As solicitors fret over completing their 16 CPD hours, Polly Botsford examines how a modern and flexible approach to training can help to avoid that last-minute panic


There will be neither tricks nor treats nor any pumpkins. On 31 October, solicitors will be having their own peculiar Hallowe’en: the date marks the last possible day for completing their 16 hours’ continuing professional development (CPD) for 2006/07.



Thankfully, the number of providers of CPD training has grown – as has the format. But choice comes at a price. Lawyers and law firms must spend increasing time and energy in finding courses and the appropriate training that suits their or the firm’s needs.



CPD training, which began in the mid 1980s, is an established component of professional life (equivalent requirements exist for accountants, architects, engineers, to name but a few), but a time-consuming one. The Solicitors Regulation Authority receives several panicky telephone calls at this time of year from solicitors who are behind on their requirements. But as the CPD year draws to a close, there are a number of last-minute methods to help those who need to meet their quota.



First, there is the Law Society itself, which provides information to solicitors on available courses (tel: 01527 504433), or lawyers can search the online database. There is also the user-friendly ‘source the course’ website, which calls itself a ‘legal training course finder’ (visit www.sourcethecourse.co.uk), and lawyers can even make use of its ‘Find me a course’ facility. But if an individual does not have the time to schedule in any of the face-to-face courses and needs to make up the training in the evenings at home, a box set of legal training DVDs, such as the College of Law’s LNTV, would also do the trick. The college produces two new DVDs a week, and there are plenty of past episodes to choose from.



Failing all these options, the Solicitors Regulation Authority can grant an extension. A spokeswoman explains: ‘We can extend the time frame for complying with the CPD requirement for six months, but it must be completed by 30 April of the following year.’ The problem with extensions, of course, is that they only add to the burden of fulfilling an individual’s CPD requirement for the next year, as the spokeswoman concludes: ‘If they have an extension to cover the previous year, they also need to ensure that the current year requirement is completed on time.’



It is worth noting that if a solicitor is behind on their hours because they have been ill, or on maternity leave, there are rules which entitle them to suspend their CPD requirement. The SRA can help individuals to recalculate what their CPD requirement will be. The same applies if lawyers have spent an extended period of time overseas, or taken a short career break, or simply had a period of unemployment.



Of course, the best way to avoid a last-minute panic is to plan the training over the whole year and take the time to pick and choose the provider. The SRA requirement of 16 hours a year (if a lawyer works full-time), can be made up in a number of different ways.



Not all CPD must be obtained on accredited courses; in fact, only 25% need be done that way. This means that three-quarters of CPD hours can be made up in other ways, such as attending non-accredited courses, but also by writing legal articles, undertaking legal research, as well as listening to and watching audio/visual materials (including online packages).



This allows enormous flexibility – all the solicitor or law firm must ensure is that they do not lose sight of the purpose of CPD: to allow them to develop professionally. As the SRA spokeswoman explains: ‘It must be work-related, have set aims and objectives, and be developmental. Team-building activities at a firm might count if they fulfil [those] requirements.’



CPD providers have multiplied in recent years, with new organisations, such as the Law Channel on the Einstein network, competing with the older established names such as Central Law Training, BPP Professional Education, and the College of Law. The format is hugely varied too: there are traditional lectures, conferences, seminars, as well as audio/visual pieces, and, now, of course, online services (the College of Law is putting its LNTV material online from next year).



‘A mixed approach appears to work best,’ says Helen Casey, a partner at niche family law practice CB4Law, based in Cambridge. ‘We do a mixture of the big providers, which for us is Family Law, which produces textbooks and runs CPD courses, then specialist or local organisations, such as Resolution, and we also go to barristers, either locally or in London.’



Solicitors should press for what is best, rather than convenient, even if it means travelling and/or taking a whole day out of the office. Trudie Marshall, part of the human resources team at the Exeter headquarters of Devon and London firm Michelmores, confirms that if south-west based lawyers need to travel to do their training in London, then the firm will arrange that. And often it takes the whole day to get through a comprehensive round-up at the end of the calendar year.



It may be that flexibility is the key attraction to a particular CPD format. This is where podcasts and video-based material works best. The Law Channel, part of the Einstein network, believes it has particular strengths. Ian Caplin, a producer, explains: ‘Guests on our programmes range from the judiciary to cabinet ministers, as well as barristers and professionals, and we have accompanying study notes written by the guest speaker.’ The channel also has instructions on how to ‘make the most of your Einstein hour’.



Online materials, such as CPD Direct, would seem to be the ultimate answer. But not everyone believes so. Ms Casey says: ‘If you have a very good live speaker, things they have said tend to stick. You don’t get that online. Nor can you ask them questions.’ Sarah Hutchinson, director of practice development at the College of Law, cites another reason. She says: ‘Many firms and lawyers prefer to watch a training video as a group, perhaps over lunch, with discussion afterwards, rather than on their own at their PC.’



As law firms are not required to provide CPD training for free for their solicitors, cost can also be a big consideration in selecting a provider. If so, the Law Society recommends solicitors and firms contact their local law societies, where costs for courses are ‘reasonable’.



But CPD is itself about to develop: the SRA is planning a review of the whole scheme. The SRA spokeswoman explains: ‘The review will take place after the new training regime for solicitors is introduced. It will be part of the SRA review of the different skills and knowledge that solicitors will need to have at the different milestones of their careers, like going into practice on your own, becoming a training supervisor or becoming a partner’.



An education and training strategy document approved by the SRA’s board earlier this year suggested that a greater emphasis on the outcomes of CPD that are relevant to solicitors’ individual training and development needs – rather than on process and time spent – may be needed in future.



The strategy said responsibility might be placed on practising certificate holders each year to analyse their own development needs in the light of their field of practice and career aspirations, and undertake a development programme that would be tailored to those particular needs. The analysis and activities would be recorded in a log that could be open to scrutiny, and managers and supervisors could be required to ensure that this was all carried through in practice.



The difficulty of monitoring whether CPD is properly carried out – and the danger that it could become a tick-box exercise bearing little relation to real development needs – are among the current problems with the scheme identified by the strategy.



In the meantime, Ms Hutchinson believes solicitors are missing a trick: ‘Although CPD is seen as being a chore, or a tick-box exercise, actually it is something that you should see as enabling you to bring a better service to clients.’



Some firms, of course, are keenly aware of this. As Chris Hubbard, training and development partner in the London office of US firm Squire Sanders & Dempsey, explains: ‘We place a greater emphasis on our in-house training programme, which often involves guest speakers. Members of the firm also often deliver seminars – that way the speaker updates their own knowledge of what has been identified as an important topic, and shares that knowledge with their colleagues.’



What lawyers really need is more quality control in looking for a provider, given the overwhelming choice now available. At the moment, the only real way to get this is by sharing information with colleagues and, as Ms Casey puts it, ‘going back to the courses which you know work well’.



And that is much better than getting a CPD fright on Hallowe’en.



l For a copy of the Gazette Guide to CPD, published last month, call 020 7841 5473.

Polly Botsford is a freelance journalist