Anyone following news of the changes taking place in the legal services industry has heard of the much-touted new law firm models represented by Axiom in the UK and Clearspire in the US. Both claim to have reimagined how a top law firm is structured and operates, and they truly have done some innovative thinking. Plus they have slick websites. Hats off to them.
But here’s the irony of Axiom and Clearspire: they proudly pronounce that most of their lawyers were trained in the BigLaw world they say is broken. Clearspire says its attorneys are “drawn predominantly from the ranks of AmLaw 200.” Axiom says that of its over 1000 attorneys in the network, “most have worked at an AmLaw 50 or Magic Circle firm.” Sure, it’s the profit pyramid/billable hour business model they and countless others piling on say is “broken” in BigLaw, but apparently Axiom and Clearspire have no problem with the training young attorneys receive in those firms. Indeed, that’s what they are marketing–their clients get BigLaw trained lawyers at half the rate. Here’s the bottom line: Law firms like Axiom and Clearspire are telling Fortune 500 clients to shun BigLaw while at the same time telling Fortune 500 clients they are staffed by attorneys trained by BigLaw. Huh?
Axiom and Clearspire also seem to have absolutely no interest in hiring and training new post-graduate lawyers in ways that would produce the quality of seasoned lawyer Axiom and Clearspire are marketing to their clients. Everyone seems to agree BigLaw does a pretty good job of moving lawyers from young post-graduates to experienced senior attorneys ready to handle complex legal matters faced by Fortune 500 companies. But according to Axiom, Clearspire, and their champions, BigLaw is over and they are now the best bet in town.
Here’s the problem: If Axiom and Clearspire are the wave of the future and BigLaw is obsolete, who will train the lawyers the new “reimagined” law firms will staff as senior, seasoned counselors. Couple that with the utterly unimaginative proposal to reform legal education in the US by lopping off the third year, and you should see the disconnect. Law firms like Axiom and Clearspire (and their clients) apparently don’t want to carry the lawyer training burden, and law schools (even with three years and plenty of clinical and skills training) can’t possibly graduate fully-formed lawyers any more than medical schools can graduate experienced neurosurgeons after their four years.
This is the one piece of the puzzle the “Rethink Law” and legal education reform movements haven’t quite figured out if their vision of the future of the legal industry and legal education comes true: Who will train the newly licensed lawyers?
Law 2050 
Have you looked at the description for entry level positions at major corporations? Most require at least 1-2 years of experience. This is a natural evolution of business where the larger corporations require efficiency, which new graduates have little of. As larger law firms get leaner they will need to follow suit, hiring less and less new graduates. New graduates will need to look at smaller firms or start their own firms in order to gain their experience. After a decade or two of working they might be able to go into Biglaw if they really want to.
As for your thoughts on Axiom and Clearspire endorsing the training of AM Law Lawyers I disagree. Clearspire and Axiom both need to establish with potential customers that they have competent legal staff so they hire from reputable firms. However they manage their firms quite differently from how biglaw normally operates. The law is the same, but how the law firms are managed is the innovation.
Biglaw firms will have to hire entry level attorneys because there is no way an attorney in a small firm/solo setting can train on tax, M&A, securities, environmental, trial, and other fields at the level of sophistication needed for the Fortune 500 client base.
Axiom and Clearspire are indeed endorsing the training that Biglaw provides–that’s why they tout the fact that their lawyers are from Biglaw. They simply don’t want to take part in the training of young lawyers. That may be an innovation, but it’s one that is unsustainable without Biglaw firms continuing to train young lawyers.