Originally published in The Legal Intelligencer/law.com
By Sona Spencer and Marcie Borgal Shunk
The apprenticeship model in law firms is dying—even if most firms haven’t admitted it yet.
For decades, lawyer development relied on a simple formula: junior attorneys learned by observing and emulating senior lawyers, absorbing unspoken norms and skills through proximity and repetition. This informal system shaped both careers and culture. Yet those paying attention are noticing a not-so-subtle shift in the matrix. The old school “learning by osmosis” approach is no longer working—and many firms have yet to create an effective development mechanism to stand in its place.
Apprenticeship, conceptually, has always been fraught with challenges. Proximity, common interests and luck of the draw sometimes dictated who received partner attention and enjoyed a productive growth experience. Unintentional bias often crept in, leading to inequities and inconsistencies.
Today, a broader set of forces is further upending the development model. Law firms are larger and more highly leveraged. Hybrid work, generational shifts, geographic spread, and the rise of AI are creating deeper chasms, leaving the next generation underprepared to shepherd the legal sector into the future.
This changing environment leaves law firms with a growing disconnect between what firms need and how they prepare their people. The consequence is not just underdeveloped talent, but strategic risk. Without intentional design, firms will face higher attrition, lower engagement, and an eroding ability to deliver value to clients. This moment calls for a fundamental rethinking of how law firms grow and sustain their most important asset: their people.
Why Apprenticeship Collapsed
The dying apprenticeship model is not the result of a single trend, but of several forces converging at once—each magnifying the others.
Hybrid and Distributed Work: In hybrid and global firms, organic learning opportunities are increasingly rare. A junior associate overhears a client conversation, observes how a partner delivers feedback, or steps into a courtroom for the first time. These types of interactions were spontaneous and provided real-time opportunities for observation and learning. As much as some partners believe forcing in-office presence is a cure-all, the nature of today’s workplace environment—fast-paced, flexible, distributed across multiple offices—does not lend itself well to maintaining traditional development methods.
AI and Technological Disruption: The rise of artificial intelligence has accelerated this disruption. Tasks that once helped train junior lawyers—research, drafting, diligence—are increasingly automated. Clients have access to many of the same tools, flattening the hierarchy of expertise. While AI offers remarkable potential for efficiency, it also strips away formative learning experiences. The risk is a generation of lawyers adept at managing technology but lacking the judgment, creativity, and strategic thinking that distinguishes trusted advisers.
Generational Mismatch: Generations bring different assumptions about work and growth. Gen X leaders often came of age in “sink or swim” environments that valued independence and self-reliance. Millennials and Gen Z expect collaboration, transparency, and clear pathways. When younger lawyers seek feedback and structure, their requests can be misread as neediness. Conversely, a lack of guidance may be interpreted as disinterest. This misalignment breeds frustration on both sides—and fuels attrition.
Leadership Gaps: Finally, today’s lawyers must lead in ways their predecessors did not. They are asked to participate not only in the delivery of legal services but in running multi-million (or billion) dollar businesses—almost invariably without systematic training or skill building. While over 70% of large firms offer leadership training at some point in a lawyer’s career, the efficacy of these programs is dim—rating just 4.6 on a 10-point scale according to professional development leaders. Additionally, lawyers continue to be incentivized for their ability to bring in large books of business, not their skills as a leader. The result is a producer–manager dilemma: those most responsible for building talent are often distracted by billable demands and typically the least prepared to do so.
These forces have combined to erode the foundation of apprenticeship resulting in a widening gap between what law firms need and how they build their people strategy. That gap is measurable in attrition rates, lateral hiring costs, and—most concerning—client dissatisfaction when teams lack depth and continuity.
From Passive Learning to Engineered Growth
In the old model, learning was a byproduct of doing the work—skills were passed down, often in a one-to-one apprenticeship relationship. Today, growth must be designed with intention. Some firms, including Troutman Pepper Locke, are taking up the mantle.
