Earlier today The ๐๐ถ๐ด๐ต๐ณ๐ข๐ญ๐ช๐ข๐ฏ ๐๐ช๐ฏ๐ข๐ฏ๐ค๐ช๐ข๐ญ ๐๐ฆ๐ท๐ช๐ฆ๐ธ published the results of its Law Graduate Salary Range Survey.
Makes for an interesting read. On the one hand, nowhere near as high as overseas markets such as London, HK and the US. On the other hand, Grads on A$130K would have been unthinkable 5 – 10 years ago!
As we navigate 2025, Australian midsize law firms find themselves at a pivotal crossroadsโbalancing client expectations, talent retention and the promise (and pitfalls) of technology. The recently released 2025 Australian Midsize Law Firm Priorities Report by Actionstep offers a deep dive into whatโs shaping the future for these firms.
Hereโs s summary of what you need to know from the Reportโand how your firm can stay ahead.
Itโs clearโclient satisfaction is king.
71% of midsize firms rank it as their top priority for protecting and growing revenue. But itโs not just about delivering legal outcomes; itโs about building trust-based relationships, offering personalised service and consistently exceeding expectations.
Interestingly, firms are focusing more on deepening relationships with existing clients rather than chasing new business. In fact, 37% see expanding existing client accounts as their primary growth strategy for 2025.
โ Takeaway: If your firm isnโt investing in client experience, youโre leaving growth on the table.
While technology grabs headlines, midsize firms know that people drive performance.
However, when employees consider leaving, pay and remuneration become the decisive factor. This signals a clear message: while meaningful work keeps people engaged, competitive compensation keeps them committed.
โ Takeaway: Create a workplace where talent thrivesโoffer challenging work, clear career paths and ensure your pay structures remain competitive.
Despite recognising efficiency challenges, midsize firms remain cautious adopters of automation and AI:
Thereโs also a noticeable gap in digital client experience. While firms excel in personalised, human-centric service, only 41% feel confident in their digital touchpoints like client portals and automated communications.
โ Takeaway: Embrace technologyโnot to replace people, but to empower them. Automation can reduce workloads, freeing your team to focus on high-value client interactions.
With client trust on the line, cybersecurity is non-negotiable. Yet, the biggest risk isnโt technologyโitโs human error. Over 63% of firms cite staff behaviour (think password sharing, weak authentication practices) as their top vulnerability.
โ Takeaway: Build a security-first culture. Regular training, robust protocols, and smart tools like multi-factor authentication are essential to protect both your firm and your clients.
2025 presents both challenges and opportunities for Australiaโs midsize law firms. Those that blend human expertise with smart technology, prioritise client relationships, and invest in their people will be best positioned to thrive in an increasingly competitive market.
Is your firm ready to seize the moment?
rws_01
The latest Law Society (England and Wales) Financial Benchmarking Survey has sparked significant discussion on social media today. The findings highlight some critical financial challenges for mid-sized law firms, particularly in terms of profitability, chargeable hours and cash flow management.
1๏ธโฃ Fee Earnersโ Costs vs. Fees Charged
2๏ธโฃ Shortfall in Chargeable Hours
3๏ธโฃ Increase in Lock-Up Days
These figures underscore the urgent need for better financial planning, sustainable profitability strategies, and operational efficiency. Some key focus areas include:
โ๏ธ Improving revenue streamsโexploring retainer-based models for better income predictability.
โ๏ธ Enhancing productivityโhave a robust and actionable business development plan for all lawyers!
โ๏ธ Optimise cash flowโreduce lock-up days by streamlining billing and collections processes.
๐ Full Report: Read the Law Society Financial Benchmarking Survey 2025
๐ข Looking to bridge the 300+ hour gap per lawyer? Or interested in strategies for growing a profitable legal practice sustainably? Letโs talk! Get in touch today.
rws_01
richard@gsjconsulting.com.au
A recent report, “Strategic Sector Insights for the Legal Profession 2025: Mid-Sized Firms”, published by The Law Society and MHA, reveals a striking trend:
๐ More than 50% of mid-sized law firms report that their lawyers bill less than 25 hours per week on average.
๐ Less than 3% of lawyers at these firms bill anywhere close to the full 40-hour workweek.
While it’s unrealistic to expect lawyers to bill every hour they work, these numbers highlight why alternative pricing models are a key priority for firm leaders in 2025.
