How can law firms make sure they consistently fill their posts with the right candidate? By making more effective use of their HR departments. Sophie Evans reports on a Legal Week roundtable discussion

"Why are we here?" asks Dan Wilkins, director and head of London law firm recruitment at Hays Legal – a valid question, given the time (8.30am) and the bleary eyes around the table. Testament to law firms' appetites to hire and keep the best people, human resources (HR) managers recently met up to discuss recruiting and retaining assistants at top City law firms.

The Legal Week roundtable discussion, held in association with Hays Legal and following up on the Legal Week Assistant report last year, saw some lively debate – despite the early start – on topics from CV-checking to the ethics of headhunters.

"We are here because law firms are struggling with their recruitment and retention," said Wilkins. "It astonishes me how bad some law firms are at recruitment, which is so key to a firm's future success."

The issue of recruitment split in-house recruiters and recruitment consultants, largely over communication issues. The Hays consultants used the example of emails from law firms that lacked the necessary detail on what they are looking for in a candidate.

Kat Gower, Hays Legal senior consultant, said: "We get emails saying, 'We are looking for a property lawyer with three years' post-qualification experience – and that is all they tell you." She suggested that a failure on the part of partners to communicate to HR departments exactly what they are looking for is part of the problem; at the firms that value their HR teams, the result is often that partners have entrusted more information to them in the search for the right candidate.

And HR managers who encourage all team members to know as much as they can about their group usually serve the partnership better, as Watson Farley & Williams' Kate Sanderson said. "From a junior level, we encourage HR officers to really get to grips with their client groups; we encourage them to read the relevant press and have an interest in the area of law in which they are working. You just cannot do really effective HR work in blind isolation and should be as aware as possible of the work your internal clients are involved in."

At Herbert Smith, the HR teams sit with the practice they recruit for, allowing for both a better understanding of and influence on the business – the so-called 'business partnering' approach, according to HR manager Julie Cupit.

At some law firms, HR directors have a place on the board. As Nabarro's Celia Staples pointed out, HR is fundamental to the business, hence a role in the firm's decision making. "We are fundamental to the business – if the partners do not have bums on seats, they cannot do the work," she said. When asked how to ensure HR has the ear of management on recruitment and retention issues, she advised: "There is nothing more effective – if it is a true partnership – than to stand up and say 'I can save you £3m'. That is how you get a place at the table."

Herbert Smith's Cupit concurred: "Talk their language – money and budgets."

Ingredients for a successful relationship

On the HR-recruitment consultant relationship, Kirkland & Ellis's Caroline Nunn said a consultancy with low staff turnover is a vital ingredient in successful cooperation. "I get sick of explaining the way our partnership structure works to new consultants," she said.

Cupit said her firm has specific requirements of job applicants (certain information about academic qualifications, for example), which it does not always get from its consultants – an unnecessary irritation that requires her to chase the information.

For the law firm HR manager, being prepared to listen to criticism from candidates – maybe regarding salaries, or a gum-chewing partner in interview (one example Nunn gave of an "appalled" candidate) – is paramount. "You cannot be a frosty-faced HR individual; I want to know how we are perceived out there in the market."

Nunn also suggested a short meeting between the recruitment consultant and the partners – the result being that the consultant will sell the firm better to candidates. Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom's Lisa Head agreed: "When we have had meetings or roundtables with recruitment consultants and discussed recruitment issues, there is an almost immediate rise in better quality applications."

Retention tools

Once the right lawyers have been recruited, what is the secret to keeping them? A 10% attrition rate is the norm for most City law firms – higher than most other professional services firms. Despite the rapid spread of the law firm bonus across the City and nationwide, more money does not seem to equate to more loyal lawyers.

"Bonus schemes can be both motivating and demotivating," said Kirkland's Nunn; the US firm famously offers big bonuses, but has to manage rising expectations every year. Whatever the approach – Herbert Smith has a transparent scheme that rewards chargeable and non-chargeable hours – HR managers agree that a bonus is not the answer to retention worries. As Gower said: "Candidates very rarely ask about a firm's bonus scheme – they are more keen on having a higher base salary." One HR director said that in exit interviews, the bonus never comes up as a reason for a lawyer leaving the firm. "It is just not a retention tool," she said.

As with bonuses, offering the right 'soft' benefits to keep lawyers happy seems to be a case of keeping up with the Joneses. "Associates know what is out there, and so we have to compete with other firms and constantly check what other firms are offering," said Cupit.

Related to soft benefits, the issue of work-life balance has recently been addressed by law firms through the introduction of alternative career paths.

So what do HR managers think about these new positions within the firm as a retention tool? The jury is definitely still out. One attendee said: "The truth will be told when you get junior lawyers coming up through the ranks saying that they are consciously opting for an alternative career path and that they do not want to become a partner. We have not seen that yet." Indeed, the work-life balance debate does not seem to be making much progress at law firms. As Addleshaws' John Canagasuriam pointed out, it is the partners of a firm who sent the cultural tone. But the cultural tone at most law firms is that it is 'soft' or not acceptable to say you will be unavailable for an hour between 6pm-7pm in order to attend to your family. And for many lawyers, home working has resulted in their home life being permanently disrupted, meaning they can rarely switch off from work. "You have to be careful how you handle home working because of this," said another attendee.

For all the attention that has been heaped upon the work-life balance and soft benefits debate at law firms, it is the recruitment issue that is easier to solve through better communication between law firms and their recruitment consultants. Retention is more of a sticky wicket that will only be solved through a long-term war of attrition against the City's long-hours culture.