Why are law firms talking more about generational differences than they have in the past? What can you, the associate, learn from this?
Younger generations wanting to change the world they’ve inherited is nothing new. From the hippies (who are now retiring from their jobs in corporate law) to Gen Z, the up-and-comers will challenge the establishment.
But law firm recruiters view generational differences as a greater challenge today than before, we heard again at the NALP Conference in April 2025. And like many new issues today, the pandemic was a trigger for them.
Gen Z went to school during a lockdown. Every success for them has been experienced as much through a screen as in person. They were the first generation to have the option of working and socializing face-to-face. They’ve also grown up amid the truths of climate change; seeing failings created by the older generations, Gen Z are less inclined to question themselves when challenging authority. They’re an empowered generation with an appetite for change.
BigLaw has broadly settled on an expectation of three days a week in the office, with a handful of elite firms insisting on four.
Perhaps the most divisive topic between the generations in law firms is face time. Partners steered a business through a pandemic and were forced to switch working patterns to succeed, changing law firm working cultures for good. BigLaw has broadly settled on an expectation of three days a week in the office, with a handful of elite firms insisting on four.
It’s easy to see why there is resistance from partners on working from home. Face-to-face work was a component of their success – boardrooms and courtrooms were where they learned their craft, won cases, and negotiated deals. Partners are naturally reluctant to tamper with this tried-and-tested formula that they know so well, when they’re responsible for bringing in the revenue and paying salaries.
Firms build commitment in Gen Z lawyers when they empower them.
The three-day compromise looks like it’s staying. But the point of contention is less whether there has to be a policy, but how rigidly it’s enforced. Gen Z being empowered means they don’t respond well to being disempowered. So a young attorney given freedom over when they come into the office will be a stronger ally to the firm than one who has to conform to a policy – they will happily come into the office every day of the week if they feel like it’s their choice.
Firms foster commitment in Gen Z lawyers when they empower them. Those with more control over how their work is allocated are much more likely to want to stick with their firm. As an associate, look out for this in your career – taking control of your work can be the making of you.
Being socially isolated at a more vulnerable time in their lives, Gen Z take a less passive view of mental wellbeing. Billable hours expectations on the junior level have never been higher – 1,950 annual hours is the market median. Burnout is a costly issue for law firms; the need for a better work-life balance is the paramount reason why attorneys want to leave their firms.
But reducing hours is rarely the answer to satisfaction – those billing 1,750 are not noticeably happier (and in the BigLaw economy what flexibility is there to reduce hours?). But what will change satisfaction is the amount of control associates have over how they spend their time, how much respect partners have for an associate’s personal life, or how much care the partner puts into managing their team’s time. Look out for these as hallmarks of good culture in a law firm.
So Gen Z wants better work-life balance, more control, and flexibility in their schedule. But they are also more demanding than previous generations about salary, agreed recruiters at the April 2025 NALP conference. This generation knows its worth perhaps more than any other. The 2021 hiring frenzy and signing bonuses taught them that they are in demand. Never has data been more readily available on what their skill set entitles them to in the legal world.
No matter how complex their lives become, attorneys never shed the values they left law school with.
The market knows this generation is more likely to leave if they’re not happy, and firms have responded with salary raises above the national pace of inflation. Compare this to partners who entered the market with a more straightforward mindset of joining a firm and working their way up. The themes of personal empowerment and appetite for change appear once more: associates live in a world where lateral moves are almost an expectation, especially if they’re on partner track.
Gen Z attorneys are naturally entrepreneurial and seek specialist, dynamic practice groups more readily than their predecessors – a stint in corporate is increasingly an apprenticeship rather than the finish line. Being natives to the AI revolution, Gen Z might, at a guess, clash ideologically with partners around the use of technology, but partners are keen to embrace it as much as the junior associates. For partners it’s more about business efficiency and client value – but this is perhaps an unexpected area where the generations align. Tech fluency is also one topic where Gen Z is showing immediate value in their firms: partners need younger minds to help build tomorrow’s law firms.
For all the talk of generational differences, they have a lot in common too. The reasons many choose law school over other career paths (and we’re not mentioning parental pressure here!) are typically: the desire for intellectual challenge; to become an expert; and to work with inspiring people. And when you ask partners what drives them above all else, it’s also tackling intellectual problems, feeling like an expert, and working with great people. No matter how complex their lives become, attorneys never shed the values they acquired in law school. Recognizing these shared values could well be a great starting point in binding these two groups together around a common purpose.
