Look smart to halt talent drain

Top firms must realise that simply paying more will not solve their recruitment problems and keep talent in the profession, argues Jamie IveyHere we are again.

Personnel heads of all the top firms have been anxiously wetting their fingers and sticking them in the air to find which way the salary wind is blowing.

Despite the anguish of partners, it looks as though 50,000 will now be the starting salary for newly qualified solicitors at some leading London firms.However, this ignores a key question: last years unprecedented salary increases, and the bursting of the dot-com bubble, did little to staunch the flow of talent away from the top practices so why should it work this year? The problem is not the pay, or even the hours, but the nature of the work.The success of law firms in recruiting top graduates has been built upon marketing the profession as one which demands intellectual excellence and in return provides stimulating, quality work, career stability, and good pay.

However, graduates drawn into the legal profession during the 90s spent much time watching their contemporaries from university earn more for less work in fields such as banking you did not meet many lawyers in fashionable City wine bars at 6.30pm.

In addition, in the past decade of unprecedented growth, the historically twitchy personnel departments of the major banks largely abandoned the ruthless hire-and-fire policies that brought many careers to an abrupt end.Assistants are not anchored to their careers by uncertain economic times, and there are numerous other well-paid opportunities in the City.

When the work promised at interview is not forthcoming, they leave the profession.Working in law firms you do not encounter many ex-traders, ex-corporate financiers or ex-management consultants.

One former solicitor, who left a top ten law firm when he was three years qualified to become a management consultant, says he left because I did not just want a job that paid well and was hard-working, but one that effected lasting change.

He maintains that law is a suitable career for those who prefer not to think too hard about the long-term consequences of their actions, but who like to work hard on projects that require no vision.This is clearly not recruitment brochure material for law firms, but others echo that view.

Another lawyer, who left a magic circle legal firm and is now on the final year of an MBA, found that: The legal side of any deal was always too repetitive to appeal.

There was no sense of achievement at the end, merely relief.

In the insurance-obsessed, risk-averse atmosphere that characterises the leading practices, the work revolves around amending precedents according to guidance notes, and carrying out tasks not because they are necessary but because they are routine on that type of deal.It was clear to that first lawyer that it must be possible to work smarter rather than harder, but such an aim is counter-productive to partners obsessed with maximising billable hours.Traditionally, lawyers leaving law firms either went in-house or to other private practices of a different size and speciality.

One lawyer reckons that nearly half of those who left from his intake left the profession altogether.

This is a major step when you consider the number of years an assistant has dedicated to qualifying, and it appears indicative of a widespread dissatisfaction with the work that assistants do.

Rather than go to a smaller firm or in-house, they are looking for other careers.Entrenched interests; politically-motivated bloc voting at elections; a poorly motivated and disgruntled constituency at the coalface these would not be out of place for the Labour Party of the 1980s.

But it is a description which despite profits per partner nearing the million pound mark at magic circle firms could easily be applied to the top practices today.A Blair-style third way is needed and firms must construct a way of working smarter not harder, for the sake of their clients, their assistants and, ultimately, themselves.Solicitor Jamie Ivey left practice at a top City firm 18 months after qualifying