โ๏ธ What does the future of legal pricing look like? If you’re exploring value-based pricing, subscription models, or hybrid fee structures, letโs talk!
๐ฉ DM me to discuss innovative pricing strategies for law firms.
Earlier today, the Thomson Reuters Institute published its Midyear Update on the Australian Legal Market, providing valuable half-year insights into industry trends in the Australian legal market.
There’s a lot to unpack in the Report, and I highly recommend you download it. That said, here are my top takeaways:
โ
Whatโs Happening with Non-Equity Partners?
Is there an underlying story in the Non-Equity Partner segment? The data suggests there might be more to explore.
โ
Equity Partners Carrying the Load?
If legal market demand and worked rates are up in 2024, yet the average billable hours per lawyer are down, it raises a big questionโare Equity Partners absorbing the extra workload? If so, why?
โ
Billable Hours Decline
With 12 months in a year, many law firms have lawyers billing less than 1,500 hours annually. What does this mean for profitability and productivity?
If you’re looking to refine your pricing strategy or need guidance on law firm profitability, feel free to get in touch. In the meantime, download the two-page update and see the data for yourself!
rws_01
A recent article by BTI Consultingโs The Mad Clientist (โDid Clients Just Go Sour on Rankings and Directories?โ published on 12 February 2025) states that:
Thought leadership now outweighs rankings โ especially when forming new relationships.
While we talk often about โthought leadershipโ in professional services, Iโm not entirely sure we understand the mechanics and actualities of what constitutes โthought leadershipโ.
For a start, if you say you’re a โthought leaderโ chances are youโre not โ as only others can pin that tag on you!
So, I thought I would do quick run through what thought leadership means to me, as well as some ways you might be able to demonstrate your knowledge in such a way as others start to consider you a thought leader!
Thought leadership is the art of positioning yourself, or your firm, as a leading authority in a particular area – industry or field – by sharing (typically for free) valuable insights, expertise, and innovative ideas.
Thought leaders influence their audience through content such as articles, blogs, speeches, books, research and social media engagement.
Many professional firms limit their content strategy to publishing articles on their firm website and stopping there. While this is a good starting point, it doesnโt fully leverage the power of content marketing to attract, engage, and convert potential clients.
To expand your reach and establish your authority as a thought leader, consider adopting the following to your content marketing strategy:
Thought leaders are recognised by others for their deep knowledge of a subject matter and so have the ability to shape conversations, influence decisions, and inspire others. These are all attributes that will help expand your audience reach and establish credibility in your area โ leading to a higher number of requests for assistance and a bigger book of business!
Feel free to get in touch if you need help with your thought leadership strategy.
rws_01
I recently posted about the ‘Billable hours target for first-year lawyers at selected [Australian] law firms‘ and one of the most read posts on this blog is from way back in August 2016 – ‘Why asking someone to work 2,000 billable hours a year will kill their spirit‘, so when the Managing Partner Forum recently published the above results (admittedly from mostly American Managing Partners) from an audience polling question at one of its webinars on the issue of billable hour expectation for Associate Attorneys, I thought I would share it.
It’s interesting to note that nearly 70% of respondents expect their Associate Attorneys to bill over 1700 hours a year, with almost 10% expecting over 1900 billable hours per year.
That’s a lot of billable hours! And if we consider the ‘10-20-30-40 Leverage Rule‘, then the implication is very bleak for junior lawyers!
And as I say to those entering the legal profession who need some understanding of how many hours they need to work to meet their billable hour target, take a look at Yale Law School’s ‘The Truth About The Billable Hour‘.
While I am all for the profit motive, I maintain that if owners and managers of law firms want to understand why they have a high attrition / burnout rate in their teams, take a close look at what expecting someone to bill 1700 hours a year is actually doing to them!
rws_01
Having just posted yesterday on ‘Directory and Award Submissions‘, I thought it was somewhat timely that the team at BTI Consulting published the results of a survey they have conducted with over 350 corporate counsel which showed:
Some of the commentary is just brilliant, including this gem:
โI assume all my attorneys are ranked somewhere.โ
Go check out the article. It’s a good [short] read.
rws_01
Following a post I made on LinkedIn last week: ‘5 Tips to help make your next directory submission standout from the crowd‘ I was asked the following question:
With limited resources, should our firm prioritize directory or award submissions?