At Troutman Pepper Locke, the challenge of the dying model came sharply into focus following a pandemic-era merger. Hybrid work, additional office locations, and the integration of two legacy cultures required more than incremental adjustments. The firm couldn’t rely on chance encounters or outdated assumptions and recognized the unique opportunity to develop a new system—one that made development visible, structured and accessible to everyone.
The result was YOUniversity, a comprehensive platform for attorney development that blends structure with flexibility. The platform offers:
350-plus trainings annually, four level-specific academies—including a new partner academy—and immersive trial, deposition and deal clinics that deliver hands-on experience
Career coaching at every stage, providing personalized guidance and actionable feedback
Clear benchmarks integrated with annual feedback to create transparency around what success looks like and how to achieve it
YOUniversity programs and trainings are not mandatory, but have had measurable impact—75% of eligible attendees participated last year, with coaching engagements for associates and partners up nearly 70% year-over-year. The level-specific academies also integrate leadership development to continue building a strong pipeline of leaders for the future. The firm has also invested in a six-month leadership development program for members of the firm’s practice group leadership. This thoughtfully designed, orchestrated and integrated approach is a blueprint for what the future of talent development may look like.What began as a bridge across two, now three, firms has become the backbone of Troutman Pepper Locke’s talent strategy. More importantly, it illustrates a broader truth: development cannot be left to osmosis. It must be woven into the fabric of how a firm operates—as central to strategy as marketing, technology or client service.
What Law Firms Can Do Now
Most firms will not launch a platform on the scale of YOUniversity overnight. But every firm can take deliberate steps to move beyond the outdated apprenticeship mindset. Four priorities stand out:
Define Success Beyond Technical Skills: Firms must be explicit about what excellence looks like. Technical proficiency remains essential, but so do leadership, collaboration, and client relationship skills. Creating transparent capability frameworks helps attorneys understand expectations and chart their own growth. These frameworks also provide a common language for feedback and advancement. Equally important, firms that limit these models to junior lawyers do so at their peril. Partners and professionals are essential and integral parts of ensuring the longevity of firms and their capacity to remain competitive.
Build Structured Learning Pathways: Chance encounters are no substitute for intentional design. Structured programs—leadership development, milestone-based curricula, hands-on clinics and even on-demand learning—give lawyers access to formative experiences regardless of geography or schedule. Coaching and mentoring should be integrated, not optional, so that feedback and reflection become part of everyday practice. When it is everyone’s responsibility to ensure the development of others, it often becomes no ones. Firms that are clear in whose role it is to ensure growth and engagement will see higher performance and enhanced client service more quickly.
Treat Culture as a Strategic Asset: Culture is not static. It must be measured, nurtured, and aligned with business goals. Regular engagement surveys, focus groups, and leadership training equip firms to adapt culture intentionally, especially in hybrid environments. A strong, healthy culture supports retention and collaboration in ways compensation alone cannot.
Hold Leaders Accountable for Growth: Talent development and engagement are not solely the responsibility of professional development teams. Partners and senior lawyers play a critical role—and must be equipped and incentivized to fulfill it. Leadership training, coaching, and clear accountability metrics ensure that those at the top contribute to building the next generation.
A Strategic Imperative
The decline of apprenticeship is not simply a challenge for professional development teams. It is a test of firm leadership. Without intentional investment, pipelines will weaken, cultures will fragment, and the ability to deliver value to clients will erode. Firms will spend more on lateral hires to compensate for internal gaps, only to repeat the cycle as attrition continues.
Conversely, firms that embrace deliberate, engineered growth will gain a durable competitive advantage. They will retain top talent, cultivate trusted client relationships, and build cultures resilient enough to navigate the uncertainty ahead.
The question is no longer whether apprenticeship is dying. It is whether leaders are willing to acknowledge its demise—and to build something stronger in its place.
Reprinted with permission from the September 23rd edition of the Legal Intelligencer © 2025 ALM Global Properties, LLC. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited, contact 877-256-2472 or asset-and-logo-licensing@alm.com.