The answer almost certainly is ‘yes’. And this will bring additional pressures on law firms, since even basic analysis of their partnership record says a lot about their business. Which firms are attempting to expand the partnership? Which firms are trying to shrink it? Which firms favour flashy laterals over home-grown talent? Once these issues were little discussed. But that time has passed, as can be seen by our analysis and breakdown of partner promotions (see pages 4-5).
A key test of the power of transparency will be the proportion of female lawyers who are promoted. This figure is already trending upwards, making up 27.5% of promotions this year. Greater disclosure of such figures boosts the chances that firms like Charles Russell, Trowers & Hamlins, Olswang and Slaughter and May will gain a ‘diversity dividend’ as it becomes clearer which firms have delivered on HR spin.
It is likely that firms like Hammonds, Ashurst and Herbert Smith that have shown willingness to promote from the ranks will benefit when recruiting at the junior end. Providing it is sustainable, it should provide an edge when the war for talent inevitably breaks out again. Conversely, firms revealed to be consistently promoting less than the trend as a proportion of their partnership (this year around 6%), will likely find it tricky to recruit juniors and even trickier to retain at mid-level.
Glancing at this year’s figures it has also become clear why firms now rarely bother to maintain the fiction that market conditions have no impact on partnership. It has been a lean year for City promotions and a fat one for international markets. There is also a clear pattern that ‘chasing pack’ firms like Herbert Smith, Norton Rose, Ashurst, CMS Cameron McKenna and Simmons & Simmons, generally on course for the best financial year in recent memory, have been among the most enthusiastic promoters. Meanwhile, the magic circle have promoted under trend. Once such distinctions would have made little difference to a firm’s image. Not any more.