Building a generationally integrated law firm

Generational differences are a fact of law firm life, but they don't have to be a source of tension. Reframe and restructure your approach to demographic diversity and make it a competitive strength.

I have regrets. Not too many, thankfully, and none that would generate much outside interest — I’m not exactly leading the glamorous life over here. But one regret I do have involves this Substack — specifically, a post from last summer about the tensions and complications many law firms are experiencing from generational differences and divides. Apparently, it’s the most-read of my 50 posts here so far.

My regret isn’t the article or the topic, however, but the title: “The Generations War comes to the law firm.” Using battlefield imagery to describe internal rifts in law firms is an unhelpful choice. It just encourages lawyers of different generations to view each other with hostility and double down on the stereotypes and assumptions that are causing problems.

What law firms need instead is de-escalation, followed by constructive paths forward. That’s the lesson I drew from consultations and conversations I’ve had with multiple firms over the past year, almost all of which involved, in part and sometimes in whole, the growing gaps between the priorities, preferences, and perceptions of lawyers from different generations.

So I’d like to address this topic anew, this time in a more positive and solutions-oriented fashion. I’ll reframe the “generational differences” issue, and then set out three ways in which law firms can turn these differences from a liability into a strength.

First, let’s illuminate this discussion with some facts. Adopting the generational categories used by the U.S. Census Bureau and analyzing statistics published by the American Bar Association, we discover the perhaps-startling fact that as of 2022, Millennials were the most populous group in the legal profession (39.6%), followed by Gen-Xers (34.1%) and Boomers (26.2%). A rough update of those stats here in 2024 suggests that maybe 1-2% of lawyers are now members of Generation Z, probably at the expense of an equivalent number of Boomers.

But keep in mind that generational categories, or even “generations” per se, are far from an exact science. The only generation with statistical significance and widely agreed date parameters is the Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964) — and even there, the population explosion in the US arguably began as early as 1943 or even 1941. The Baby Boom started and ended at different times in other countries, if it occurred at all. There’s even an argument that the Boom had little to do with the end of the war — that it started when women joined the workforce during WWII and ended when The Pill was developed in 1960 and legalized in 1965.

Subsequent generations weren’t nearly as populous or socially significant as the Boomers. In fact, the next two generational cohorts were arguably the invention of two books by Canadian authors: Douglas Coupland (Generation X) and David Foot (Boom, Bust and Echo), each of which helped spawn a massive cottage industry in generational differences. The fact that there’s little agreement on names for the next two cohorts (Z? Alpha? Zoomer? iGen?) further suggests that this whole area might simply be, to put it a little harshly, demographic astrology.

What all this means is that it’s important we don’t read too much into “generation gaps.” Do younger people see the world differently than middle-aged and older people? Uh, yeah. It’s been that way for a while. If Boomers stretch their memories back a few decades, they’ll remember when their own parents called them “entitled.” My fellow Xers don’t have to think back as far to recall when we were “the slacker generation.” Trust me, Millennials, before you know it, you’ll be complaining about “kids these days who don’t want to work hard.”

Yes, our view of the world does tend to be influenced by the times in which we grew up — people whose dads drove shiny new Buicks home to a freshly cooked dinner in the suburbs see the world differently than people whose dads went to Normandy and never came home at all. But more importantly, people at different stages of their lives will always have different ideas about what’s important. And there is a wide range of “life stages” in law firms right now.

This range of perspectives and priorities is just a fact of life. However much you might wish that other people saw the world as you do, they don’t, and they won’t. Grouse all you like about “old people” or “young people” — the truth is, everyone’s right about something. No stage of life has a monopoly on what’s true, or on what will make a law firm successful now and in the future. Generational diversity is a reality — so we might as well make the best of it.

“Making the best of it” starts with the principle that, since every single law firm is dealing with stage-of-life differences, any law firm that can minimize the negative impact of those differences — or even find positive effects — is going to carve out a significant competitive advantage over other firms that can’t. Here are three areas in which your law firm can begin to do that.

1. Communication and Workflow

Communication has to be tailored to the recipient: If the person you want to reach doesn’t use voice mail (or doesn’t read texts), it’s on you to figure out which other methods will reach them most effectively. I suggest you calibrate communication choice according to urgency: The more critical the need, the higher up the communication hierarchy you should reach. (And resist the temptation to believe everything is critical. It’s not.)

Law firm workflow is usually random and disorganized: Partners often drop work on lawyers’ desks with little regard to what’s already there. Department- or firm-wide workflow systems improve productivity and morale. Younger lawyers especially need structure in work assignments, including detailed frameworks around exactly what, when, and how, plus where to go with questions. Don’t expect them to march through the partner’s door and boldly demand answers. That’s not how they’re built.

2. Expectations and Advancement

Younger lawyers were raised on rubrics: detailed descriptions of what they needed to do in order to get good marks and earn positive feedback, which they crave. Older lawyers had to figure it out themselves and developed instinctive but invisible parameters for success. These two approaches don’t mesh well. Younger lawyers should be given extremely clear expectations, but they should also understand that partners can’t and won’t be explicit and concrete about everything.

This is especially true about advancement into partner status, which will never be 100% objective: Promotion rides as much on partners’ gut feelings as on an aspirant’s achievements, and the power of collegiality means one partner’s “No” will rule the day. But young lawyers need and deserve honesty, clarity, and above all consistency when it comes to advancement criteria. Non-partners often complain that the advancement goalposts are either invisible or keep getting moved downfield. Don’t do that.

3. Clients and Business Development

This is where generational diversity can most effectively be converted into generational integration. Because here’s the thing: Your clients are going through the same thing you are. Your wide array of internal perspectives and priorities that feels like a burden to you suddenly becomes a benefit when your firm can connect with client representatives in every demographic cohort. Make clear to everyone, older and younger, that the firm’s future hinges on inter-generational cooperation in this area.

Business development is the critical avenue. Younger lawyers should be advised, coached, encouraged, and directed by more senior partners to make connections with their demographic opposite numbers inside clients’ businesses, with whom they should relate more easily. This way, you feed two birds with one hand: Building collaborative and constructive relationships between generations while either bringing in new business or solidifying existing client relationships for the long term.

None of this is easy — law firms haven’t experienced cultural challenges like this in nearly 40 years. Today’s law firm partnerships were built on consensus, something that was more easily achieved when everyone shared common generational values and assumptions. You didn’t need to be explicit about a lot of important stuff, because everyone knew what you were talking about. Sensitive things were often left unsaid.

But that harmony and continuity came to a record-scratch halt when a different cohort not only showed up, but quickly became the demographic plurality. Boomers (re)made law firms according to their values; now, they’re barely a quarter of the population in their own firms. A generation that went out and got everything it wanted doesn’t know what to do with a generation that prefers to wait for permission — and vice versa.

But you don’t need to exert a Herculean effort to make all this work. What you mostly need are patience with, and generosity towards, each other. That starts with genuinely listening to other people and their perspectives. You don’t have to agree with them. But you can try, really try, seeing the world through their eyes. Just making that effort is a sign of respect — and that’s what you need above all. Treating each other with respect as professionals and as people is the key to this whole puzzle.

Your colleagues are not categories, and they’re not labels. They’re people who deserve to be respected and accepted, and that applies whether you’re looking up or down the generational chain. If you can make that the foundation of your generational integration, then you’ll leave your rivals behind you, squabbling in the dust.