Assistant lockstep must evolve to survive

With Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer ushering in milestones to grade associate development and three other major UK firms working on initiatives moving in the same broad direction, the question is how long traditional associate lockstep will continue in its current form.

True, the model has proved more durable than many expected but the system of grading and remunerating assistants with strict adherence to post-qualification experience has been fraying at the edges for years. At many firms, it can only strictly be said to be in force up to three years' PQE. The bottom line is that there is already active career management for many mid-level associates in addition to the up-and-out track that was until recently supposed to do all the heavy-lifting. So by the time Norton Rose last February announced it was to move to an explicitly merit-driven model that sorts associates into three grades, the writing has looked to be on the wall. It was, in addition, obvious that the recession would conflict with the inflexibility of assistant lockstep, one reason why several US firms have moved away from the model this year. A desire to shift from lockstep's inflexibility also contributed to many City firms breaking the model this year to freeze pay.

Given the timing of current moves there will be suspicion from assistants about law firms' motives for moving in this direction but that won't be enough to stop the shift – and it shouldn't. The modern legal profession has a fundamental need to inject more meritocracy and flexibility into its career management. The former issue has hogged much of the debate but the latter point is just as important. Legal practice is diversified but pay structures are essentially flat and rigid. That means widely-differing demand for different practice areas are constantly conflicting with what isn't far off a one-size-fits all model. That was apparent during the boom when law firms were forced to pay their entire staff on the basis of what was required to retain lawyers in the hottest practices areas like deal finance and private equity. It sort of worked but provoked untold resentment among exhausted corporate lawyers that equivalents in other teams were earning the same for two thirds of the hours.

But even if law firms are set on this direction, it's no quick fix. Active career management is much more time-intensive than the simplicity of the 'step. Left to their own devices many partners will mess it up, either by grading up their personal favourites or refusing to engage with firm-wide standards. But just because it is hard to get right doesn't mean it isn't worth the effort. These issues are central to most law firms' business and they are not going away.

More comment and analysis