Conversation is swirling around how many “in office” days law firms are requiring of their professionals.

Recent reporting on the “4 days a week in the office” mandate coming from Managing Partners and Management Committees in Big Law is spurring controversy. 

Leaving a hybrid work model in the rear-view mirror seems a dangerous proposition that will ultimately backfire. And these mandates go beyond who is sitting in the office on which day of the week. It raises red flags about law firm culture, recruiting, and retention.

By most standards, mandates are unpopular. In fact, they allude to an overall negative firm culture. With plenty of proof that workplace culture is an important factor in how professionals choose their employers, a “mandate” culture for in-the-office sends a message that the firm is likely a domineering, limiting, and potentially untrusting environment.

Mandates can create an impediment to recruiting and retaining talent. In today’s tight marketplace for legal talent, professionals know there are options. We see time and time again that flexibility in the workplace is an incentive for attracting the best talent, motivating candidates to make a move and stay at a firm.

So, what should a law firm managing partner and the management committees do about post-pandemic, in-office scheduling?

• Let departmental leadership make the decision directly with their teams.
• Empower leaders and their teams to work collaboratively to meet client service and production goals.

Choosing an appropriate workplace model can be a powerful way to deliver the best possible legal services in modern ways.

Of course, flexibility must extend both ways—firms must trust their professionals to know where they should be and when. Likewise, professionals need to be plugged into the realities of client and colleague needs—being in-person when it matters the most. I’ve worked with a lot of law firms, and I see the productivity and cultural results are worth it.

- Jason Caramanico, Senior Managing Director.