EXPLAINING WHY LAWYERS WANT TO LEAVE THE PRACTICE OF LAW
| Date | 08 November 2001 |
| Pages | 117-145 |
| Published date | 08 November 2001 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/S1521-6136(2001)0000003009 |
| Author | Jean E. Wallace |
117
EXPLAINING WHY LAWYERS WANT
TO LEAVE THE PRACTICE OF LAW*
Jean E. Wallace
ABSTRACT
This study integrates the methodological and substantive contributions from
two streams of publications that examine lawyers’ attitudes towards work.
It uses interview data from ex-lawyers in combination with the job
satisfaction and commitment literature to develop a model of lawyers’ job
dissatisfaction and desire to leave law. The interview data proved instru-
mental in identifying relevant work-related factors that explain lawyers’
work attitudes and the multivariate analysis used to test this model on a
larger sample of lawyers revealed that some factors suggested by the
interviews may not be as important as assumed. The findings of this study
show it is important to recognize the contributions of both streams of
publications in this area.
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, two very different views of lawyers’ attitudes towards their
work and the legal profession have emerged. One suggests that significant
numbers of lawyers are highly dissatisfied with the practice of law and are
leaving the profession (e.g. Arron, 1989; Bainbridge, 1989; Brockman, 1994;
Dart, 1988). The other contends that most lawyers are generally satisfied with
011
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
011
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
011
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
Legal Professions: Work, Structure and Organization, pages 117–145.
Copyright © 2001 by Elsevier Science Ltd.
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
ISBN: 0-7623-0800-1
their careers in law (e.g. Chambers, 1989; Hagan & Kay, 1995; Heinz, Hull &
Harter, 1999; Hull, 1999; Schrimsher, 1998; Stanford Law Project, 1988).
This literature is also marked by methodological and substantive divisions.
In one stream, we find journalistic reports and biographical accounts that include
popular books such as Running From the Law: Why Good Lawyers are Getting
out of the Legal Profession (Arron, 1989), articles in lawyer trade publications
with titles like “Can the Law Practice be Fun? No: The Hours are Long, the
Stress is Incredible and Those Aren’t the Worse Parts” (France, 1993) and
headlines that read “Lives of the Living Dead: Associates Rate Canada’s Law
Factories” (Canadian Lawyer, 1990). These studies typically rely on lawyers’
first-hand reports of their personal experiences practicing law or interviews with
a small number of lawyers. Such publications are important in identifying
potential sources of lawyer dissatisfaction, such as the excessive time demands
of practicing law, the difficulties of juggling work and family and the stresses
associated with billable hours and working with other lawyers (Arron, 1989;
Altman, 1991; France, 1993).
The second stream tends to be more academically oriented and usually relies
on larger, representative samples and more structured data collection techniques
(e.g. close-ended questionnaires). Some of these researchers use quite
sophisticated statistical techniques (e.g. Hagan & Kay, 1995; Hull, 1999; Kay,
1997; Mueller & Wallace, 1996), whereas others present relatively simple analy-
ses (e.g. Brockman, 1994; Chambers, 1989; Heinz et al., 1999; Schrimsher,
1998; Stanford Law Project, 1982, 1988). Many of these studies generally rely
on demographic variables (e.g. gender, race), human capital measures (e.g. edu-
cation, experience) or employer characteristics (e.g. work setting, number of
lawyers) in predicting lawyers’ satisfaction and/or departures from law (e.g.
Brockman, 1994; Chambers, 1989; Hagan & Kay, 1995; Heinz et al., 1999; Hull,
1999; Kay, 1997).
Few attempts have been made to integrate these literatures on lawyers’
attitudes towards practicing law. And, while each may be limited in certain
methodological respects, together they are complementary in contributing to our
understanding of lawyers’ work attitudes. The first stream of publications may
identify important determinants of lawyer satisfaction but its findings tend to
lack generalizability. In addition, many of these studies focus on exploring why
men and women’s satisfaction levels differ or why women are more likely to
leave law in comparison to men. The second stream also shares this limitation
in its focus on documenting gender differences in satisfaction levels and
departure rates (Brockman, 1994; Heinz et al., 1999; Hull, 1999; Kay, 1997).
In doing so, both streams convey little information as to why it is that both
male and female lawyers may be dissatisfied with law or deciding to leave the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1011
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2011
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3011
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
118 JEAN E. WALLACE
To continue reading
Request your trial