Brass on the Titanic

As reported in last Thursday's New York Times, law firms are yet again attempting to put a lid on the ever growing associate attrition rate. Among the methods cited: Quarles & Brady eliminating the billable hour requirement and granting more time off; Howrey's move to merit based career and pay progression; and an increasing number of firms shifting to flat fee billing.

JDBliss argues that these are all good things for associates, but I doubt both the seriousness and efficacy of this "trend". In the words of Tyler Durden, this is "polishing brass on the Titanic." Even if leverage within law firms continues to shift, crucial questions about the practice of law and the value delivered goes unanswered.

To be brief: this isn't new. Firms attempted to stem the tide by increasing first year salaries by over 50% since 2000. Interestingly, the attrition rate has gone up over the same period. Because I believe that on a risk adjusted basis, associate compensation is more or less equivalent with peers in other industries (private equity firms, banks, more entrepreneurial endeavors), attrition must be a function of something more endemic to the practice of law and the law firm model. What will keep the balance from shifting further to competing professions isn't a better work-life balance (although that might help), but a sense of meaning, a sense that one controls their own destiny, unchained by a lock step career progression and an exceedingly long "apprenticeship" period.

Howrey's merit based advancement suggests the possibility of increased responsibility earlier on and is intriguing in that regard. But how is merit to be determined, particularly where a good deal of junior associate work is writing memorandums and compiling documents for discovery requests more than delivering advice, quantifying business risks, or crafting creative settlement solutions? If value and merit of legal talent (as opposed to rainmaking prowess) is difficult to quantify at the partner level, it's undoubtedly more subjective in the lower ranks.

Some associates will find a reduced workload for the same or reduced salary enticing. It is presumably stable work, without much stress. But without a fundamental shift in the role and responsibilities of associates, I don't see this doing much, particularly with a generation looking to participate more than blindly consume.