An excellent question.
So good, I thought I would try and answer it in this week’s BD Tips post.
When it comes to gaining brand recognition and visibility – for your law firm and its partners/principals – two leading strategies are directory and award submissions. Both have their own unique benefits, so let’s take a look at each in turn:
Legal directories are comprehensive listings of law firms and individual lawyers. They provide potential clients with information about legal service providers – including leading lawyers in practice areas and client reviews.
Legal awards recognize excellence in various aspects of legal practice. Awards can be given to individual lawyers, law firms, or specific practice areas based on criteria such as innovation, client service, and case outcomes.
The decision on whether to do a directory or award submission ultimately depends on your firm’s current brand awareness strategy and goals.
If your firm is looking to improve brand awareness, a legal directory submission might be the way to go.
On the other hand, if your firm’s primary goal is to boost your firm’s reputation and gain recognition within an industry in the short-term, legal award submission can be a much more beneficial tactic.
The fact is that both play a critical role in enabling your firm’s marketing and business development strategy by improving visibility, credibility, and client trust.
In a perfect world, you get to do both.
In an imperfect world: go awards for the short game, and directories for the long game!
Richard & GSJ
As we start out on 2025, the ๐จ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ญ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐น๐๐๐๐๐ (AFR) has helpfully published a table today (14.01.2025) – ‘๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ฅ๐๐๐ฅ๐ ๐ก๐จ๐ฎ๐ซ๐ฌ ๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐ญ๐ฌ ๐๐จ๐ซ ๐๐ข๐ซ๐ฌ๐ญ-๐ฒ๐๐๐ซ ๐ฅ๐๐ฐ๐ฒ๐๐ซ๐ฌ ๐๐ญ ๐ฌ๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ญ๐๐ ๐ฅ๐๐ฐ ๐๐ข๐ซ๐ฆ๐ฌ’ – that makes for very interesting reading.
Other than the expected billable hour targets for first year lawyers and comments on alleged “under-billing” practices at major Australian law firms, what caught my attention in the article was this comment:
“๐๐ฏ๐ญ๐บ ๐ฐ๐ฏ๐ฆ ๐ง๐ช๐ณ๐ฎ โ ๐๐ข๐ฎ๐ช๐ญ๐ต๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐๐ฐ๐ค๐ฌ๐ฆ โ ๐ค๐ข๐ญ๐ค๐ถ๐ญ๐ข๐ต๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ช๐ต๐ด ๐ต๐ข๐ณ๐จ๐ฆ๐ต๐ด ๐ฅ๐ช๐ง๐ง๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต๐ญ๐บ, ๐ธ๐ช๐ต๐ฉ ๐ข๐ฏ ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐ถ๐ข๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ฃ๐ข๐ด๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ท๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ถ๐ฆ ๐ณ๐ข๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ข๐ฏ ๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ณ๐ด ๐ฃ๐ช๐ญ๐ญ๐ฆ๐ฅ. ๐๐ข๐ธ๐บ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ด ๐ข๐ต ๐ต๐ฉ๐ข๐ต ๐ง๐ช๐ณ๐ฎ ๐ข๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ฆ๐น๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ค๐ต๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ฃ๐ณ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ช๐ฏ ๐ง๐ฐ๐ถ๐ณ ๐ต๐ช๐ฎ๐ฆ๐ด ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ช๐ณ ๐ด๐ข๐ญ๐ข๐ณ๐บ ๐ช๐ฏ ๐ค๐ญ๐ช๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต ๐ง๐ฆ๐ฆ๐ด.”
I might be wrong, but in the event that Hamilton Locke charges clients by the billable hour, then I highly suspect this also translates into a yearly hourly targetโฆ
โฆIn the event that HL charges clients fixed fees or some other type of fee arrangement, then I accept this calculation probably sets it apart.
rws_01
RWS_01's B[D]log 