The rise of contracting as an established and legitimate career choice for lawyers

Contracting has evolved from a backup plan into a preferred path for many legal professionals.

From career variety to accelerated growth, lawyers are embracing interim roles for their flexibility and exposure to different industries.

Aspen Legal’s Managing Director, Nat Parbhu, breaks down the shift in perception and what it means for lawyers and legal teams alike.

What do you see as the primary benefits of contracting for lawyers compared to traditional full-time roles within law firms?

The skillset required to be a successful in house lawyer is fundamentally different and far broader than that generally required in private practice within a law firm. Alongside a required level of technical legal knowledge an in house lawyer needs to be commercial, pragmatic and relationship focused. Understanding how the business they work in operates (including essentially how the business generates revenue and profit from providing products and services), and the risks faced by the business and how these are mitigated are important skills to develop. Being able to build deep and strong relationships with key stakeholders at all levels of the business is also essential for success. These skills are highly valued by Aspen Legal’s client base which largely consists of ASX200 and multinational corporations, as well as higher education, medical and research institutions.

One of the primary benefits of contracting for lawyers is the exposure to a wide range of industries and expertise. Every business is different, with a different corporate culture and legal function. One of the most interesting parts of my job is understanding the role that the particular business seeks the legal function to perform, and the accompanying expectations from the business of the legal function. With the rise of commercial generalists and the demand for ‘T-Shaped lawyers’, the more exposure the secondee lawyers have across different organisations, the better equipped the lawyers become.

How has the perception of contract lawyering changed within the legal profession over the past few years, and what factors do you think have contributed to this shift?

Around ten years ago when contract lawyering first really started taking off in Australia and I was a co-owner of secondment business lexvoco, there was still a perception that these roles were for lawyers not capable or ambitious enough to build a successful permanent career either in law firms or in house in corporates. It’s exciting to see how that perception now has dramatically changed, with clients understanding the real value that diversity of experience gained from working across multiple businesses, industries and corporate cultures can bring. Whilst historically the talent pool consisted largely of those returning from parental leave, we are now seeing exceptional lawyers choosing contracting as a primary career for a wide range of professional and personal reasons.

Generally speaking, corporate life has shifted from just building one career. We now have Gen Z coming through the ranks who don’t think twice about changing roles or careers and see flexibility around work as an expectation rather than a benefit. This is only going to further drive the prevalence of contracting across all sectors, including within the legal industry.

How can lawyers in contract roles best position themselves for success?

Most successful in-house lawyers are generalists, so the advice I have for contract lawyers is to be open to all opportunities and not pigeonhole themselves. Also don’t underestimate the importance of building strong relationships with your key stakeholders and being genuinely curious about the business – how it operates, how it makes money, and how it manages risks. Finally, back yourself and your ability – most lawyers are far more adaptable than they realise, and bring a level of critical thinking and problem solving that can be productively applied far beyond purely legal issues.

What are the positive and negative impacts of choosing a contract role?

One of the main benefits we see in choosing a contract role is the ability to upskill rapidly – in a new industry or area of expertise. This empowers lawyers to take more control over the trajectory of their career at an accelerated rate. Lawyers who are curious, open to growth and change, and generally are interested in the commercial aspects of business are those that really enjoy and benefit from contracting.

Whilst the feedback we get from our secondees is that the positives overwhelmingly outweigh the negatives, we appreciate that contracting isn’t for everyone. Some contract lawyers may feel, particularly with short term contracts of only a couple of months, that they don’t achieve as much growth as they’d like, or that they are viewed as just an interim solution by the business.

What does the rise of contracting say about the state of the profession?

The rise of contracting indicates that the industry is in flux and that Heads of Legal are far more sophisticated in how they deal with bespoke resourcing solutions. Where a business requires something other than a piece of technical legal advice, then reverting to an existing law firm panel is now clearly seen as a sub-optimal outcome for the business. The ability to bring in house secondee lawyers in quickly with diverse skill sets and commercial capability is now regarded as a key tool available to be deployed swiftly and easily by in house legal teams.

Will more lawyers opt for this path moving forward, and where does this leave law firms?

This fit for purpose approach to resourcing applied by Heads of Legal is driving demand for high quality interim support, which is inevitably driving growth in the number of lawyers opting for contracting as a legitimate career path.

There will always be a place for traditional law firms with regard to specialist technical or transactional work; however, there is undoubtedly a growing awareness that law firms are not the best fit for certain work types – for example there will always be greater value in outsourcing BAU in-house legal work to contract lawyers rather than to law firms from both a cost and fitness for purpose perspective.